DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 193 215 SP 016 832

AUTHOR Smith, B. Othanel: And OthersTITLE A Design for a School of Pedagogy.INSTITUTION Department of Education, Washington, D.C.}EPORT NO E.-BO-42000PUB DATE BONOTE 124p.

EDSS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

MF01 /PC05 Plus Postage.Classroom Techniques: Curriculum Design: *EducationalAssessment: *Educational Change: Field ExperiencePrograms: Higher Education: *InstitutionalEvaluation: *Instruction: Policy Formation:*Preservice Teacher Education: ProfessionalDevelopment: Program Design: *Program Improvement:Teacher Certification

ABSTRACTA perspective is given and recommendations are made

for restructuring education personnel development with major emphasison preservice teacher education. Issues facing teacher education areput in a socio-historical context. It is stated that teacher traininghas been largely separated from the public school system, and thattraining has teen overloaded with pedagogical theory before theprospective teacher's experience is broad enough to absorb it. Thepotential institutional arrangements required for a professionalschool of pedagogy are examined. A proposed program in pedagogicaleducation is presented, with its focus on the ability to do the jobfor which training is given. This program is mainly field-based withthe campus serving for basic field preparation. Types cf knowledgeare identified and their characteristics discussed by showing howeach type functions in teaching behavior. What is known about how toteach skills and concepts to teachers is delineated. The finalsection presents ways to bring about the proposed changes. The roleand responsibilities of college faculty and what sort of coalitionswill be necessary to effect new policies and programs of pedagogicaleducation are discussed. CID)

*****44141**********************************************************414441** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. ************************************************************************

A Designfor a

School ofPeaagogy

byB. Othanel Smith

in collaboration withStuart H. Silverman, Jean M. Borg,and Betty V. Fry

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONShirley M. Hufstedler, Secretary

Publication No. E8042000

3 OCT 2 8 1980

DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED. No person in the United States shall,on the ground of race. color or national origin, be excluded from participationin, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any pro-gram or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, or be so treated on thebasis of sex under most education programs or activities receiving Federalassistance.

The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policyof the Department of Education, and no official endorsement by the Depart.meat of Education should be inferred.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEWASHINGTON: 190

For tale bp the Superintendent cd Doeumen's. U.S. COMIMINInt Printing MtnWeshligeon. D.C. 20402

4

THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATIONWASHINGTON. G C 20202

The Department of Education is dedicated to fostering and

encouraging a devotion to excellence in every aspect of

education in this country.

From the first whispers of independence to the brilliant,

extended Constitutional debates about the best form of

government for a free people, education was understood by

all to be the cornerstone of successful democracy in

America.

Thomas Jefferson said it best: "If a nation expects to be

both ignorant and free expects what never was -.Id

never will be."

The key to educational excellence is teaching. Therefore,

we must examine the quality of teacher training, the kinds

of incentives that teachers are offered to improve their

skills and to enhance their own feelings of worth, dignity,

and achievement. A good place to begin is a definition of

the issues. Dr. Bunnie Othanel Smith has had over 50 years

of experience in the field of teacher education. Dr. Smith's

work is a fine prologue to discussion.

Shirley M. Hufstedler

5

FOREWORD

Education in the United States has finally achieved Cabinetlevel status. A Depart-ment of Education will soon be established (and, in fact. will already be establishedwhen this book is published).

"It will be a Department." in the words of Secretary Shirley Hufstedler,"that strives unceasingly for the highest possible quality at every level of theeducation process: a Department that seeks out models of success. of ex-cellence, and holds them aloft for all to see."

Such a statement alien both a challenge and a commitment. and sets an inspira-tional tone for the new Department. The time is ripe for our entire educational enter-prise to make great strides. And it is ready to do so.

Foremost among the areas in which education is ready to advance is the field ofteacher education. This is a welcome and healthy sigrs, because there is a direct linkbetween the quality of education and training of our Nation's school personnel and theexcellence we seek in the education of our children.

A golden opportunity exists today for restructuring teacher education. We musttake advantage of this opportunity. Timing is a crucial factor, and conditiLns at pres-ent are too favorable to igrsore. If we act now, we will generate momentum momen-tum that may otherwise be lost for a generation.

It is imperative that we set a perspective and develop recommendations to meet thischallenge involved in restructuring education personnel development. In this connec-tion A Design for a School of Pedagogy provides an invaluable contribution that willstimulate thinking not only among professional educators but by the public at large.The author. Professor B. Othanel Smith of the College of Education of the Universityof South Floridaalong with his collaborators. Stuart H. Silverman, Jean M. Borg,and Betty B. Fry merit high marks indeed for this outstanding work.

Starting with the institutionalization of teacher education, the book, in part One,indicates where we are and how we got there. It states the issues and puts them in asociohistorical context. It discusses the fact that teacher training has been largelyseparated from the public school system. and that training has been overloaded withpedagogical theory before the prospective teacher's experience is broad enough to ab-sorb it.

Among the questions explored are these: Is teacher education a graduate study? Atwhat collegiate level should teacher education be offered? Who should train teachers?Is academic work necessary for effective training? Then, making a forceful case forusing the term "pedagogy" to refer to the science and art of teaching, the book examines the potential institutional arrangements required for a professional school ofpedagogy. Also presented is a proposed program in pedagogical education, with arecommendation that pedagogy be treated as a postbaccalaureate study leading to amaster's degree and that it focus on the ability to do the job for which training is given.For this purpose, the program is mainly field-based with the campus serving for basicfield preparation.

In Part Two the nature, types, and uses of pedagogical knowledge are examined.The author and his collaborators present pedagogy's present knowledge base and helpto increase confidence in what we know and can do. Types of knowledge are identifiedand their characteristics discussed by showing how each type functions in teachingbehavior. The distinction it also drawn between the use of knowledge as the content of

e"

vi

training in school. classroom procedures and techniques and knowledge as a guide tothe formulation of school policies. This sets the stage for exploring further how muchknowledge and what kind of knowledge a teacher needs to be effective and looks at thedifferences among primary. intermediate. and high school teachers. The book thendelineates what is known about how to teach skills and concepts to teachers, anddiscusses a need for assembling and organizing generic clinical knowledge and a way toaccomplish this.

Part Three discusses ways to bring about the changes proposed. How can this be accomplished? What can college faculty do and what sort of coalitions will be necessaryto effect new policies and programs of pedagogical education? The challenge is raised.the need presented. and the possibility held open.

Ten years ago Bunnie Smith's Teachers For the Real World made a marked impacton our thinking and on education programs throughout the country. In this book. neagain stimulates us to think and to act. Will we continue to restrict our thinking aboutthe college of education to what it isor to what it can be? Whatever position we take,the question is an important and timely one. worthy of exhaustive exploration. 1 ap-plaud Professor Smith for giving us an opportunity to explore anew.

April 1980 William L. SmithCommissionerU.S. Office of EducationWashington. D.C.

04

PREFACE

In the fall of 1977, at a meeting of the Task Force on Demonstration for the Na-clonal Teacher Corps. it was asked whether the knowledge base of pedagogy was suffi-cient to underwrite any significant demonstration. Some members of the Task Forcewere of the opinion that our knowledge. especially that related to instruction, was notonly fragile but inadequate. We did not share this view then. nor do we share it today.

Shortly after the Task Force completed its work. Teacher Corps authorized us to doa study of pedagogical education including its knowledge base and the relation of thatknowledge to the training of pedagogical personnel. It was anticipated that such astudy would be useful to Teacher Corps projects and colleges of pedagogy.

We began our work with a review of the various studies of pedagogical education.dating back to the early decades of this century. The latest of these studies. TheReport of the Bicentennial Commission on Education for the Profession of Teaching.opens up many more questions than the question of the adequacy of knowledge. Itidentifies and explores most. if not all, of the major issues of pedagogical education inthe United States. Its recommendations are fundamental but brief.

We have attempted to expar.d upon some of the recommendations of the Bicenten-nial Report by developing the outlines of a plan for the reform of pedagogical schools.a plan based on the belief that schools of pedagogy can now become genuine proles-sional schools; that the program of professional preparation must be completely over-hauled; and that the knowledge base for the scientific grounding of the pedagogicalarts is now available and increasing.

We hope that the plan herein proposed will not only stimulate thinking and discus-sion of the problem of designing a genuine professional school of pedagogy but alsolead to action by the deans of pedagogical schools. professional organizations, andcivic leaders.

The reader who is interested in the nature and use of knowledge in the training ofeducational personnel should turn to Part II. Those who wish to see the outlines of theprogram before becomini familiar with the content and its uses will of course read thechapters in order, although parts of the program become more meaningful after PartII has been read.

We had planned from the very inception of the project to consult with a number ofpeople at various stages of our work. This proved to be fortunate, for the suggestionsand criticisms from leaders in pedagogical education. its both schools and colleges. ex-panded and sharpened our conceptions and helped to define the scope of our under-taking.

The first conference was held at the University of South Florida. December 11-13.1978. This conference considered a wide range of issues covering almost every aspectof pedagogical education. Participants in the conference we..e Robert Ardike, SpecialAssistant to the Commissioner of Education and formerly Associate Director. NationalTeacher Corps: W. F. Connell. professor Emeritus. University of Sidney, Australia;William Drummond, University of Florida; Robert Edwards, Principal, Youth Oppor-tunity School North. Miami; David Gliessman. Indiana University; Gene Hall. Univer-sity of Texas; Beverly Kelton. University of Hartford; Suzanne Kinzer, University ofFlorida; Donald Orlosky, Uni.-enity of South Florida: Donovan Peterson. University ofSouth Florida; Kevin Ryan, Ohio State University: and William Smith. Commissionerof Education and formerly Director, National Teacher Corps.

Svii

viii

The second conference convened three months later in Washington. D.C., onMarch 12-13, 1979. This conference dealt with questions somewhat more specificthan those at the first conference. Two or three chapters were prepared in rough formand sent to participants in advance of the meeting. We thus had the advantage ofspecific reactions to both content and discourse as well as extended discussion of newissues, further sharpening our sense of direction and limiting the scope of our under.taking. Those who participated in the conference were Robert Bush, Stanford Univershy; Asa Hilliard, San Francisco State University; Beverly Kelton. University of Hart.ford; Margaret Lindsey, Professor Emeritus, Teachers College, Columbia University;James Tanner, Cleveland Public Schools: and William Smith, Commissioner of Education and formerly Director, National Teacher Corps.

An intensive threeday discussion was held with Margaret Lindsey and DavidGlkssman, 'day 2-5, at the University of South Florida. which served to clarify our notions of training domains and the place of research training in programs ofpedagogical education as well as such concepts as institutional autonomy and the roleof outside agencies affecting schools of pedagogy.

In June, the first draft of the manuscript was submitted to a number of individualswho had attended the conferences and to others. Those who read and criticized themanuscript were Dwight Allen, David Berliner, Walter R. Borg, Robert Bush, DavidClark, Alan Gartner, Gene Hall, Kenneth Henderson, Au Hilliard, Margaret Lind.sey, Daniel Purdom, Maynard Reynolds, Kevin Ryan, Lester Tuttle, Roger Wilk, andElaine Witty. To these individuals we owe special gratitude. To read a manuscript isitself a chore but to criticize it thoroughly, as everyone did, shows a commitment toour field that one will not forget. The comments of these readers forced us to restruc-ture the manuscript, delete parts of it, expand others, and to clarify many points wehad slurred over.

We are especially indebted to Margaret Lindsey for her thorough criticism of themanuscript at different stages of its development. for her insistence upon clarificationof concepts and her insightful analysis of the various components of teaching. Had webeen able to take advantage of all her suggestions, the book would have been much thebetter. She, of course, is not responsible for whatever shortcomings are to be found inthe pages that follow.

We wish also to express our deep appreciation to William Smith. U.S. Commis-sioner of Education, for his continuing insight into the problems of pedagogicaleducation as manifested in his intellectual, moral, and administrative support of ourwork, and to Robert Ardike, Special Assistant to the Commissioner. for his help atalmost every step toward completion of this project.

To all these and many others who provided us with information through theirresearch, writing, and informal discussion we owe more thanks than we can ever pay inperson.

March 1980 B. Othanel SmithClearwater. Florida

CONTENTS

Page

Letter From the Secretary iiiForeword v

Preface viiChapter

1. Introduction 1

PART ONEInstitutional Alignment and Programs

2. Professional Statue of Pedagogical Schools i 1

3. Toward a Professional School of Pedagogy 17

4. Preprofessional Education: Outlines of a Program 31

5. Toward a Program of Pedagogical Education 39

PART TWOPedagogical Knowledge

6. Attitudes Toward Pedagogical Knowledge 497. Pedagogical Knowledge: Its Forme and Uses 59

8. Academic Pedagogical Knowledge: Its Nature and Utility 69

9. Teaching and the Domains of Training 79

10. A Profile of Generic Knowledge for Pedagogical Training 89

11. A Profile of Specific Knowledge for Pedagogical Training 101

PART THREEHow to Get There

12. Memo on the Problem of Getting There 107

Index 115

Chapter 1

Introduction

For over 50 years pedagogical education has beena concern of teacher educators, academic scholars,researchers, and laypersons. In surveys and reports,individuals and organisations have presented plansand courses of action to improve programs for edu-cating and training the nation's school personnel.

A Parade of Surveys and Reports

Among the lint of these was the CommonwealthTeacher-Training Study published in 1929.1 Per-haps the most extensive and thorough explorationever made of what teachen do, this study consistedof an analysis of over 200,000 statements of teacheractivities. The statements were analyzed and the activities classified into six categories: instruction,management. extra classroom activities, adminis.trative relations, personal and professional advance-ment, and activities concerning supplies and plant.These activities were evaluated and put forth u abasis for developing a functional pedagogical cur-riculum. Whatever the shortcomings of activityanalysis u a mode of curriculum development, thisstudy still stands today as perhaps the only comprehensive and objective effort to provide a functionalbasis for pedagogical education.

Only 4 years after the Commonwealth Study waspublished the United States Office of Educationissued its extensive survey of the education ofteachers.t Among other things, the National Surveydescribed better practices in teacher education andin recruitment and selection, and recommendedthe development of curriculums for various types ofpositions. It urged competence in the skills of teach-ing as a primary objective.

Some 10 yean later, in 1944, the AmericanCouncil on Education issued the first volume of itsCommission On Teacher Education under the littleTeachers for Our Times,' followed two years laterby the second volume The Improvement of TeacherEducation.. The main purpose of the Commissionwas neither to make a factual survey nor to conduct

11

research, but rather to stimulate institutions to improve their programs. Impelled by ideological con-siderations and by an urgent feeling of need to im-prove pedagogical education, it emphasized thecontemporary social scene and the democratic wayof life as points of orientation, urging that teachersbecome sensitive to the school's relation to socialrealities and ideals. The Commission also emph8sized the sociocivic responsibilities of teachers.While it advanced no design for pedagogical educa-tion. the Commission did urge that each institutiondevelop an effective program along the generallines suggested in its reports.

These three studies and reports. like the ones tofollow, reflect the temper of their time. In the clos-ing years of the 1920's. the Nation was not yetaware of the impending transformations the GreatDepression would make in the public mentality.Researchers and scholars alike could still think indetached, objective ways, although a few seers weresending out warning signals of the shoals ahead.Collecting. ordering, and analyzing data fromsurveys of one sort or another was the prevailing approach to the study of educational problems, andthe Commonwealth Study and the National Surveyreflected this social aloofness.

However. the depressing years of the 1930'schanged all this to an alarming degree. Ideologiesbecame rampant. Communist, fascist, democratic,socialist, and technocratic ideologies emerged ortook on new life. offering their particular solutionsto the Nation's problems if not those of the world.Teacher educators almost overnight became in-volved in social movements and deeply concernedwith values. social reconstruction. and with theschool as an instrument of social change. In thisatmosphere of conflicting ideologies. extending in-to the war years. the American Council Study wasconceived and carried out. It thus stands in starkcontrast to the detached orientation of the NationalSurvey and the Commonwealth Study.

In a new era and a new day. almost 20 years afterthe American Council Study, the Conant report ap-

1

peaied " In the early 1960's the Nation teemed tobe .iliticist on the veig of a new view eil itself. WithA young man in the White I louse and youth bermsmg mot interested and active in political andsocial MOVCIlleilk, it was only natural that the NaLion would take a new look at pedagogical educalion, A look that would end in recommendations forac own along institutional rather than ideologicallines. Conant's study, backed by the Carnegie Corjx ration, was similar to Flexner's study of medicalthit ation. It entailed visits to schools of pedagogy.interviews with teachers and professors. and theassistant e of tidagogial specialists and politicalscientists The report consists largely of Conant'sobservations and recommendations about certifica-tion. academic preparation of teachers, theory andpr.ictic e of teaching. course requirements, and permime,

Despite Conant's status as a national and international educator. his report made little more thana ripple on the surface of pedagogical education.'1 he title he suggested for supervising teachers.Clinical Professor of Education, enjoyed a brief lifethat was not paralleled by any significant changeeither in the quality oc training or competence 01personnel.

Although the study resembled Flexner's as tomethod, it lacked the trenchant prose of Fiexnerthat named medical schools deemed to be worthlessand areas of the country where they were concentraced. Speaking of the South. Flexner said: "It isgenerally overcrowded with schools with whichnothing can bt done: for they are conducted by old-time practitioners, who could not use improvedteaching facilities if they were provided.'' Further-more, the impact of Flexner's report, according to arecent history of American medicine,' was probablydue to Flexner's succtss in persuading the Rocke-feller family to make grants to selected medicalschools, grants that over a short time amounted toalmost $50 million. This had the effect of elevatinga few schools to such heights of visibility that otherswere lost to view and disappeared. Within 20 yearsafter the report was issued the number of medicalschools was reduced from 148 to 66. Conant hadneither financial support nor the backing of theorganized profession, both of which Flexnerenjoyed.

In 1961. the National Commission on TeacherEducation and Professional Standards of the Na-tional Education Association issued the report of its

2

task force, New Horizons For The Teaching Proles.sion, after an extended study of the following areas:professional standards, pre and inservice educalion. accreditation, certification, and admissionand retention policies and procedures. The purposeof this project was to develop plans to professional-ize teaching, plans for action at local. State, andnational levels. It emphasized, along with otheraspects of pedagogical education, continuous experience throughout the period of undergraduatepreparation, clinical experience, participation incommunity activities. controlled expedience inpractice teaching, and internship. It recommendeda program of preparation extending over five yearsand the develnpment of a feeling of responsibilityon the part of students for their own learning. Agood part of the report was devoted to inservicepreparation. Its analysis of standards, accredita-tion. and licensing was perhaps the most thoroughtreatment of the subject to be found in the literacure. However, like the studies that preceded it, thereport negiected the fundamental conditions thathamper the development of preservice pedagogicaleducation.

In addition to these studies and reports, theAmerican Association of Colleges for Teacher.Education issued two studies and sponsored thecompetency teacher education movement of the1970's. One of these studies. Teacher EducationFor A Free People. published in 1956, was a by

of a 3-year self-study of member institu-tions.' The team created to assist these institutionsin selfstudy took the opportunity afforded by itsvisits to study the problems and trends in pedagogi-cal education. This study. like the American Court.cil Report of a decade earlier, was highly influenced by democratic ideology and the social scene.Academic preparation, the professional curriculum, laboratory experiences, acid a number ofother topics were emphasized by the study, but littlerecognition of advancements in the procedures,techniques, or knowledge of pedagogical educationcan be found in it.

A second study. Teachers for the Real World,was a product of the NDEA National Institute forAdvanced Study in Teaching DisadvantagedYouth, established under a Title XI contract be-tween the U.S. Office of Education and Bali StateUniversity.' The American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education administered the instituteunder a subcontract. This study culminated 2 years

12

of Institute work. Like other studies. it reflected theconflicts and tensions of the time. especially thosecentering on cultural and ethnic prejudices and dis-criminations. Placing emphasis upon the belief thatall ethnic and cultural groups learn alike, it urgedthat teacher education be based upon that fact. Itadvocated systematic training in skills, teaching ofconcepts in situ. reconsideration of subject matterpreparation, a year-long intern experience follow-ing the bachelor's degree, and a training complexin which the personnel of all occupations directlyrelated to the care and education of youth would betrained.

With the support of the Federal Government agroup of leading pedagogical educators in the1960's developed a number of elementary teachereducation models. generally referred to as TheComprehensive Elementary Teacher EducationModels Project. Although fully expanded concep-tually. these models never became operational anddied for want of financial support. But they left alegacy of concerns and ideas about the developmentof competence. It was not surprising that this com-mitment to competence, carried over into the '70's.would contribute to the rise of the competence-based movement." Combined with the ModelsProject it perhaps generated more deliberation anddevelopmental work in pedagogical education thanhad occurred in any previous decade. Specificationof competencies and the development of practicalplans and materials constituted the heart of themovement."

Part Two of the Sev,:eity.Fourth Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education ex-plored some of the perplexing and pressing prob.lems of pedagogical education, an exploration thatnot only brought our knowledge up-to-date but ex-plored a number of fundamental issues aboutvarious conceptions of the school. accreditation andcertification. and the nature and complexity of theteacher training establishment. While this year-book dealt with several facets of pedagogical educa-tion. it made no attempt to suggest innovations anddirections of reform, although one chapter took afuturistic look. In this respect the Yearbook is quitedifferent from other works on pedagogical educa-tion reviewed in th:z chapter. Nevertheless. itrepresents the most complete survey of the status ofour knowledge about pedagogical education at thebeginning of the last quarter of the 20th century.

Another study of primary importance is The

13

Report of Me Bicentennial Commission on &LucaLion for the Profession of Teaching of the AmericanAssociation of Colleges for Teacher Education, andis the most comprehensive study of pedagogicaleducation of recent years." It culminated 2 years ofstudy and was issued in celebration of the nation's200th birthday. The report covers not only thepreparation of teachers. emphasizing a career-longpursuit of effectiveness. but also the status of teach-ing as a profession. influences controlling pedagogi-cal education, and the control of quality.

The Commission's primary purpose was to stimu-late changes and to give them direction. Accord-ingly, the Commission provided its report withinsights and rational justifications for its recom-mendations. It is not too much to say that one findshere an agenda for thinking and action that couldtake the profession through a generation of con-tinuous improvements in pedagogical education.

What Previous Studies Overlooked

All of these surveys, reports, and movementshave three things in common, each of which is amajor feature of this book. First of all, they over-looked the university arrangements that throughoutthe current century stunted the development ofprofessional schools of pedagogy. Colleges ofpedagogy have been caught between the restraininginfluence of the graduate school mentality and thetime restraints and academic animosities that comefrom the fact that pedagogical education is anundergraduate study.

To be sure, the university structure is not the onlyinfluence impeding the rise of genuine professionalschools of education. Equally enervating are thelack of a stringent accrediting agency and theabsence of direct support by teacher organizations.No less important is the fact that State legislatures,education agencies. and the Federal Governmentexercise more control over the profession of teach-ing and institutions preparing its personnel thanover any other profession. In the entangling net-work of Federal. State, and local agencies and pri-vate and professional groups. the actual politicaland social forces shaping pedagogical education areno longer obvious. The motivation of these ex-traneous forces and their effects on pedagogicaleducation. although explored in the Bicentennial

3

Commission's report, call for more critical ex-amination than has been given to them heretofore.

The original scope of this book envisioned a studyof this web of influences. Had time and resourcesbeen available, they would have been treated. Withmany misgivings, however, these concerns wereabandoned in the interest of treating the internalproblems of pedagogical education. The reason forthis choice is a conviction that colleges of pedagogymust first put their house in order before they canhope to attain the faculty cohesion and professionalleadership necessary to cope with the social andpolitical influences now threatening whateverautonomy they have, if not their very existence.

The second thing these surveys and movementsshare is the failure to give primary considerationto the knowledge base of pedagogical education.Conant did discuss the professional sequences forelementary and secondary teachers, proposing thatthe secondary sequence be limited to 12 to 18semester hours and to 30 hours for elementaryteachers. But his deliberations consisted mainly ofselecting among existing courses, eliminating someas worthless, and endorsing others as necessary andstill others as useful. Of course, the competency-based movement also considered the content ofpedagogical education as it related to the objectivesof a particular program. This represented amarked advance over Conant's approach. Ho..'ever.neither one recognized the disarray of pedagogiralknowledge and the necessity of assembling and sift-ing the knowledge from all sources as a prior condi-tion to formulating objectives of instruction andtraining.

The third similarity among these studies ofpedagogical education is that, while they allrecognize the necessity of skill development, nonegave an analysis of how pedagogical knowledge pro-vides a basis for such development. The acquisitionof knowledge and the development of skills havetended to fall apart, one taught as "theory': and theother as "practice." This cleavage has given rise todivisive orientations in faculties and to discontentamong wsdents with pedagogy as a professionalstudy. This condition need not have developed, forwhen knowledge is properly understood it is clearthat the path from knowledge to skills is con-tinuous. Furthermore, the relation of knowledge toprogram development and to policy and decision-making received little attention despite their ob-vious importance.

4

A New Approach To Old Ends

In view of the array of studies extending oversome 50 years and the apparently meager influencethey have had upon the course of pedagogical edu-cation, it may well be asked why still another effortshould be made to lay the groundwork for reform.One might plausibly argue that pedagogical educa-tion is what it is and is what it will continue to be;that pedagogical institutions will continue to pro-duce teachers of lesser quality than is now possible.and that they will continue to attempt to do in in-service what they failed to do in the preservice pro-gram.

As part of that argument, it is often asserted thatthere is no adequate knowledge base of pedagogicaleducation and that the most effective and efficientmode of teacher preparation is an apprenticesystem conducted largely by teachers in the publicschools. This position is herein rejected, and for thefirst time an effort is made to examine the knowl-edge base of pedagogical education and to analyzethe nature of that knowledge and how it can bemade to relate to the task of preparing informed,inquiring, and skillful teachers.

It is a propitious time for making this effort. Forthe first time in this century the demand and supplyof teachers are approximately equal. Pedagogicalfaculties are for the first time relieved of enoughpressure from the production of teachers to con-sider their programs and to attempt a thoroughrevision of them.

Furthermore, the Teacher Corps has launched its5year cycle, which gives the various projects moretime to give thorough consideration to the basicelements of their programs. Also a new researchbase is developing in selected areas of pedagogythrough programs funded by The National In-stitute of Education. In addition, the deans andmembers of pedagogical faculties throughout thecountry are now concerned about the propereducation of teachers for mainstreaming as well asfor teaching skills and knowledge to children fromlow socioeconomic groups and backgrounds.

Moreover, research on the general concepts,principles, and skills of teaching and classroommanagement have now begun to equal in depend-ability the research on the teaching of reading,mathematics, and other subjects. For a long timeresearch knowledge in the field of reading andmathematics has made it possible to design effective

14

programs in these areas and to train teachers in theskills appropriate to the content and problems ofinstruction. That teachers have not always used theknowledge and skills thus available is not to be at-tributed entirely to the teachers themselves but alsoto the inadequacies of their preservice and inservicetraining programs. Lacking knowledge and skills ofmanagement of classroom time and resources andstudent conduct and instruction, teachers are oftenunable to use content-specific skills and knowledgeeffeCtively. The research of the last 25 years hasnow accumulated a body of dependable genericknowledge with which to begin the development ofa more effective program. It is this fact that makesan analysis such as the one herein discussed of para-mount importance, especially at a time when in-terest in pedagogical education is at a new height.

Why Preservice Education Is the Theme

Perhaps a word of explanation should be given asto why this book is devoted wholly to preservice at atime when inservice education is receiving nationwide attention. The case for the latter is strong andalmost compelling. We are told that the public isclamoring for better schools and that theirdemands can be met most immediately andthoroughly by increasing the competence of schoolpersonnel now on the job. Coupled with this point isthe fact that the demand for beginning teachers isless now than it has been for several decades. with aresulting reduction in students seeking to becometeachers. This decline in enrollment has been inter-preted as an opportunity for schools of pedagogy toturn their resources primarily to inservice activities,an objective denied over the years because of insuf-ficient staffing to carry on an all-out inservice pro-gram and a preservice program at the same time.

But why is inservice deemed to be so important?In answer, it can be said that advancements inknowledge during the last two decades make itdesirable that teachers update their knowledge andskill. The trouble with this answer is that althoughthere have been significant breakthroughs in didac-tic instruction and teacher-student interactionvariables, the increase in knowledge is hardly suffi-cient to justify the overwhelming energy now beingdevoted to gearing up for inservice education.

Again, it can be said that innovations in instruc-tional programs and in the structure of the

IJ

school for example. the open classroom typical-ly requires retooling of personnel. While much is tobe said for this claim, all innovations should bethoroughly tested on a small scale before wide-spread adoption. This would eliminate many inno-vations that now absorb the energies of teachersand administrators in abortive efforts to improvethe school's effectiveness. Inservice training wouldthus be noticeably reduced.

A more plausible justification for the current emphask. upon inservice programs is that over theyears beginning teachers have been ill-prepared tomeet the requirements of the day-to-day classroomtasks. This means that the ranks of teachers havebeen too often filled with those who required further preparation in order to satisfy a minimum levelof successful work. To continue this syndrome of in-adequate preservice preparation followed by effortsto make up the deficiencies by inservice educationcan only accentuate the present state of affairs.

The vision that this two-stage program of teacherpreparation can make a marked improvement inpublic education is a mirage. Teachers now in theschools number a little over 2 million. About700,000 have masters degrees and the remainderabout 1.800,000 hold the bachelor's degree."Colleges of pedagogy now enroll about 200.000students preparing to teach. To provide top qualitypreparation for beginning teachers and follow-upservices in their first year. not to mention advancedstudents on the campus, overtaxes the meagerresources of schools of pedagogy. When we add tothis an inservice program for 1,300,000 teachers,the burden becomes overwhelming. Schools ofpedagogy can scarcely hope to cope with this de-mand for both pre- and inservice training. This is asituation that invites ill-considered plans. privateconsultants who often claim more than they candeliver, and worst of all spokesmen for sensationalsolutions to dire problems.

Moreover. inservice programs drain off theenergies of faculties from the task of developing aneffective school of pedagogy, one capable of turn-ing out teachers whose future inservice preparationcan be reduced to updating their knowledge andskills instead of eliminating deficiencies resultingfrom poor preservice education.

No one can justifiably argue that inservice educa-tion today should be eliminated, for the requirement of improved schooling has been documentedover and over again by achievement data. The posi

5

tion taken here is that inservice preparation shouldbe limited largely to those areas where data showthe need for more effective instruction and controlof student conduct. This would free a large pro-portion of college faculties from inservice activitiesto engage in a complete overhaul of the preservicework, an overhaul to produce professional teacherscapable of doing their work skillfully and with afeeling of confidence.

Notes on Terminology

A few words about terminology is appropriate.The term "pedagogy" has long been held in ill-repute despite the fact that it designates the scienceand art of teaching. Nevertheless, we shall use"pedagogy" instead of "education" and shall use itto mean both the act of teaching and the art andscience of education.

We are abandoning the use of "education" torefer to the science and art of teaching for anumber of reasons. For one thing, the term cannotbe used as an adjective to describe a kind of educa-tion, We can speak of legal education, medi:aleducation, and religious education but it is odd tospeak of educational education. To avoid this odo.i-ty the expression "teacher education" is used whenwhat is meant is educational education. While thisavoids the oddity, it creates a semantic bindbecause colleges of pedagogy are much broader inprogram and purpose than the work of the teacher.We can speak of pedagogical education withoutthis awkwardness and restraint.

For another thing, there is perhaps nothing thatreveals so clearly our feeling of shame and inferiori-ty for being teachers as our refusal to refer to ourfield as pedagogy. The use of "education,"whatever the justification for it initially. is a subtlecoverup of our feeling that association with theyoung and the task of shepherding them intoadulthood is an inferior occupation.

It should be noted also that the term "education"has made it easy for schools of pedagogy to expandtheir curriculums to cover almost any area ofhuman interest regardless of its lack of relevance tothe science and art of teaching. The dininction be.tween the content of a subject and the pedagogy ofthe subject has become so blurred that schools ofpedagogy are finding it more and more difficult torule out any subject. Either in formal courses or in

6

workshops, hardly any subject is thought to be soremoved from education as to be denied a part inthe program of pedagogical schools. Consequently.we find courses or workshops in recreation, mar.riage, death, and human relations. to mention onlya few, that have no unique pedagogical signifi.cance. Some colleges now offer more than 500courses, many of which are only remotely related, ifat all. to pedagogy.

Finally, the use of "education" to cover a field ofstudy has been a continuing source of ill will towardschools of pedagogy. All university faculty membersconsider themselves as being in education regard-less of their field. For a pedagogical institutionwithin a univesity to designate itself as a college ofeducation is to court criticism and the ill will ofother faculties within the university.

We are fully aware that once a term is built intothe literature there is little likelihood of eliminatingits use. Nevertheless, we feel impelled to use"pedagogy" to designate the art and science ofeducation.

"Training" is another term in disfavor. Neverthe-less, we shall use it. It has a bad name because it hasbeen interpreted to mean the inculcation of habitswith little if any meaning to the learner. This inter-pretation came largely from Dewey, who used it indeveloping his conception of education." Dewey'spreference for "education" rather than "training"rests in part on his failure to distinguish trainingfrom both drill and conditioning. As a result, heassimilated the mindlessness of drill and condition-ing to training, thereby making it a pejorativeword. Viewing the term historically, Dewey'sdistinction is overdrawn, for since the mid-I500's"training" has meant "to instruct and disciplinegenerally: to educate, rear. bring up": "to instructand discipline in or for some particular art. profes-sion, occupation. or practice."

When we speak of "training," we refer to thepractice of working with students in situationswhere they understand what they are to learn to do,why they are learning to do it. what the outcomesare expected to be. and the conceptual explanationof the performance being acquired. Students whohave thus been trained are fully capable ofmonitoring their behavior. correcting subsequentbehavior in terms of the preceding performanceand the intended outcome. Students who act in thisfashion are performing intelligently and profes-sionally. We prefer "training" to "education" for

16

the simple reason that it designates the kind ofeducation required for professional competence.

In this connection. a word should be said aboutthe term "inquiry." Some authorities insist thatteachers who are properly educated will be thosewho face problematic situations in their classrooms.be it learning difficulties, conduct problems. orwhatever, and will inquire into the situations bygathering data, thinking them through, and arriving at a plan of action to solve the problem.

Properly understood, this is the conception of theinquiring teacher assumed in the followingchapters. An inquiring teacher facing a problemwill diagnose the difficulty in terms of professionalknowledge. If it is a problem in reading, theteacher will know the total range of known dif-ficulties of which the symptoms are an indication.

In terms of the diagnostic data. the inquiringteacher will make a judgment as to which of thepossible difficulties is involved. and from the knownrange of treatments decide the one most appropriatc. try it out, assess its success, and analyze stillfurther if other treatments must be considered.

It should be remembered, however, that no mat.ter how intelligent, knowledgeable. and skillful theteacher may be he or she will from time to timemake errors of either observation or judgment orboth. Perfection, however much we covet it, is not ahuman quality. The rare teacher of course will oc-casionally go beyond the known diagnoses andtreatments and hit upon new ideas and new ways ofdoing things. However, there is no way of educatingthe teacher to guarantee the ability to discover orcreate effective novelties.

Summary

No one can study the foregoing reports without a deep sense of appre-ciation for the efforts of so many who have explored the problems ofcreating a profession of pedagogy. Perhaps no other profession has beenso thoroughly studied with respect to the preparation of its members.Yet none of these studies has dealt expressly with the institutionalculture that has dwarfed the development of the professional educationof teachers, the nature and uses of pedagogical knowledge. the need toassemble and order the knowledge relevant to a viable program ofpedagogical education and the development of an informed and skilledcadre of pedagogical educators, and an appropriate institutional systemof pedagogical education. These neglected problems are addressed inthe following chapters.

17 7

NOTES AND REFERENCES

Chapter 1.t. Charters. W. W and Douglas Waples, Commonwealth

Teacher-Training Study. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress. 1929.

2. National Sumo of the Education of Teachers. U.S. Of-fice of Education. Bulletin, 1933. No. 10.6 vols. Relevantvolumes: Rugg, E. U., and others. Teacher EducationCurricula; Caliver, Ambrose. Education of NegroTeachers: Evenden, E. S. Summary and Interpretation.

3. Commission on Teacher Education. Teachers for OurTipples. American Council on Education. 1944.

4. Commission on Teacher Education. The Improvement ofTeacher Education. American Council on Education.1946.

5. Conant. James Bryant. The Education of AmericanTeachers, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,1963.

6. Flexner, Abraham, Medical Education in the UnitedStates and Canada, A Report to The Carnegie Founda-tion for the Advancement of Science, New York. 1910. p.238.

8

7. Duffy. John. The Healers. A History of AmericanMedicine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 1979. pp.264-265.

8. Cottrell. Donald P. (editor). Teacher Education for AFree People. Washington: The American Association ofColleges for Teacher Education. 1956.

9. Smith, B. Othanel. and others. Teachers for the RealWorld. Washington: American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education. 1969.

10. Rosner. Benjamin. The Power of Competency-RasedTeacher Education: A Report. Boston: Allyn and Bacon,1972.

11. Hall, Gene E., and Howard L. Jones. Competency-BasedEducation: A Process For The Improvement Of Educa-tion. Englewood Cliffs. N. J.: Prentice-Hall. 1976.

12. Howsam. Robert B.. Dean C. Corrigan. George W.Denmark, and Robert J. Nash, Educating A Profession.Washington: American Association of Colleges forTeacher Education. 1976.

13. Ream, Marsha A. Status of the American Public SchoolTeacher. 19754976. Washington: National EducationAssociation, 1977.

14. Dewey, John. Democracy and Education. New York:Macmillan Company. 1916. pp. 15.16.

18

PART ONE

Institutional Alignment and Programs

How pedagogical education became deprofessionalized asit was incorporated into the university

The institutional arrangements for a professional schoolof pedagogy

Outlines of a preprofessional program for preparation inthe subject matter of instruction and the behavioral andsocial sciences

A proposed program in pedagogical education for themaster's degree in pedagogy

A brief for professional specialization leading to the doc-tor of pedagogy and to the doctor of philosophy

19 9

a

Chapter 2

Professional Status of Pedagogical Schools

There are approximately 1400 senior collegesand universities in the United State.; in the businessof pedagogical education. They fall roughly intofour categories: private liberal arts colleges withdepartments of pedagogy; universities, recentlyconverted teachers colleges, with schools ofpedagogy; older State universities with schools ofpedagogy; and private universities some of whichrefer to their pedagogical units as graduate schoolsof education and others as departments or schoolsof education. The private colleges make up thelargest proportion of these 1400 institutions.

Are Schools of Pedagogy Professional?

Strictly speaking. are any of these pedagogicalschools and departments professional? If we use theclassical examples of professional schools, medicineand law, as the source of criteria for decidingwhether a school is a professional one, we arrive atthe following conditions. A school is professional ifits

sole purpose is to train personnel for a pro-fessionprogram focuses on the development of prac-tical knowledge and skillsprogram is designed without interference byother departments and schoolsprogram is influenced by professional organinations and public criticism

Schools of medicine and law satisfy these criteria.They are singlepurpose institutions that emphasizethe education of practitioners. While some of theirgraduates become researchers. programs for profes-sional degrees are not designed to produce them.Their programs are planned without regard to otherdepartments and schools including graduate schoolregulations, save where the Doctor of Philosophydegree is involved. Unlike academic departmentssuch as mathematics and history. which are rela-tively insulated from public pressure. schools ofmedicine and law are responsive to professional

20

organizations and public criticism. In the finalanalysis, a professional school's commitment, likethe profession itself, is to the well-being of the pea-pie the profession serves. Consequently, a profes-sional school is subject to external pressures fromboth the profession and the public. However, thestrength and frequency of such pressures are directlyrelated to the social position of a profession and tothe esteem in which the professional school is heldby the profession and the public.

The schools that provide some form of peda-gogical education measure up to these criteria invarying degrees. Although they train teachers,liberal arts colleges cannot be called professionalschools. They are not single-purpose institutions,and their pedagogical departments function underthe general policies covering all departments.

The private universities are not all of a kind.Some, Tulane University for instance. have a depart-ment of pedagogy, but they cannot be consideredprofessional schools for the reasons just given for rejetting that status for liberal arts colleges.

Other private universities such as Stanford andChicago emphasize graduate study in pedagogy.The primary mission of their pedagogical unit is toprepare personnel for university and college posi-tions, to conduct research, and to preparespecialists for the public school. Little if any anewtion is given to the preparation of beginningteachers. Their faculties are oriented topedagogical studies that ultimately focus onresearch for the doctor's degree rather than oncompetence for either positions in the public schoolor in the training function of pedagogical schools.These schools are divided as to purpose. In thesame graduate -oriented program they purport toprepare at once students for research positions andhigh-level school personnel. The fact that theirproducts are more able in academic than in prac-tical pedagogy helps to account for the inferiorpedagogical training in less prestigious institutionsthat employ them. In fact, the private universitiesalong with the large State universities have over the

1 1

years supplied the personnel of the private collegesand smaller universities. Consequently, these domi-nant schools have set the pattern of pedagogicaleducation and prepared personnel to fit it. Whilethese schools appear to be relatively free of univer.city restraints, except where graduate policies andfinances are concerned, and are influenced to someextent by professional groups, they are neverthelessmore graduate than professional institutions, di-vided in purpose with little emphasis upon practicalcompetence. .

Except for undergraduate work in pedagogy. theforegoing analysis holds for the large State univer-sities; for example, Wisconsin and Texas. Theschools of pedagogy at these universities are dualpurpose institutions, trying to amalgamate the re-quirements for research degrees with those for prac-tical competence. At the master's level the pro-grams contain little that can be called clinical ex-perience despite the fact that mini-courses inmicroteaching, protocol films, and other clinicalmaterials are now available.

With few exceptions, the newer universities arefollowing the same path, providing graduate-typeprograms heavily weighted with academic peda-gogical courses and skirting the question of how togive the beginning teacher thorough training inclinical knowledge and skills.

Perhaps the most common characteristic ofpedagogical departments and schools is that theirclinical work is largely under the control of, andcarried on by, the public schools whose personnelare unprepared to train teachers. Unless the pri-mary emphasis upon clinical knowledge and skills,a school can hardly be called a professional institu-tion. And clinical work under the direct controland supervision of pedagogical schools throughoutthe Nation is almost nonexistent.

At the undergraduate level colleges and depart-ments of pedagogy actually function as servicedepartments. The work in pedagogy is concen-trated in the junior and senior years and varies fromapproximately 18 semester hours for secondaryteachers to some 36 or more for elementaryteachers. Pedagogical students are typically en-rolled as juniors and continue to take a large pro.portion of their studies in nonpedagogical depart-ments. Thus time for pedagogical education is in-adequate. contributing to its deficiencies that inturn give comfort to its critics.

While the postbaccalaureate preparation of

12

school personnel is typically concentrated in thecollege of pedagogy, the college in fact functions asa department of the graduate college, or, wherethere is no graduate college per se, as a graduatedepartment of the university. The distinction be-tween these two ways of categorizing colleges ofpedagogy is considered by some to be important.The first, it is claimed, places restraints on the pro.gram of the college while the second leaves the col-lege unfettered. But it is a distinction with littledifference, for in either case the program of instruction is shaped almost entirely by the pervasiveinfluence of the graduate mentality rather than bydemands for professional competence. Tolerancefor. and in some cases defense of, this graduateorientation by faculties of pedagogy betray their al-titude toward the college as a professional school.iiedagogical faculties, educated in the graduate at-mosphere, absorb its norms and unwittingly carryon ;ts traditions.

How Did We Get That Way?

It was not always so. The normal schools.however poorly staffed and financed, were devotedsolely to the preparation of teachers and more near-ly met other criteria of professional institutionsthan the pedagogical colleges today.

How was the further development of normalschools aborted?' It began in the middle of the lastcentury with the movement that ultimately took thetraining of teachers into the universities. The nor-mal schools of that time were autonomous. single-purpose institutions. devoted solely to the prepara-tion of teachers. In 1859. Richard Edwards. president of Illinois Normal University, speaking indefense of normal schools, emphasized that theirsole purpose was to train teachers; that they gaveinstruction in the science and art of teaching; thatthey provided experience in the practice ofteaching: and that they developed an esprit decorps and exalted the business of teaching. Thesepurposes are as forward looking today as they werethen. But even these essential functions were to beseriously eroded as pedagogical education cameunder the pervasive influence of the norms andfolkways of the academic community.

In their early days. normal schools preparedelementary teachers and were not affiliated with in-stitutions of higher learning. While they enrolled

2 1

students who were typically no further along intheir education than the eighth grade, they took thevery best of these. The curriculum provided forprofessional training and for preparation in thesubject matter of the elementary school program.

A few years after the rise of normal schools, highschool enrollments began to increase and the de-mand grew for secondary school teachers. Almostfrom the beginning, however, the preparation ofteachers for the high school was considered a func-tion of the liberal arts college. It was generallybelieved that there was little, if any, need for in-struction in pedagogy. for academic knowledge wasthought to be sufficient for success as a teacher. Itwas also believed that the liberal arts were superiorto all other subjects and that they were superiorbecause they provided general education and in-tellectual discipline.

However, professional subjects became more andmore a part of the university curriculum as the elec-tive system, beginning at Harvard, made its way in-to the university and belief in formal disciplinebroke down under the impact of psychological in-vestigations. Despite the long standing belief thatvocational subjects in general and pedagogy in par-ticular were inferior to the liberal arts, pedagogywas nevertheless incorporated into the liberal artscurriculum. The inferior quality attributed topedagogy, however, tended to shape its program interms of those subjects most closely allied to theconventional disciplines. Hence the history ofeducation was most commonly taught, second onlyto educational philosophy and psychology. Coursesin methods. and especially such practice courses asobservation and teaching, were considered weakand unsuitable for collegiate pursuit. Furthermore,pedagogical instructors were induced by theacademic climate as well as by their own inclina-tions to accept the modes of instruction thought tobe conducive to intellectual rigor. The courses inpedagogy were thus taught didactically with em-phasis upon memory and verbal learning, a prac-tice continued by pedagogical faculties whenteacher education became a function within theuniversity.

In competition with liberal arts colleges, normalschools expanded their programs by creating liberalarts departments and employing graduates ofliberal arts colleges as faculty members. The men-tality of the liberal arts departments, often quiteout of sympathy with the science and art of peda-

a a

Bogy. thus crept into the normal schools. The aca-demic departments in time became influential inshaping the programs of pedagogical preparation.And differences in orientation between the aca-demic and professional faculties often gave rise todivisive issues such as the relative amount of time tobe allocated to academic and professional courses.graduation requirements, the relevance of aca-demic work, and the utility of pedagogical courses.

With the addition of liberal arts departments,the normal schools were transformed into institu-tions of higher learning, signaled by the new name

teachers college. Gradually these colleges beganto admit more and more students who did not pro-pose to teach but rather to acquire a liberal educa-tion. Partly as a result, the teachers college lost itssingle purpose to prepare teachers bequethed tothem by the normal schools. The surrender of thesingle purpose, so staunchly defended by proponentsof the old normal schools, led in the end to multi-purpose institutions and the consequent assimila-tion of teachers colleges into universities.

In the course of this development, the teacherscollege came to be nothing more than liberal artsschools with a service department of pedagogy toprovide a modicum of professional preparation.Thus the first teachers colleges, while in no wayassociated with the universities, were neverthelessnot professional schools. In fact, if not in principle.they became liberal arts colleges not unlike privateliberal arts schools with departments of pedagogy.Thus the movement to upgrade the normal schoolended in the demise of the single-purpose. autono-mous, professional school for the education ofteachers.

Influence of the Graduate School

Liquidation of the 19th century ideal of a pro-fessional school of pedagogy is attributable as muchto the incorporation of pedagogical education intothe graduate school as to the emergence of thedual-purpose teachers college.

After graduate programs were introduced atJohns Hopkins University around 1880, universitiesbegan to develop graduate departments by exten-sion of the liberal arts to higher levels. The cur-riculums of the various branches of liberal arts wereaccommodated to graduate requirements by speci-

9 9........

13

fying majors and minors believed to be prerequisiteto advanced learning. This was the mold into whichadvanced study of pedagogy was cast, so that thenet effect of the influence of the university uponpedagogical education was to eliminate, or reduceto the lowest level, clinical work in favor of aca.demic pedagogy, and to lock advanced study intothe framework of the graduate school.

Widespread agitation for the creation of university colleges of pedagogy began around 1900. By1923. some 34 State universities had establishedsuch a college. These colleges prepared beginninghigh school teachers and sometimes elementaryteachers as well. They also provided programs forexperienced teachers who desired to return to theuniversity to complete work for their bachelor'sdegree. In keeping with graduate requirements.they also offered advanced studies in pedagogyleading to master's degrees. which initially requireda thesis, and later to the Doctor of Philosophydegree and still later to the Doctor of Education.

It is important to note that colleges of pedagogy.while satisfying their hankering for academic statusby stressing academic pedagogy. nevertheless tendedmore and more in the direction of clinical studies-general methods. special methods, practice teaching- but even these, except the latter. were typicallytaught didactically. At the very outset colleges ofpedagogy were therefore torn between the desire toachieve academic respectability and the need to

14

prepare students to perform effectively on the job.With the growth of pedagogical faculties at the

graduate level, colleges of pedagogy as departmentsin the graduate school. or else on their own. beganto develop programs leading to the Doctor ofPhilosophy degree. Emphasis was thus placed uponresearch and the development of research scholars,even though they would be engaged in the trainingof teachers and only a small fraction would ever doresearch.

As pedagogical education came under the in-fluence of graduate requirements and the liberalarts orientation. the college of pedagogy was caughtbetween the influence of the graduate mentalityand the demands of the public school for efficientand capable personnel. By trying to fulfill two pur-poses at once. colleges of pedagogy have beenunable to realize either.

It has been recognized for some time that neitherteachers nor researchers have been adequately pre-pared by this dual-purpose program. From time totime a separate program leading to research capa-bilities. if not degrees. has been props: -d. but re.mained undeveloped. And modifications in thetraining of teachers have likewise been advanced.tried out, and abandoned. Pedagogy is today in astalemate. Neither the demands for research northe practical requirements of the profession havebeen met by the schools of pedagogy.

Summary

The drift of pedagogical education into its present setting was not thework of any one individual or group of individuals, but rather the resultof the hidden forces of history. Who could have foreseen that the intro-duction of subjectmatter departments would in the end convert normalschools into dual-purpose institutions, that the emergence of universalsecondary education would ultimately transform them into teachers colleges, and that advanced study of pedagogy would respond more to themores and folkways of the academic community than to the practicalrequirements of the profession? What pedagogical education is todaycould hardly have been averted. That it could have been. otherwise, isprofitless speculation.

So, our schools of pedagogy are not strictly professional. So what?Would not a rose smell as sweet by any other name? Yes, but it is neitherthe name nor the fragrance that counts, but whether or not the rose isreally a rose. Are our schools really professional schools? Do they meetthe criteria? If they do, their graduates are likely to acquire the knowl-edge and skills of practical competence. If they do not, then meeting thecriteria will render them more effective. How we got where we are, andthe conditions we must satisfy as we move to a higher level of profes-sional competence. is the sole purpose of the foregoing analysis.

What is important now is to consider the modifications thatpedagogical faculties have the power to make. It is to these modifica-tions that we turn in subsequent chapters, beginning in the next withelements of institutional culture that must be modified as progress ismade.

Chapter 2I. Thb analysis is based upon the classic work of Walter S.

Monroe. TeachingLearning Theory and Tear her Educa-tion. 1890.1950. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.1952: Pangbomfessie M. The Evolution of the American

24

Teachers College. Contributions to Education. No. 500.New York: Teachers College. 1932: Gamier. Alan. ThePreparation of Human Service Professions. New York:Human Sciences Press. 1976.

15

Chapter 3

Toward a Professional School of Pedagogy

What can a pedagogical faculty do in order tomove its school closer to a professional level' Con-sider, first. things it cannot do, or can do only to alimited extent. These concern factors external tothe school and on which the faculty can have littledirect influence. Examples are Federal restraints.regulations of State departments of education.legislative enactments, judicial rulings. attitudes ofthe public, financial support. influences of accred-iting agencies, attitudes and policies of professionalorganizations, and the excessive number of schoolsin the business of pedagogical education.

However, certain internal conditions yield tofaculty influence and control, such as the institutional level of professional study. amount of timeallotted to it. the preprofessional and professionalcurriculums. the involvement of public school personnel, the quality of the faculty itself, and policiesgoverning rank and pay. It stands to reason that ifthese conditions are modified in positive directions.a pedagogical school can make marked progresstoward becoming a full-fledged professional institu-tion.

As we approach the question of what changesshould be made in these conditions, it is instructiveas well as encouraging to note that pedagogicaleducation today confronts about the same problemsas medical education did at the close of the last cen-nary.

An Historical Parallel

Comparisons are sometimes made between peda-gogy and medicine in respect to methods: for exam-ple. diagnosis and prescriptive procedures and clin-ical approaches to training. The comparisons arejust as often questioned. It is pointed out that peda-gogical problems are not pathological and that, un-like medicine. the purpose of pedagogy is to raiseindividuals to new and higher levels of interactionwith their environment and not to restore a bodyequilibrium. These are interesting claims andcounter claims. but they overlook a more interest-

ing and striking similarity: namely, the similaritybetween medical education at the close of the lastcentury and pedagogical education today.

Even in the closing years of the last century a student could enter medical school with only a common school education and complete the require.ments for the doctor's degree in 2 terms of 4 monthseach, The low quality of medical schools in the1880's is vividly portrayed in the 1889 annual announcement of the medical department of theUniversity of Georgia. The close parallel with theconditions of colleges of pedagogy today is all toostriking. Here is the announcement:

The Medical College of Georgia. since 1872the Medical Department of the University ofGeorgia, received its first charter in 1829. andrapidly attained a marked success. With allfacilities for imparting instruction in everydepartment of medicine, an exceptionally ableFaculty and an ample income. its claws in-creased yearly until they numbered from 150to 200 students, among whom were many ofthe most noted men of Georgia and the sur-rounding States. It would. undoubtedly. havebecome one of the foremost institutions of theland if Georgia. conjointly with other Stateshad not adopted the very foolish policy ofchartering a number of competing colleges. allsole judges of their own requirements. both formatriculation and graduation. Of such char-ters, ten have been issued in Georgia and nearly400 in the United States. The consequencemight have been foreseen. Students as a classare distrustful of their own powers when con-trasting their modest acquirements with thevast store of knowledge they are expected to at-tain, extremely sensitive to the disgrace of re-jection. and anxious to obtain their licenses inthe shorten possible time. Hence, they natu-rally patronize not the best colleges. but suchwhere the requirements are the least exactingand the time the shortest.

17

It is but natural that the colleges, dependentas they are upon their patronage for their veryexistence. should have keen influenced by thistendency to lower their requirements. until thestandard of medical education is actually lowerin Georgia and the surrounding States than itwas thirty years ago. It is no secret that youngmen are annually graduated from all the colleges who are by no means competent to prat.tice the difficult art of medicine, and haveneither the talent nor the education to obtainthe requisite knowledge by their own endeavors.

The University has made unceasing endeavors to escape from this degrading position.but has learned from experience that to persistwould result in driving its students to other col-leges and close its doors without in the leastaltering the condition of things. The case seemsutterly hopeless without the aid of the Legislature, to which it has hitherto been consideredvain to apply to remedy the mischief for whichit is largely responsible.'

As noted earlier. there are some 1400 pedagogical institutions. The content of their programsconsists of personal experience of instructors, doctrines. pedagogical formulas, opinions. andresearch knowledge. Competition for studentsamong instructors as well as among schools. even atthe crest of the enrollment swell of the 1960's. waskeen enough to loosen the rigor of instruction.Legislatures establish and support pedagogical in-stitutions with little regard to either need or quali.ty. Yet there is cause for hope. If medical schools.in comparable circumstances. raised themselves toadmirable levels of quality in less than a century,there is reason to hope that schools of pedagogy canat least establish themselves as genuine professionalinstitutions.

Those of feeble hope will say that medical education possessed a knowledge base at the turn of thecentury and that the task of medical schools was todevelop and institutionalize an effective trainingprogram, but that pedagogical education today hasinsufficient knowledge for a program. We ventureon shaky ground when we begin to compare knowl-edge in one field to that in another. But the anemicstate of medical education in the closing decades ofthe last century is evident from the fact that 8

18

months of medical itelo; o...i., -.. sufficient toqualify one as a physician.

The medical curriculum at the University ofGeorgia in 1889 consisted of anatomy. pathology,pharmacy (called medical chemistry), obstetrics,gynecology. eye and ear and throat, surgery,medical jurisprudence, and practice of medicine.Comparatively little was known about any of these.The theory of disease had been established,although limited to hacterial causes. Little ornothing was known about viral, genetic or nutri.timid diseases. Diagnostic knowledge and tech.niques were crude. and physicians prescrihed forohvious symptoms sore throats, coughs, diarrhea.fevers, and consumption. Medical treatment was inits infancy. Quinine for malaria, aconite anddigitalis fur the heart, splints for broken bones, carbolic acid and iodoform as antiseptics, and afterthese we soon run out of specifics. Many drugs af-fected only the symptoms. Among these werebismuth, opium. alcohol, spirits of ammonia, and afew analgesics. Surgery was still primitive: Keen.Crile. Halsted and others had barely begun todevelop the science of the art.

Pedagogy today is much beyond medicine whenJohns Hopkins initiated the program that ultimatelytransformed medical education. While we do notknow the cause(s) of learning, we do know the con.ditions of learning both in and outside the class-room. The general outlines of human developmenthave been discovered and we are beginning to learnthe effects of some environmental factors uponhuman potentials. We know how to identify manyobstacles to learning, particularly in reading andmathematics. and how to help learners cope withthem. Our knowledge of exceptionality and how toprovide for it is considerable and increasing. Whileour knowledge of social and emotional develop-ment is more fragile than our knowledge of cogni.tive development, still much progress has beenmade in procedures and techniques of promotingeffective growth in the classroom. In later chapters,pedagogical knowledge will be discussed at length.It should suffice for now to say that if the history ofmedical education has any lesson for us, it is thatthe problem of pedagogical education is not thelack of knowledge so much as the lack of will to in-stitutionalize an effective program of pedagogicaleducation.

2 6

Proposed Institutional Arrangements

While new knowledge is always to be cherished.and pedagogy. like other professions, can alwaysuse more of it, the shortcomings of pedagogicaleducation today can be attributed more to defi-ciencies in institutional arrangements, programs.and instruction than to lack of knowledge. In theremaining pages of this chapter an institutionalframework for pedagogical education is suggested.Programs and instruction will be treated in laterchapters.

The reader should remember, however, thatelements of the plan will change, perhaps funda-mentally. between our conception and the finalrealization of a professional school of pedagogy.There may be better formulations than the one wesuggest. And new conditions, not now foreseeable,may arise whose demands will require drasticchanges in our design. It would be strange indeed ifour prospectus were not improved upon greatly asothers consider the problems and conditions.

Our schools of pedagogy would be well on theirway to becoming genuinely professional, however,were the arrangements finally worked out to adherefrom school to school. What we need least of all is amultitude of different institutional and programdesigns. giving rise to endless debate and schemes ofevaluation.

Consider the following schema for the prepara-tion of pedagogical; personnel. It begins with thefirst year of undergraduate study and ends forteachers with 2 years of professional study in theschool of pedagogy and for specialists after 2 addi-tional years.

Students would enter the undergraduate schooland pursue work for admission to the school ofpedagogy. Certain curriculums would be open tothem: a curriculum in the subject matter requiredto teach the elementary school curriculum, in-cluding early childhood and primary; a curriculumin each of the various content areas of the juniorand senior high school; and a prepedagogical cur-riculum consisting of introduction to psychology.learning theory, human development, sociology,anthropology, and philosophy. These studies are tobe taken as a foundation in tho behavioral sciencesfor work in academic pedagogy. At the present timefew students come to the study of pedagogy withadequate footing in these areas, a deficiency thathandicaps them in their study of the concepts andprinciples underlying the programs, policies, andpractices of the schools.

Admission to the school of pedagogy would be byspecified criteria and contingent upon completionof the baccalaureate program. except as indicatedbelow. Students would then pursue professionalstudies until completion of the course require-

Diagram 1. Schema for Preparing Pedagogical' Personnel

Liberal Arts and Sciencesand

Other Non-pedagogical Schoolsand

Departments

School of Pedagogy

..

4 years 2 years

612 years

19

ments. This would entail at least 2 years of study.At that time the student would be granted themaster's degree in pedagogy upon satisfactory per-formance on examinations and demonstration ofcompetence.

Now, the exception. Articulation of the under-graduate program and the first year of professionalstudy can be so ordered that the last semester of thesenior year and the first semester of pedagogicalstudy can be interchanged, thus enabling the stu-dent to become involved in clinical pedagogy some-what earlier. The academic work for the bachelor'sdegree would be completed and the degreeawarded during the first year of professional study.

The sole aim of the program for the master'sdegree is to develop competent teachers, and thetime of the student will be devoted entirely to pro-fessional studies. The program will be discussed inChapter 5. Suffice it to say here that it will consistof various types of clinical experiences and peda-gogical practice throughout the 2 years, coordi-nated with academic and clinical pedagogicalstudies.

Naturally, specialization with respect to peda-gogical functions will be built into the program.The areas of specialization will include early child-hood and primary pedagogy, elementary pedagogy,and secondary pedagogy. Exceptionality will not bean area of specialization except in the doctoral pro-gram. However. all students will be prepared in theelements of exceptionality and in the skills of main-streaming.

Although they are intensively trained, graduatesshould be followed up during the first year and pro-vided with such assistance as is necessary to assuretheir success. To this end. a follow-up corps shouldbe established by the college to study its products.to provide them with assistance, and to supply in-formation to the faculty bearing upon the strengthsand weaknesses of its program of training.

Requirements for admission to the doctoral pro-gram will vary with specialization. Students whowish to pursue a career in research and evaluationmay go into advanced study directly. or they mayteach for a year or two and then enter the program.In any event. research and evaluation should be thedominant interest of the student and only the mostcapable should be admitted. The program shouldbe distinctly different from professional programsto prepare specialists in various areas ofpedagogical practice. The program should lead to

20

the Doctor of Philosophy degree, and students whobecome researchers should not thereby be con-sidered capable of training pedagogical personnel.The number of students being prepared forresearch careers at any one time should be small.and only those schools having an active researchfaculty and resources should offer work leading tothe research degree.

Programs leading to the Doctor of Pedagogy areto be planned to prepare competent specialists inall areas of educational endeavor except researchand evaluation. Students admitted to the advancedprogram to become prepared as specialists in peda-gogical practice should have had some experiencein educational work, for students are more likely tobe successful as specialists if they have first demon-strated their competence as teachers.

Areas of specialization should be quite diversi-fied, as are the positions in education generally. Afew are mentioned here as examples: specialists inexceptionality, reading, vocational pedagogy, coun-seling, school psychology; educational directors inthe private sector, and in government.

Curriculums leading to the degree of Doctor ofPedagogy should emphasize clinical work and peda-gogical practice in the student's specialty as well assubstantive courses. Although the student must bethoroughly steeped in research literature and itssignificance for the practice of pedagogy, no thesesor dissertations should be required for the doctoratein pedagogy. And students should not be expectedto do research in the course of their training.

A college, no matter what it calls itself, can func-tion as a professional institution only if it separatesits program for the preparation of practitionersfrom the program for researchers. This does notmean that the program for practitioners is to ignorethe results of research. On the contrary, researchknowledge is its very substance. But it does meanthat the requirement of a research project andother trappings of a research-oriented graduateprogram are barriers to the development of a pro-gram for professional personnel.

It is claimed by some authorities that teachersshould themselves engage in research and shouldtherefore be prepared to do so in their professionaltraining. This is a worthy objective, but it does notrequire a graduate-oriented program for its attain-ment. We know from other professions that a fewpractitioners do engage in research from time totime and that their preparation also enables them

28

to conduct on-the-job studies when they choose todo so. Research by teachers is not the issue. Instead.the question is whether the program of professionalpreparation is to be shaped by the research men-tality.

The Need For Clinical Facilities

Institutional arrangements for pedagogical edu-cation are incomplete without clinical facilities thatcan be provided by the public school, governmentaldepartments, and the private sector. Although thefacilities of all these are needed, the public schoolsare crucially important in the first 2 years of peda-gogical study. The key role of the school followsfrom the fact that most graduates will becometeachers and from the further fact that the clinicalprinciples of teaching and learning as well as peda-gogical skills, both of which are necessary in anypedagogical function, are best acquired in schoolsettings.

To acquire pedagogical skills is to practice in aschool setting in which the trainee's performancecan be observed, diagnosed, and corrective feed-back given as practice is continued. This require-ment has fundamental implications not only for thepersonnel of the college of pedagogy but also for therelationship between the college and the schools.These implications have never been satisfactorilyderived, explicated, or translated into practice. Forone thing, neither the local board of education northe State has seriously committed itself to the taskof providing the proper clinical conditions forpedagogical training. For another thing, colleges ofpedagogy have never committed their resources orstaffs to the task of pedagogical training nor pro-vided the leadership to induce local school person-nel to join in a study of the mutual problems ofpedagogical education. The crucial function ofschool clinics in the training of all pedagogical per-sonnel makes it mandatory that colleges of peda-gogy seek the cooperation of local educationauthorities to establish a system of clinical laborstories.

The number of training sites will depend uponthe number of trainees and the optimum numberthat a given school can properly train without dis-rupting its program. The number of trainees persite can best be answered by the experience of eachschool, for the circumstances may vary widely fromschool to school.

29

This injunction applies equally well to the col-leges of pedagogy. Admit no more students thanthe faculty can properly train. It is not the primaryresponsibility of pedagogical schools to turn outgraduates in sufficient number to fill every vacancyin the public schools or elsewhere. Their first com-mitment is and must be to the education of com-petent professionals. To water down that commit-ment in order to turn out enough personnel to meetdemands is to surrender whatever right pedagogicalschools have to call themselves professional institu-tions. If the graduates of the schools of pedagogyare not numerically sufficient to fill the jobs, let theState provide the necessary resources to train theneeded personnel without sacrificing the quality.To meet the demands for educational personnel atthe expense of quality is to betray the public and itschildren.

Some will hold that the State will meet thedemands for teachers by other means. If peda-gogical schools continue to turn out quality person-nel, however, their products will be in demand bythe better school systems. And the State, not thepedagogical schools, will bear the burden for thedepressed quality of schooling.

Clinical facilities for the third year present a prob-lem quite different from that of the first 2 years.Clinical training required for the master's degree iscommon to all pedagogical work, as noted above,and can best be provided in a school setting; thatfor the doctor's degree is specialized and preparesindividuals for differentiated positions in privateand governmental domains as well as for specializedwork in the schools. Since the number of doctoralstudents will be comparatively small, fewer clinicalsites will be required. The clinical situations,however, may be extremely varied because of theuniqueness of the job demands from one enterpriseor organization to another. Nevertheless, theseclinics will fall into three groups: scholastic, govern-mental, and nongovernmental enterprises andorganizations. The relationships of the college ofpedagogy to these clinics are likely to be tenuousand fleeting at the beginning, but can be stabilizedwith experience.

The Quest for Clinical Facilities

Pedagogical schools have been plagued through-out the current century with the question of where

21

to train their students. In the first half of the cen-tury the typical provision for training was the cam-pus school, variously referred to as the experimen-tal. practice. demonstration. or laboratory school.From time to time the campus school encounteredserious objections. It was not like the public schoolsand hence maladapted the trainees for work success; it cost too much per trainee even though theschool often served as a research center: and it wastoo experimental and offbeat to serve as a demon-stration center. Although these objections were notinfrequently justified, the campus school lingeredand is still found in a few institutions.

However, its displacement by the public schoolsas the training facility resulted less from criticismthan from the influx of students into pedagogicaleducation in the 40's and 50's, overcrowding thecampus school and driving colleges of pedagogy toseek training facilities in the public schools. Onestudy showed that by 1945 some 75 percent of thetrainees of forty large universities were being placedin the public schools' while another study reported2 years later that, of 135 teachers colleges. 108 stilloperated campus schools but also used publicschools to ease the overload.'

In the long run, however, the laboratory schoolswould probably have dropped by the wayside anyhow. Their faculties were no more capable of iden-tifying the deficiencies of trainees and showing howto overcome them than the better public schoolteachers themselves. And it is only fair to say thatthis is a condition with which faculties of pedagogyare still struggling. even though the knowledge forremoving it is becoming increasingly available.

From the beginning the use of public schools as atraining facility rested upon an uneasy partnership.*Use of the schools was informally arranged. Neitherthe university nor the college of pedagogy negotiated contracts for the services of the schools. Inmoving its trainees to the schools the college gaineda natural setting for its training function, but at thesame time it lost control of the training personnel.The critic or supervising teachers were typicallyrecommended if not selected by the principal. al.though the college sometimes exercised veto power.They were poorly paid. typically by small stipend:or tuition waivers, and as critic teachers totally untrained: nor did the college provide training forthem. Even today only a few colleges provide amodicum of training. Furthermore, the services ofsupervising teachers were over and beyond their

22

normal teaching loads, overtmcing their energiesand rendering them even less effective as critics.Against all this was the claim that the teacher andthe school profited from the growth of teachers whoserved as supervisors, a dubious claim at best.

Moreover, college supervision of training wasseldom, if ever, adequate. The college supervisorinfrequently observed the trainees' performanceand thus lacked the understanding of their problems that can come only from direct observation.*Discussions between the supervisor and traineeswere thus often academic if not irrelevant. Further-more, the college supervisor was typically no betterprepared for the training function than the criticteachers themselves. The large universities tendedto use supervisory positions to support graduatestudents. While these students were usually diligentand conscienticus, still they were unprepared forthe task. And, az in the case of critic teachers, thecollege provided little or no training for its super.visors.

The training program suffered still further fromcollege policies on salary and promotions. Thesupervisory faculty was considered of less impor-tance than the faculty who taught pedagogical academic courses, did research, or published articlesand books. The supervisors were thus the underdogs of the college faculty, even when they heldrank. and received less attention when salary increases and promotions were passed around.

While the foregoing account of the facilities andstaffing of he training program is presented inhistorical perspective, it describes in general outlinethe training component of pedagogical educationtoday.

New Conditions Call for New Arrangements

Dissatisfaction with the provisions for trainees isbeing expressed in new and forceful ways.* Teachersare becoming aware of themselves as professionalsand are demanding to be treated as such. One expression of this awareness is a growing revolt againstthe use of the schools for pedagogical training without involving teachers in the formulation of policiesabout the number of trainees, how they are assigned,status of supervising teachers, modes of training,and evaluation.

Moreover, the demand and supply syndrome isuppermost in the minds of teachers today. for the

30

oversupply of teachers tends to reduce mobility ofthose who hold positions and to cast a shadow ofuncertainty on their tenure. It is not surprisingtherefore that teacher associations are lookingaskance at the use of the schools to provide teachingexperience for students in excess of the demand fornew teachers. And the practice of placing traineeswith selected teachers, difficult as it has been in thepast, promises to be even more difficult as both in-dividual teachers and the organized profession seekto exercise more control over assignments.

There is little likelihood that a genuine profes-sional school of pedagogy can be sustained and im-proved unless its training facilities are of high quali-ty. Yet the present facilities are unsatisfactory. Toreturn to the campus school as a training center isnot a feasible alternative. It was not satisfactory inthe first place, and the demands for qualityteachers, even when school enrollments are decreas-ing, is far in excess of what campus schools can sup-ply. Besides, the present partnership with thepublic schools is encountering new conditions withwhich it is unlikely to cope.

At the same time our conception of the role ofthe teacher is undergoing fundamental modifica-tions. The teacher today is expected not only to becompetent in the classroom and the school per se.but also to understand both the broad social context and the narrow context within which a par-ticular school carries on its work. This means.among other things, that teachers should under-stand the various social groups and agencies thatimpinge in one way or another upon children andyouth. and should also possess the skills of com-munication essential to successful interaction withthese various entities. In addition, the involvementof teachers with parents and home influences ofchildren and youth are such that knowledge andskills required for successful communication withparents are only less essential than the knowledgeand skills for participating in the school itself.

The Emergence of Community as a Laboratory

The foregoing analysis points up the necessity forwidening the arena, within which pedagogicaltrainees acquire their professional knowledge andskills. to include the whole community. The com-munity is not the dose intimate web of human asso-ciations we often read about in literature and that

31

many now living experienced in their youth. In lit-tle more than a generation this mode of social ex.istence has all but fallen by the wayside. In its placehas evolved a conglomerate of social groups. cor-porate associations. and organized interests allloosely interdependent and held together partly bysome sense of fair play and partly by antagonisticcooperation, to borrow an expression from Sumner,in which their unique and competing interests aretemporarily subordinated to some special and com-pelling common concern.

Gone also is the neighborhood school whosestudents lived in the vicinity and whose controlrested with a board of trustees who knew thechildren and their parents. Today the school drawsits students from a population scattered over an ex-tensive territory. The school trustees also have beenreplaced by a single board of education that con-trols a number of schools and whose members areoften known to the parents only through the media.All of this indicates that today the teachers often donot know the parents and many, if not most. of thechildren do not associate with one another save inthe school itself. There is hence an impersonalquality about the school and its ties with the socialmilieu.

When we speak of the community and its schoolswe have reference to this general situation of com-peting and often conflicting groups and interest,constantly coming together in varying combina-tions in efforts to resolve social issues of commonconcern. We do not mean community in the oldsense, as a group of people living in the sameneighborhood. sharing experiences, and having alarge core of mutual interest. Community in thatsense hardly exists save at the point of resolution. Inshort, community as a meeting of minds tends thesedays to be a recurring event rather than a constantstate of affairs.

This is the social setting in which the trainees areto be socialized and prepared in pedagogical skills.The question to be considered is what institutionalstructures. contractual arrangements. and labora-tory facilities are indicated for pedagogical educa-tion by this complex set of social circumstances.

The implication of this broader conception of thepedagogical arena indicates the need for a new con-ception of training facility. From the very begin-ning the training facility has been thought of as aparticular school in which the trainees gain ex-perience. This conception must be abandoned. The

2$

Teacher Corps has taught us in no uncertain lan-guage that the community and its schools constitutethe training laboratory. The pioneer work of theTeacher Corps in creating a new setting for thetraining of teachers has now begun to be realized asone of the most significant developments in pedagogical education in recent decades. It is this con-ception that must now be grasped, expanded, andinstitutionalized as a component of the school ofpedagogy. In the remainder of this chapter we shallattempt to set forth the concept of a communityand its schools as a pedagogical training facility.

The Clinical Complex

Visualize a school of pedagogy surrounded by anumber of communities of varying sizes anddistances from the campus as shown in diagram 2.Each of these communities will constitute a trainingfacility with the school of pedagogy as the center ofthe duster. We shall refer to such a group of communities and the school of pedagogy as a clinicalcomplex and to each community as a traininglaboratory.

The center of the cluster of community traininglaboratories is the school of pedagogy. For purposesof illustration let us assume that the cluster containssix communities with an average population of50.000 and that each community has 10 elementaryschools and four high schools, two junior and twosenior schools. If each elementary school accommo-dates seven trainees, one for each grade pluskindergarten, or a total of 70 for the entirelaboratory, the complex of six laboratories wouldafford training for 420 trainees. At the same timethe four high schools, combining junior and senior.could easily accommodate 12 trainees each, two foreach grade, or a total of 48 for the laboratory as awhole or 288 for the entire complex. Furthermore,the community organizations and agencies couldprovide training experiences for at least 40 traineesper semester, or a total of 240 for the complex as awhole. All together the complex could accom-modate 708 trainees in the schools and 240 in thecommunity, or a grand total of 948 per semester. Ifeach school of pedagogy restricted its enrollmentsto the number of students it can train effectively, acomplex of this scope would seldom be required.

The foregoing description gives the general out-lines of the clinical complex. Its scope will of course

24

vary from college to college, depending upon theavailability of communities and their geographicdistribution. But the core of the concept would re-main the same: namely, a college of pedagogy witha cluster of community training laboratories.

Governance of the Clinical Complex

An organization of this scope and complexity canoperate smoothly and effectively only if it is func-tionally ordered to represent the interests and con-cerns of its constituents-- community, schools. legalauthorities, and the college of pedagogy as shownin diagram S.

There are two levels of organization. First of all isthe complex itself. The administrative organizationat this level should consist of at least one representa-tive from each laboratory, preferably the chairper-son of the laboratory advisory board, and a repre-sentative of the college who should be the directorof the complex. This group, referred to here as theclinical complex council, is responsible for develop-ing the rules and regulations governing the opera-tion of the complex, reviewing and evaluating itswork, making suggestions for improvements, and ingeneral advising the director, who is ultimatelyresponsible to the dean and faculty of the college ofpedagogy.

The director is responsible for the administrationof the complex which involves, among other things,negotiation of contracts with local boards. keepingabreast of the problems and developments in thevarious laboratories. selecting and working with thecollege faculty. including public school teacherswho are members of the faculty. who are to serve ina clinical capacity in the laboratories. The directorwill also work closely with the appropriate membersof the college administration having to do with theselection and retention of students and assessmentof their readiness for assignments to the traininglaboratories.

Governance of a Laboratory

The second level of organization is the labora-tory. A contractual agreement between the schoolof pedagogy and each local board of educationwould be negotiated. This agreement would specify

32

TrainingLaboratory

Diagram 2. Clinical Comply

Schoolof Pedagogy

Training

Laboratory

TrainingLaboratory

TrainingLaboratory

33 25

it

Diagram 3. Governance of the Clinical Complex

College of Pedagogy

Director of the Clinical Complex

Contractual Negotiation

Local Boards of Education

College of Pedagogy Facultyin Training Laboratoties

the general policies under which the school of peda-gogy and the board would cooperate to finance andstaff the training facility. The contract should alsoprovide for the establishment of a board of directors for the laboratory, as depicted in diagram 4.This board would consist of one elementary andone high school teacher, each a representative ofthe organized teaching profession. The boardshould also include an elementary and a secondaryschool administrator, university representative,community services representative, two parent-teacher representatives, one of whom should be froma minority group, and a representative of the cham-ber of commerce or a similar organization.

Each board of directrrs would operate within thepolicies laid down by the contractual arrangementsbetween the school of pedagogy and the respectiveboard of education. It would have direct responsi-bility for the formulation of policies about thenumber of trainees the laboratory would accom-modate, the assignment of trainees to schools, the

26

CLINICAL COMPLEX COUNCIL

One or more reptesen tat ives

from each Ttaining Laboratoty

responsibility of the clinical staff, the extraclass-tJorn activities in which the trainees would engage,and such other policy questions and problems asmay arise from time to time. The director of theclinical complex would be an ex officio member ofthe board.

Staffing the Laboratory

Traditionally the trainees have been confined tothe school and the classroom during their clinicalexperience. This is no longer a viable practice. Asindicated earlier, the trainee must now study notonly the sociology of community life but also gainfirst-hand experience through observation and par-ticipation in a wide variety of community activities.This point has been emphasized by a number ofauthorities, and a few schools have arranged forsuch experience. But these ventures have for themost part been conducted informally and without

34

Diagram 4. Governance of the Training Laboratory

Local Board of Education NIMMI=01 Contractual Agreement

4,

i--

Director of Clinical Complexex officio member ofTraining Laboratory Board of Directors

Training Laboratory Board of DirectorsTeachers Association Representative forElementaryTeachers Association Representative forSecondaryElementary School AdministratorSecondary School AdministratorUniversity RepresentativeCommunity Services RepresentativeTwo Parent-Teacher RepresentativesCommunity Representative

Training Laboratory

clear direction and control. In order for the traineeto receive proper experience and training in thesebroader pedagogical settings a definite programmust be planned and staffed.

The personnel to conduct this program shouldconsist of a team of college faculty membersselected from among those who are knowledgeablein the area of community life. This team wouldplan a program for review by the advisory board,and after the criticisms and suggestions of theboard had been fully considered and the programrevised, the trainees would be admitted for at leasta quarter if not a semester's intensive work underthe direction of the team. This means that the teamwould in effect be conducting a seminar-practic.tmin an actual community setting.

School of Pedagogy

Turning now to the schools, a team of clinicalteachers would be constituted in each school to con-duct the preparation of the trainees not only in theskills of classroom teaching but also in curriculumplanning. participation in various school activities,and the development of skills in the various do.mains of training (see Chapter 9) with special em-phasis upon the ability to observe and diagnose thedifficulties students encounter as they engage in theprocess of learning. Diagnosing and planning isprerequisite to the conduct of instruction itself:their importance cannot be overemphasized. Butthey should, nevertheless, not preempt the programto the exclusion of other domains of preparation.

All can agree that clinical teachers must bethoroughly versed in the knowledge and skills of

3527

teaching based not only upon their own experienceand professional wisdom but even more uponresearch. It is too much to suppose that any team ofteachers, however successful they are as teachers intheir own classrooms and school, will be equallyprepared to conduct a training program. Even themost effective teachers perform in many ways ofwhich they are not aware and attain results withoutknowing explicitly how they attained them. Fur-thermore, they are probably ill prepared to observethe behavior of teachers and students objectivelyand to analyze teaching behavior sufficiently toprovide corrective feedback to a trainee.

To prepare clinical teachers, both college andschool, the college will need to designate instructorsto work cooperatively with teachers in the develop-ment of a training program. It must be admittedthat college instructors themselves are often no bet-ter equipped to conduct a training program thanthe teachers. This means that college instructors,those who are to engage in clinical work themselves,will be engaged in acquiring knowledge and skillsabout training along with the teachers who are tocompose the clinical teams. While the question oftraining will be considered again in Chapter 12, itcan be said now that such training will be mostly abootstrap operation, for there are few experts todraw upon.

Because differentiated staffing is the practice inan extremely small number of schools, the mores ofpublic school faculties tend to produce negative at-titudes accompanied by feelings of jealousy towardteachers whose assignments are different from thoseof other teachers. Clinical teachers are thereforelikely to encounter coolness if not actual resentmentbecause of the special character of their work andtheir rank on the college faculty. There is probablyno way of avoiding this possibility, but perhaps itseffects can be alleviated by opening up the ranks ofclinical teachers to any teacher who satisfies thequalifications. If the criteria are stringent andrigorously adhered to. as they should be, not every-one will want to become a clinical teacher. Thosewho choose not to do so will at least have had theirchance, and this fact should help to reduce jeal-ousies and tensions.

The clinical teacher would of course be given anassignment different from that of other teachers.They would also hold rank in the school of peda-gogy, a recognition that would be contingent on thejudgment of appropriate faculty committees and

28

the dean of the college. All of this is possible only ifthere is adequate financing by the State to compen-sate teachers for that part of their load assigned tothe clinical function. The funds thus appropriatedshould be channeled through the budget of theschool of pedagogy. The salary of clinical teachers.however, must be determined jointly by the schoolof pedagogy and the local board of education.Other than providing funds to supplement thesalaries of clinical teachers the State should exerciseno influence over the program.

Elements of a Clinical Program

In order to picture the outlines of a program weshall walk a group of trainees from the campus intoand through the program. Again the experience ofTeacher Corps is of paramount importance. TheCorps has developed a concept of a preinductionperiod in which the trainee is given a completeoverview of the school and the community. We areadapting this concept for the program of the train-ing complex. The director of the complex should beresponsible for organizing the preinduction pro-gram. part of which might well be given on the col-lege campus and another part at the laboratoryitself. The trainees are informed about the differentkinds of experiences they are expected to undergo,together with appropriate instruction about therules and regulations of the schools, their adminis-tration, and the board of education. In short, theyare given a preview of the school system in order toset the stage for their more direct socialization whenthey first visit the school as trainees. In addition.they should be provided with a preinduction experience to the community its various powergroups, its recreational and health facilities, itslegal and judicial system, the agencies that administer to children and youth including juvenilecourts, and, in short, to all the social interests.organizations, and agencies that in one way oranother impinge upon the schools. teachers,parents, and children.

The preinduction period should be positive in itstone so that the trainees approach the laboratory ina positive mood and with sufficient information toenable them to cope successfully with the demandsthey will meet. Much of the information necessaryfor their proper functioning can be supplied byrepresentatives of the various organizations and

36

agencies invited to participate in the program.These representatives, however, will need to be informed about the purposes of the preinductionprogram and of its importance in the education ofschool personnel.

Let us assume that some 30 or 40 trainees will beassigned to begin their training in the elementaryschools. They should probably meet as a group withrepresentatives of the training teams. the collegeclinical specialists, and the director of the complexfor further briefing on their duties and responsi-bilities and on the kind of activities they will beengaging in from time to time. Following thismeeting they would go to their respective assign-ments in the schools. There are many details ofoperation tha. cannot here be imagined, but itseems reasonable to suppose that the clinical teamswould meet with the director of the complexperiodically to discuss common problems and toassess the training activities.

In addition to engaging in the clinical work, thetrainees would also be enrolled in seminars orcourses. conducted by a clinical teacher and a col-lege clinical specialist, and designed to deal withgeneric as well as content-specific problems of class-room instruction. These courses might be in the

teaching of reading. mathematics, social studies, orwhat not. In some cases, the work may be organizedwith reference to clusters of specific difficultiestrainees are having. The nature of this concomitantwork will doubtless vary from college to college andfrom laboratory to laboratory. But the details thusfar given should serve to indicate the general out.lines of a program.

A similar description could be given for second-ary trainees, but since their program would differonly in details there is little reason to discuss theirprogram. Both elementary and secondary pro-grams will be further described in a later chapter.

Following the community preinduction period,the trainees would begin to become familiar withdemographic data, social structure, welfare levels,occupational structure, and other relevant infor-mation. At the same time they would begin theirlaboratory study, coordinated with the seminar,and based upon a laboratory guide. The guidemight call for trainees to help parents work withtheir children; attend meetings of city councils,school boars meetings, court trials; work withjuvenile agencies; become familiar with recrea-tional facilities and health services; and so on.

Summary

The picture of a school of pedagogy projected in bold outline is whata professional school would conceivably look like if in fact it did exist. Itrecognizes a few compromises with the real world of pedagogical institu-tions. Yet it is not intended as a mere dream or a transcendent ideal,but a realizable picture of pedagogical education.

It allows time for the prospective teacher to acquire a liberal educa-tion and to prepare to enter the schoolroom with the confidence thatcomes from realizing that one knows how to cope with moment to mo-ment events and with the more intricate problems that arise less fre-quently in the classroom. It provides for the preparation of researchersas well as specialized practitioners. And it recognizes that clinicalfacilities are necessary and that they must be provided cooperativelywith the public schools.

The details of the picturethe knowledge and its uses. the domainsof training, and the programs of instruction must now be painted in.We turn to these in subsequent chapters.

3"i 29

a

Chapter 3.1. Annual Announcement. 1999-90. Augusta:

The Medical College of Georgia: Archives of Records. Oflice of the Registrar.

2. Brink, W. G. "Administration of Student Teaching inUniversities Which Use the Public Schools." EducationalAdministration and Supervision. SI: 399-402. 1945.

3. Blyler. D. M. "Student Teaching in the American Asso-ciation of Teachers Colleges." Educational Administra-tion and Supervision. 33: 75.97. 1947.

30

4. Stiles, L. S. "Student Teaching Opportunities Providedby the Universities." Educational Rematch Bulletin. 25:67.74, 1946.

5. "Supervision of Student Teaching in Universities,"Education. 67: 9.11. 1946.

6. Kaplan, Leonard. "Does Anyone Want Our StudentTeachers?" journal of Teacher Education. XXX, No. 3,MayJune 1979 p. 62.

38

Chapter 4

Preprofessional Education:Outlines of a Program

Total preparation to enter the clauroom as afull-fledged teacher requires completion of two in-terrelated programs: a preprofessional and a pro.fessional program, the latter consisting of a trainingcomponent and a substantive pedagogical compo.nent. These components will be treated in the nextchapter. In this chapter, we shall sketch the generaloutlines of a preprofessional curriculum.

The preprofessional curriculum covers 4 years ofwork leading to the bachelor's degree. It is just asimportant as the professional program to theteacher's success. What future teachers learn in thisfirst segment of their education and how well theylearn it will affect their future intellectual develop.meet and their success as students of pedagogy andas teachers.

The preparation of teachers in the subject matterthey are to teach has often been considered unsatisfactory. Much evidence has accumulated in the lastfew years indicating that a considerable number ofteachers do not know the mathematics they are sup-posed to teach and there is good reason to supposethat the same deficiencies hold in natural science,social science, and language arts. Admittedly, thedata bearing on this question are spotty and notaltogether conclusive. Nevertheless, there can belittle question that the subject matter preparationof both elementary and secondary teachers shouldbe strengthened.

Conditions Affecting Academic Preparation

Academic preparation of teachers must parallelthe public school curriculum. What one is to teachin the elementary or secondary school must bestudied at an advanced level in the college oruniversity. As we consider what the teacher shouldknow, we must keep an eye on the school cur-riculum and what its content requires of theteacher. At the same time. it is necessary to

recognize that the various academic curriculums ofthe college or university were not designed toprepare teachers. Thus the school of pedagogy isfaced both by the demands of the public schools forteachers who are knowledgeable with respect to thecurriculum and by the task of persuading academicdepartments to make curriculum adjustments tomeet the subject matter requirements for successfulteaching.

Certain conditions account in large part for thelack of adequate subject.matter preparation. Wehave already referred to the effects of timerestraints at the undergraduate level. Removal ofprofessional studies from the undergraduate yearsshould alleviate scarcity of time.

But there are still other restraining conditions.The academic departments have typically deniedrequests of the school of pedagogy for suitablecourses for elementary teachers in the subjects theyare to teach, often alleging that such courses werenot of college grade. Nor have they been willing towaive the requirement of majors and minors. a re-quirement that often makes it difficult for elemen-tary teachers to fit needed courses into their pro-grams.

Furthermore, schools of pedagogy, no less thanthe nonpedagogical schools and departments. havebeen, and continue to be. possessed by the magic ofthe expression "general education." The referenteven in the most stringent definitions is elusive. Itsmeanings are as numerous as the points of viewregarding what education is all about. To some itmeans dipping into a number of disciplines, tastinggeneral courses here and there: to others it meanspursuing a program in the humanities whichstrangely enough often skirts philosophy, the integrative discipline par excellence.

As a result of preoccupation with the notion ofgeneral education, a considerable proportion of theprospective teacher's academic program. some-times amounting to half of the credit hours, has

39SI

been distributed over a large numher of fields froniwhich the student has acquired only very superficialknowledge.

Because of the term's ainhiguity and vaguenessand the tendency of those who use "general education" to stand for a little of this and a little of that,the term will not be used to designate any part ofpreprofessional curriculum for school personnel.

It can hardly be overemphasized that the purposeof a preprofessional curriculum in pedagogy is toprepare the prospective teacher in the subject mat-ter he or she is required to teach. That is the toppriority and until it is provided for, there is no roomfor anything else in the program. What is needed ispreparation in depth, or at least as much depth astime permits.

The preprofessional curriculum for prospectivesecondary teachers, including junior high school,will be considerably different from that of elemen-tary teachers. Secondary teachers must be preparedin depth in at least two disciplines, for in smallschools a teacher is likely to be responsible for in-struction in two subjects instead of one, as in largeschools. l'he elementary teacher. on the othernand, is faced with a broad spectrum of subjects.for the elementary school is seldom departmental.ized. However. the subjects of the elementary cur-riculum are not treated in as much depth as in thesecondary school. Hence. depth can be somewhatsacrificed for breadth in the preparation of theelementary teacher.

The Complementary Component of thePreprofessional Curriculum

for Secondary Teachers

It goes without saying that the preprofessionalcurriculum of the secondary teacher should consistof two components: teaching fields and comple-mentary areas. By the latter we mean subjects thatreinforce, enrich, and expand one's knowledge ofhis or her teaching field and yet are not part of thedisciplines that comprise the field. Physics. for ex-ample. is part of a teaching field. Philosophy ofscience can enrich and expand one's knowledge ofPhysics and other sciences whereas literature is lesslikely to do so. Philosophy of science thus comple-ments a curriculum in science.

Everyone is possessed in one way or another byorientations from which they can escape only understrong stimulation and even then for brief episodes,

32

and they look at any program with these orients-tions in their heads. The multiplicity of conflictingviews makes it unlikely that anyone can suggest aprogram that would he universally acceptable. Inthe final analysis, this means that the conceptionand program for teachers must be hammered outby representatives from pedagogy. the publicschools, and the relevant university disciplines.

Despite these difficulties and with the knowledgethat there will be objections raised to any suggestion.we shall nevertheless indicate the scope of knowl-edge from which the program should be formed andan outline of its content. Such a view of knowledgewill sensitize us not only to the range of knowledgebut also to some of the domains into which it can beclassified.

The time when the totality of knowledge could beencompassed by a single mind has long sincepassed. Nevertheless, a number of efforts have beenmade in recent years to provide a comprehensivemap of knowledge. One of the most thorough. andfor our purposes most useful, is the categorizationof knowledge by Tykociner.' He classified knowl-edge into twelve areas, as follows:

The arts architecture. choreography, dramatics,graphic arts, industrial design, landscaping, litera-ture, music, painting, and sculpture.

Symbolics of informationlinguistics,matics, logic, and information theory.

Physical sciences physics. chemistry. astrono-my. geology, and mineralogy.

Biological sciencesbotany. zoology, taxonomy.morphology. cytology. genetics. physiology.

Psychological sciences experimental, develop-mental, abnormal, and others.

Sociological sciencessociology, human ecology,demography. social institutions. ethnology.

Sciences about the past history of the world atlarge. aggregates of human beings. and of societyand its culture.

Life sustainingagriculture, medicine, technol.ogy, and national defense.

Regulative sciences jurisprudence, political sci-ence, economics, and management as administra-tion.

Disseminative sciences education, library sci-ence, journalism, and others.

Zetetic science .!s taxilogy, problematology. gen-eral methodology, and others.

Integrative sciencesphilosophy, theologies, andothers.

mathe-

4 0

Each of these categorics is connected to the onefollowing it by a hybrid science. For example. thephysical and biological sciences are related by bit:-chemistry and the social and historical sciences byanthropology.

To select from this array of knowledge what afuture teacher should study to be able to discusswith students, colleagues, and citizens questions ofpersonal and intellectual significance. to serve as amodel of an educated person. and to increase thepossibility of continued intellectual growth is a taskalmost too much for the mind to fathom. Yet it isdone over and over again, however crudely. everytime a student and an advisor design his or her pro-gram leading to the bachelor's degree.

The task is difficult enough in its own right. Yetit is made even more complex by the conglomeratecharacter of university curriculums. Except for afew traditional courses, those comprising theuniversity curriculums today were designed tosatisfy a few steps in a sequence, to introduce newknowledge, or to satisfy the interest of an instruc-tor, courses determined by the latter perhaps beingthe most numerous. Consideration is not often

given to the question of how the courses are to serveas an instrument for the intellectual expansion ofstudents.

Moreover. in the loose elective system of today. itis easy for a student to receive a bachelor's degreewith little basic knowledge and no discipline in in-tellectual skills and without having faced anyserious intellectual question. Teachers who attainonly this level of learning are certain to reduce thepossibility of raising the quality of education in hepublic schools. For this reason, if for no other, thepreprofessional program must be designed toground the teacher in the rudiments of at least afew areas of knowledge.

Although any set of recommended courses willdoubtless meet with objections. perhaps it is possi-ble that all can agree on certain general functionsof knowledge. The functions attributed byTykociner to his areas of knowledge have much tocommend them. They serve to group the areas andthese groupings in turn provide a convenient way ofindicating areas of concentration for both com-plementary studies and the teaching field.

TABLE IFunctions of the Areas of Knowledge

AREASI. Arts and symbolics of information

FUNCTIONSTo develop systems of symbolic representation ofperceptions and cognitive activity for communica-tion

2. Physical. biological, psychological, and social To systematize knowledge of basic facts and theirsciences relations

3. Historical. sustaining. regulatory. and dissemi-native sciences

4. Zetetic sciences

5. Integrative sciences

To systematize knowledge of the past, project fu-ture needs, conduct regulative activities. and elm-municate information

To promote the growth of all arts and sciences

To create an allembracing synthesis

41 33

a

To be thoroughly educated, to have a renais-sance mind, is to have mastered these areas andtheir functions. But this is an achievement beyondthe grasp of anyone today. So educated persons,aside from their field of specialization, must becharacterized as less than masters of these domains.For a secondary teacher, the scope of complemen-tary studies should consist of a 15 semester hour se-quence in each of two of these domains or a total of30 credit hours, exclusive of area 4 which is moresuited to students who plan to pursue a researchcareer. Even for them, however, work in this areashould more appropriately be taken at advancedlevels. Since the social and psychological sciences,area 2, are to be included in the prepedagogicalcurriculum, to be discussed in a moment, theyshould likewise be excluded.

The areas chosen for the complementary compo-nent should enrich the student's teaching fields.Students who are specializing in the naturalsciences should concentrate in the symbolics of in-formation and the integrative sciences. For exam-ple, in the area of symbolics. science studentsshould concentrate upon mathematics. and. in theintegrative sciences. upon the philosophy of scienceand epistemology.

Students who are specializing in the social andhistorical sciences should complement theirteaching fields by work in the integrative scienceswith special emphasis on the philosophy of thesocial sciences. In addition. they should take studiesin the area of symbolics with special emphasis onmathematics or linguistics.

The areas that complement symbolics of infor-mation when mathematics is the center of concen-tration are the integrative and physical sciences.

Those who are planning to teach English, in-cluding literature, as the linguistic component ofarea one. should choose as complementary areasthe integrative sciences with special emphasis onanalytic philosophy and the historical sciences.

These are rough suggestions to illustrate thepoint that the complementary component shouldserve not only to provide a breadth of knowledgebut also to strengthen the prospective teacher'sgrasp of the disciplines he or she will teach in thesecondary school. For too long we have allowedsomething called general education, somethingapart from the prospective teacher's field of special-ization to comprise a large part of his or her pro-gram. The upshot of this has often been that pro-

34

spective teachers missed the opportunity to under-stand the various dimensions of their specialty andthe relations among the disciplines. Consequently,teachers are typically unable to grapple with themore fundamental problems concerning the rela-tion of their specialty to the deeper concerns ofadolescent students about destiny, truth, and life.

Preparation in the Student's Teaching Field

The secondary teacher should be prepared in atleast two disciplines, consisting of approximately 30semester hours in each. If the student intends toteach the physical sciences, he or she might chooseto specialize in both physics and chemistry, or thebiological sciences paired off with one of thephysical sciences. if the student intends to specializein the social sciences and history. 30 semester hourswould be chosen from area 2 and 30 from area 3.The student preparing to teach English wouldspecialize in area I. Likewise, students looking for-ward to becoming teachers of foreign languageswould concentrate in the same area.

While the high school teacher is not ordinarilyexpected to teach either arithmetic or the languagearts, nevertheless every secondary teacher should beproficient in the rudiments of arithmetic and inspelling, grammar, reading. and writing. Theyshould be required to take a competence examina-tion over these areas for the purpose of screeningout those who need remedial work. Justification ofthis requirement is the fact that reasonable correct-ness in the use of the English language is expectedof all teachers and the further fact that manystudents now reach high school deficient in thebasic skills of mathematics and language. A secon-dary teacher who is unable to help students who arethus deficient, but are not serious remedial cases, isill prepared.

The specialized program of prospective secon-dary teachers, like the complementary component.will evoke controversy and call out a multiplicity ofpoints of view and conceptions of what knowledge isneeded and how it is to be acquired. In order tothrash out these differences of opinion and to arriveat the best possible program of preparation in theteaching field and to assure that the complemen-tary component reinforces and deepens the pro-spective teacher's area of specialization. the com-mittee that decides the complementary program

42

should also decide the specialized preparation. Thiscommittee should probably be a continuing com-mittee in order to make adjustments in the programas problems arise and further experience indicatesthe need to make adaptations.

To summarize, the program of students prepar-ing to teach in the conventional disciplines shouldapproximate the following work in the teachingfields and complementary studies.

Considerable depth is provided for in at least twoareas and a greater degree of thoroughness in thedisciplines of the areas the student chooses as his orher teaching fields. Such a program should obviatethe practice of taking one or two courses in this andthat discipline, resulting in superficial knowledgeand no sense of real accomplishment.

The complementary component is marked bysome sense of thoroughness in basic concepts andprinciples that illuminate wide domains of experi-ence. The levels of discourse one learns in analyticphilosophy, the nature of knowing, the nature ofexplanation. the principles of literary criticism, andthe nature of mathematical knowledge are cases inpoint. To acquire such knowledge is not only tostudy the relevant disciplines but also to go beyondbeginning courses. What the prospective secondaryteacher needs is not superficial acquaintance butdepth. The foregoing program provides some depthin at least two of the four recommended areas ofknowledge in addition to the teaching specialties.

TABLE 2Program for Secondary Teachers

SUBJECTS SEMESTER COMPLEMENTARY SEMESTERHOURS STUDIES HOURS

1. Natural s:iences(choice of two)Sequence in physics 30 Sequence in symbolics 15

Sequence in chemistry 30 Sequence in integrative sciences 15

Sequence in biology 30

2. Social sciences and historySequence in economics Sequence in integrative sciences 15

sociology or anthropology 30 Sequence in symbolics 15

Sequence in history 30

3. EnglishSequence in symbolics and Sequence in integrative sciences 15

literature as art form 30 Sequence in history 15

Elective sequence 30

4. MathematicsSequence in mathematics 30 Sequence in integrative sciences 15

Elective sequence 30 Sequence in logic and language 15

5. Foreign languagesSequence in one language 30 Sequence in symbolics 15

Sequence in second language 30 Elective sequence 15

4335

ill

Academic Preparation of Elementary Teachers

What academic preparation elementary teachersshould have is a question that has not been studiedwith much care. An early proposal by Bagley setforth the notion of professionalized subject matter,by which he meant that academic knowledgeshould be presented and studied in such a way as toshow how it can be adapted and used in actual in-struction at the elementary level. This has been ac-complished, but the emphasis has tended to bemore upon the techniques and procedures of teach-ing than upon study of the content itself.

Many elementary teachers finish high school withonly a limited competence in arithmetic and evenless in algebra and geometry. They complete collegework with no additional study in mathematics andconsequently enter the classroom inadequately pre-pared. This fact has shown up time and time againin competence tests of teachers and indirectly in thefact that achievement of public school students inmathematics is low. The same observation holds for

36

the rudimentary elements of the language arts --spelling. grammar. and composition.

The curriculum of the elementary school consistsof three parts: the content and skills of mathematicsand language arts; the skills and values of art.literature, and music; and the facts, concepts, andprinciples of content subjects biological, physical.and social sciences. Except for art, music. andphysical education the elementary teacher is

generally expected to teach all of the subjects of theelementary curriculum.

Considering the breadth of the elementary cur-riculum, what should be the complementary com-ponent of the elementary teacher is a bogus ques-tion. To have sufficient knowledge to teach theelementary curriculum with enough margin to feelcomfortable is to have acquired considerableknowledge in each of Tykociner's areas exceptzetetics.

What then should be the subject matter prepara-tion of the elementary teacher? We suggest a pro-gram as shown in Table 3.

TABLE 3Program for Elementary Teachers

Area 1. Arts and symbolics of informationtwo courses in art and music

sequence of literature including children's literaturesequence in English and linguistics

sequence in mathematics

Area 2. Physical, biological, psychological, and social sciencessequence in the physical sciences including both physics and chemistrysequence in biological sciences

Area 3. Historical, sustaining, regulatory, and disseminative sciencesa sequence in history including world and American historya sequence in economics or political science

44

6 semester hours12 semester hours

15 semester hours15 semester hours

21 semester hours

12 semester hours

15 semester hours

6 semester hours

102 semester hours

The elementary teacher. as he or she enters theschool of pedagogy. would have completed 102semester hours of academic work directly related tothe elementary curriculum, and, as indicatedbelow, 18 additional hours of prepedagogicalstudies, or a total of 120 semester hours.

Institutional committees responsible for design.ing the program will naturally develop their ownideas of how the credit hours should be distributedwith respect to the areas of knowledge. And theymay even question the areas, but areas I, 2. and Scertainly parallel most closely the elementary schoolcurriculum. Their main effort, however, should beto persuade academic departments to offer coursesdesigned especially for elementary teachers.

Prepedagogical Curriculum

Students intending to enter pedagogy should beprepared in a prepedagogical curriculum. All canagree that the student preparing to become ateacher should be well grounded in the behavioralsciences. This agreement rests upon the fact thatsince the teacher is intimately involved with stu-dents who vary physically. mentally, emotionally.culturally, ethnically. and socioeconomicallytheyconsequently should be prepared in humandevelopment, conceptions of learning, conceptionsof intelligence and its measurement, and principlesof sociology and anthropology.

The large proportion of students who now enterthe study of pedagogy have practically no academicpreparation in these areas. and the amount of timeavailable for the study of them in their pedagogicalpreparation is almost zero. Some attempt is madeto provide instruction in them by social foundationscourses and by elective courses in educationalsociology and anthropology. Furthermore, peda-gogical psychology is often devoted so teachingelements of academic psychology that should havebeen acquired before admission to pedagogy.

In order to rectify this condition and to providean adequate preparation for the study of pedagogy

..1

we strongly urge the development of a prepeda-gogical curriculum. This curriculum should consistof at least 9 hours of psychology including learningand motivation, human development, and intelli-gence and its measurement. In addition. the pro-gram should include 9 hours of work in sociologydistributed over community sociology, anthro-pology. and human ecology. This work will free thepedagogical school from the necessity of providingbackground for the study of academic pedagogy.

Electivt. r,°urges

There are those who will hold that the programsuggested in the preceding pages is too rigid andthat there is no room for the student to elect coursesto satisfy his or her particular interest. A great dealcan be said for the claim that students should par-ticipate in shaping their own education and thatthey should have extensive leeway to select coursesthat in their view are relevant to their interests andtheir development.

It should be noted, however, that the principle ofelective courses has not led over the years tostronger preparation of the teacher for classroominstruction. It was never intended even by PresidentElliot, the originator of the elective system. that thestudent would simply be free to taste any and everysubject and gain no depth or discipline in the pur-suit of academic knowledge. In a professional fieldwhere the academic preparation of students isclosely associated with the work they are to do, as inthe case of teachers, there is less room for the elec-tive principle to function than in cases where theacademic preparation is not closely associated withoccupational responsibilities. It would appear,therefore. that elective courses should be strictlyLimited. Perhaps they should be allowed chiefly incases where proficiency in a required course isdemonstrated. where substitution is an equivalent.or where the overlapping of concentration andcomplementary studies occurs.

37

a

Summary

The foregoing programs for prospective secondary and elementaryteachers represent an attempt to satisfy three objectives: to providedepth of learning; to so shape complementary studies as to enrich andreinforce the secondary teacher's specialty; and to build the credit hourscurrently assigned to socalled general education into the elementaryteacher's subject matter preparation. These programs are intended asexamples and neither as prescriptions nor as imperatives. However, thescope of knowledge worked out by Tykociner, we believe, provides amost promising framework within which to begin the reconsideration ofthe academic preparation of teachers.

Chapter 4.1. Tykociner. Joseph T. Chains of Zetetics. Philadelphia:

Dorrance. 1966.

38 46

Chapter 5

Toward a Program ofPedagogical Education

There are two levels of pedagogical education:basic preparation in the science and art ofpedagogy and specialization. It was proposed inChapter 5 that each of these levels be allotted 2years of intensive study. The purpose now is to pro-pose a program for each of these levels.

Faculties of pedagogy are sharply divided onmany aspects of pedagogical education. It is, there.fore, unlikely that any program, however well conceived, will gain the approval of everyone. Nor is itlikely that anyone can propose a program so op.timal that it can, or should be, instituted withoutmodification. Whatever its shortcomings, the program we propose is based on the belief that basicpreparation should be focused on the developmentof scientifically grounded skills, where these areknown, and that informed judgment should be ex-ercised in their use. Where such skills have not yetbeen empirically established as reasonably depend-able, professional wisdom (craft knowledge). ratherthan personal opinion or doctrines, should prevail.

The character and quality of a program are con-ditioned by the number and quality of students.This is borne out by the experience of other profes-sional schools and departments that require clinicaltraining. Hence the first and most important ques-tion for faculty consideration is that of how manystudents it can train.

Admission to the School of Pedagogy

In the last 50 years, a great deal of research hasbeen done to test various criteria for admission tothe study of pedagogy.' One criterion after anotherhas been tested only to find that in most instancesthe relationship between teacher-effectiveness vari-ables and the criterion is typically negligible or alow positive relationship at best. What all thisresearch shows is not clear. It can be argued thatthis lack of relationship is attributable to ineffectivetraining programs. If a program makes little dif-ference in the performance of students when they

enter the classroom as teachers, the criteria of admission may simply be predictors of initial teachingability.

From the very beginning of pedagogical educa-tion the policy of colleges and universities has beento produce teachers to fill jobs, rather than to pro.duce quality personnel. If there is a demand forteachers, hire more instructors to increase teacherproduction. Faculties of pedagogy thus increased insize with each new demand for teachers. Big enroll.ments, big faculties, big productionthat is thetune to which pedagogical schools have dancedthroughout this century. If schools of pedagogy areto continue that dance. it is folly to speak of admis-sion criteria.

Once a faculty has determined the number ofstudents it can properly train, an admission policycan be worked out. While it s'iould be based uponthe best available knowledge, certain general considerations should prevail. Admission to a school ofpedagogy should be a significant event in the life ofthe student. Entering a school of pedagogy today isno more impressive than changing from one de-partment to another. The admission procedureshould emphasize that the student is entering a pro-fession that profoundly affects the lives of every individual and ultimately the strength and well-beingof the nation; that it is an occupation to be takenseriously and calls not only for the utmost ability ,_;the individual but also for complete dedication.The admission procedure should include a ritual toimpress upon students that they are asking for achance to serve humankind in the oldest and mosthonorable profession.

One of the features, revealing the bankruptcy ofcurrent admission policies, is the typical introductory course to enable the student to decide whetherhe or she wants to pursue a pedagogical career.While it is important to know whether a candidatefor admission has reason to believe that teachingwould be satisfying, a course for that purpose isgratuitous and worthless. While almost all collegesrequire an introductory course to acquaint students

4I59

with schoolwork, still more than a third of the grad-uates never entered the public school classrooms.

Certainly a professional school of pedagogy willnot leave to the applicant the decision to enter. Itwill decide whether or not the applicant is amongthose candidates who show promise of becomingeffective, dedicated members of the profession. it isfolly to devote the time and energy of a pedagogicalfaculty, not to mention clinical teachers in thepublic school, to the education of individuals whoarc not going to teach anyway.

When students are admitted, and before theybegin courses, faculty members and public schoolteachers should impress upon all of them the importance of the teacher's work. In addition, thevarious opportunities in education should be ex-plained and the various departments thoroughlydescribed by their representatives.

It should now be clear that there are three pur-poses of an admission policy: first, to decide thenumber of students a faculty can properly train;second. to make sure, at least as sure as possible.that those who are admitted and trained shall bethose who are most likely to enter teaching whenthey graduate and to serve the children and theschools with maximum effectiveness: and third, toestablish a ritual through which students are intro-duced to the study of pedagogy as an important lifecalling.

Focus of Basic Program

The first thing to note about programs of peda-gogical education today is that they have no focus.In some schools of pedagogy the courses numberalmost a thousand. Some of these courses are de-signed to produce effective teachers and otherschool personnel. But the great preponderance oft hem are offered because they satisfy the interests ofparticular instructors and departments.

But even though some of the courses were de-signed to produce effective personnel, in realitythey have no focus and add up to no particular setof competencies. It is true. of course, that at theundergraduate level there is a brief sequence ofcourses leading to student teaching, but thesecourses, all too often, are shaped by instructors totheir own interests. Required courses in peda-gogical psychology, for example. often vary fromsection to section, depending upon the particularinterests and whims of the instructor.

40

The same is true of other courses. In some ofthese the content is so varied that no text is used.leading many students to believe that the instructoris more important than the course. Indeed, someprofessors have been known to advie students toselect instructors rather than courses. The logic ofthis injunction is to substitute a program of personsfor a program of knowledge and skill. This may bejustifiable for so-called gene-al education. but forprofessional training it is an admission that any-thing goes so long as particular instructors go withit.

The basic program should be shaped by a singleoverriding purpose; namely, to prepare prospectiveteachers for work success in the classroom, theschool, and the community. Every course should bescrutinized with respect to its contribution to thisend. If this were done. a large number of courseswould be eliminated at the level of basic prepara-tion. Candidates for deletion would be introductionto education. history of education, philosophy ofeducation. social foundations of education. and ahost of others including courses in learning anddevelopment provided for in undergraduate study.Work in these areas can be offered in programs ofspecialization leading to the doctor's degree.

Basic Program: First Semester

The first semester should be devoted primarily tothe mastery of clinical knowledge and skills ofobservation. All can agree that knowledge of thecharacteristics of children and youth, concepts andprinciples of teaching, concepts and principles ofevaluation, and of the impact of home and com-munity on children and schools are involved inschool and classroom work. Accordingly, we suggestthat the first semester should be devoted entirely tofour courses: exceptionality, pedagogical psychol-ogy. measurement and evaluation, and the schooland community.

Each of these courses should consist of two com-ponents: a formal course and either clinical obser-vation or laboratory work. depending on the con-tent of the formal course. The formal course shouldcarry 1 hour of credit for each clock hour of class-work. while the clinical work should require 5 clockhours for each credit hour. Although these com-ponents must be closely coordinated and integratedfor instructional purposes, they should be treatedseparately for purposes of evaluation and grading.

48

Separation of these components will safeguard theintegrity of both clinical work and courses, for poorclinical performance will not then be compensated

for by good course work and vice versa. In Table 4is a list of courses and the allocation of credit andclock hours:

TABLE 4Program of Studies: First Semester

COURSES SEMESTER CLOCK HOURSHOURS PER WEIK

Exceptionality 2 2

Clinical Observation and Experience 2 6

Clinical Psychology 2 2

Clinical Observation and Experience 2 6

Measurement and Evaluation 2 2

Evaluation Laboratory 2 6

School and Community 2 2

Field Laboratory 2 6

16 32

The justification of these courses for initial studyis not far to seek. The concepts and principles per-taining to exceptionality provide a framework with-in which to understand all children. Much is to besaid for the claim that normality, whatever it is, isbest comprehended when viewed in the context ofthe total range of human variability. To understand the mentally retarded, the gifted and thetalented. the emotionally handicapped. auditoryand visually disabled, speech and language dis-abled, societally neglected. and those with physicaland specific learning disabilities. is to be well on theway to understanding all children and to becominga knowledgeable teacher.

The course in exceptionality should be system-atic. thorough, and accompanied by clinical obser-vation and experience with students who exerislifythe various categories of exceptionality. This meansthat the work in the concepts, principles, and factsof exceptionality should be accompanied by a clear-ly developed plan of clinical work in the traininglaboratory.

Pedagogical psychology should take full accountof the fact that the student has already had work inbehavioral sciences. covering human developmentand learning, and that the groundwork has thus

been laid for pedagogical psychology to become aclinical study. Much of the content now included inpedagogical psychology will thus be deleted, at leastin the basic program. Among the topics eliminatedwill be conceptions of learning and motivation,heredity and environment as related to intelligenceand personality, definition and measurement of in-telligence, and personality development. The timethus saved will enable instructors to zero in ongeneric concepts and principles underlying the do-mains of training: observation. diagnosis. plan-ning, management of conduct. grouping, instruc-tion. communication, and evaluation (see Chapter9). Pedagogical psychology will thus come into itsown as a distinct professional discipline and cease tobe an adjunct to academic psychology.

The concepts and principles should be taughtwhenever possible with protocols,2minicourses. andsuch other visual. auditory, and transcribedmaterials as exemplify them behaviorally. Further-more, planned systematic observation and class-room experiences in the training laboratory shouldparallel the course work, beginning with controlledobservation in one training domain and proceedingto another until the total range of domains is com-pleted. The concomitant work in the laboratory

4941

should be planned in cooperation with clinicalteachers and the work jointly conducted by campusinstructors and clinical teachers. The utility ofsystematic observation and experience in the labo-ratory cannot be overemphasized when coordinatedwith course work and closely supervised.

Measurement and evaluation should be focusedon the knowledge and skills a teacher can use in theclassroom and to some extent on the organizationand interpretation of data bearing on problemcases and on the programs and policies of theschool. This means. among other things. that agood part of the work should deal with diagnosisand feedback. The prospective teacher must learnto use test materials in order to uncover learningdifficulties and to relate feedback to thcm, bearingin mind that evaluation should be primarily for thepurpose of helping children to learn and onlysecondarily to ascertain the levels of their achieve-ment.

The formal course in measurement and evalua-tion should be accompanied by laboratory experi-ences in which the trainee would study. undersupervision, different types of tests, their purposes,and their validity and reliability. Furthermore, thelaboratory should provide practice in the develop-ment of tests, in giving tests, and in organizing andinterpreting the data therefrom.

Although teachers spend most of their time in theschool and classroom. their work is nevertheless af-fected by the home and community. Studiesabound that indicate the influence of the homeupon the student, although the effects are not sooverwhelming as has sometimes been supposed.While this influence is good reason for the prospec-tive teacher to study community life, it is only oneof the reasons for becoming acquainted with com-munity structure and the nature and character ofhome life in the various areas of the community.Many children and youth today are disadvantagedin various ways and are assisted in their develop-ment by all sorts of community agencies and insti-tutions. The requirements of the teacher are suchthat every prospective teacher should study thesocial classes, the welfare levels, the occupationalstructure, the power structure. the recreational re-sources, the system of juvenile courts. and suchother community agencies as affect children andyouth.

The study of community should take into ac-count the work the students will have already had insociology and anthropology at the baccalaureate

42

level and should emphasize clinical experiences.This can be accomplished by a parallel laboratoryin community life to take the student directly intothe various socioeconomic areas of the community.the political and economic power systems, as well asthe various institutions and agencies that ad.minister to the many needs of youth. Emphasisshould be placed upon ways of studying the com-munity as well as upon the techniques of observa-tion and the interpretation of firsthand experience.

To sum up, the first semester is oriented primari-ly to the study of generic clinical knowledge and tothe development of skills of observation. It com-bines formal classwork with an emphasis uponobservation, using both media and actual situationsin the school and community.

Learning the skills of observation, however,represents only part of the skills required of ateacher. The other part consists of operational skillsconcerned primarily with diagnosis and instruction.In addition to generic knowledge and skills,teachers must also use content-specific knowledgeand skills. Besides, they must also understand theeducational program and how their work fits intothe total scheme. It is to this that we turn in the sec-ond semester's work. This semester will therefore beconcerned exclusively with the total school programfrom early childhood through the high school andwith instruction in the various subjects.

Basic Program: Second Semester

With the foregoing purpose in view, we propose aprogram of studies as shown in Table 5.

When we speak of the curriculum we do not referto theories of curriculum development but rather tothe actual curriculum of the school. It should beanalyzed in the light of certain concepts and prin.ciples. For example, the existing curriculum entailstwo kinds of sequencing: program and instruc-tional. Program sequencing is the order in whichthe major components of the curriculum occurfrom year to year. By instructional sequence ismeant the ordering of the items of content condu-cive to day-to-day learning. The concepts and prin-ciples on which program sequencing is based shouldbe thoroughly explored. and the sequencing of in-struction should be examined in relation to the con-tent to be taught. Instructional sequencing in arith-metic, for example. is not the same as sequencing inliterature or history, a difference attributable to

50

TABLE 5Program of Studies: Second Semester

COURSES SEMESTER CLOCK HOURSHOURS PER WEEK

Curriculum and Instruction 2 2Curriculum Laboratory (including initial teaching

experience) 3 9

5 11

Concurrent Specialized CoursesEarly Childhood Through Middle School

Pedagogy of Art and Literature 2 2Pedagogy of Language Arts 2 2Pedagogy of Mathematics 2 2Pedagogy of Reading 2 2Pedagogy of Science 2 2Pedagogy of Social Sciences 2 2

12 12

Concurrent Specialized CoursesJunior and Senior Sigh School

Pedagogy of Major Subject 2 2Pedagogy of Minor Subject 2 2Pedagogy of Secondary Reading 2 2Electives 6 6

12 12

disparities in the language and logic of the disci.plines.

Another theme to be explored is content selec-tion. By what criteria was the subject matter of thecurriculum selected? These criteria should be ex-pressly formulated and examined by reference towhat is known about child and adolescent develop.ment, learning, and the utility of knowledge. Like-wise the principles of content organization shouldbe examined with care, not merely in abstractionbut in reference to the structure of courses of study,textbooks. workbooks, and other materials of in-struction.

As a rule, future high school and elementaryteachers have been separated in their study of thecurriculum. We suggest that this practice be aban-doned. One of the persistent problems of schoolinghas been that of articulating not only the differentgrade levels but also the different segments of theschool primary, intermediate, junior high school,senior high school, and college. These problemscan be obviated, at least partly, if the elementary

and high school teachers are familiar with the en-tire curriculum from early childhood through thehigh school. For this reason we strongly urge thatthe course in curriculum be required alike of allprospective teachers regardless of what they willteach.

Two programs, one for early childhood throughmiddle school and one for junior and senior highschool. would be taken concurrently with thegeneral course in curriculum and instruction. Everyprospective elementary teacher would be requiredto take a 2-hour course in each of the six specializedareas of the elementary curriculum in addition tothe general course consisting of 2 semester hoursplus the curriculum laboratory of 3 hours. Peda-gogy of the different subjects would be integratedwith work in the curriculum laboratory so that eachstudent becomes familiar with instructional andlearning materials of each area of instruction andfor each grade level. Furthermore, the materialsnd instructional principles and skills required formainstreaming should be emphasized.

5I43

The same arrangement would hold for studentspreparing to teach in the junior and senior highschool, although the pedagogy of the subjects foreach student would be limited to major and minorsubjects. However, these students would be re-quired to study their teaching fields from the earlychildhood program through the twelfth grade.

In addition, they would be expected to take acourse in secondary reading, since many problemsof learning at the high school level are rooted in theinability of students to read in the different fields ofinstruction.

The curriculum laboratory should provide op-portunities for the high school trainee to becomefamiliar with such learning materials as textbooks,workbooks, and their use. In addition, the traineeshould become familiar with instructional mate.dais, especially films, video materials, audio mate-rials and such other technical instruments as maybe conducive to instruction and learning.

A part of the laboratory time should be set apartfor all prospective teachers, both elementary andhigh school, to observe classrooms and to engage inactual teaching during this semester. Such initialteaching will give the students hands-on experiencewith the use of materials as well as provide themwith a sense of the clinical work to follow.

Basic Program: Third and Fourth Semesters

The students now enter the second year of proles.sional study, following a year in which they havehad an opportunity to acquire basic clinical knowl-edge, both generic and content specific, togetherwith skills of observation and a brief introduction toactual teaching. In addition, they have exploredthe community and its agencies and institutions.

This year is to be devoted to full-time work in atraining laboratory. How the work is to be orga-nized and conducted can be decided only as plansare formulated, revised in the light of experience,and tried out and revised again and again until thetraining operation works smoothly and effectively.We can do no more here than suggest one possibleapproach.

Before the students enter the laboratory astrainees, they should be thoroughly informed aboutthe rules and regulations of the school, the variouspositions and thcir functions, and their own dutiesand responsibilities as trainees in the system. Theyshould clearly understand that they are therc to

44

learn to teach and not to reform thc school or tocriticizc the people with whom they work, for it isimportant that they learn professional conduct aswell as knowledge and skills.

Each trainee should begin in some capacity shortof full classroom responsibility. The trainee mayserve as a teacher of a small group, as a diagnosti'cian working with one or two children who needspecial he/p.or as a tutor of one or more exceptionalchildren.

Following this initial period of experience, thctrainee should begin to be responsible for a largerproportion of a teacher's work. If the trainee is aprospective elementary teacher, he or she shouldbegin to assume responsibility for two or three dlr.ferent subjects and after a brief period of time forthe entire spectrum of subjects. The progressive in-crease in the amount of responsibility should reacha maximum point by the end of the first half of theyear. The second half should be devoted to corn.plete responsibility for classwork or as nearly that asthe training laboratory can allow.

If the trainee is a prospective high school teacher,the same initial period of introduction should befollowed. By the end of the first half of the year thetrainee would have had experience in teaching bothmajor and minor subjects and in more than one sec-tion of each. The second half of the year should bedevoted to as full a schedule of teaching as thetraining facilities permit.

It would be desirable were the program to allowtrainees to acquire experience in more than oneschool. The logistics of this may be difficult to workout, but attempts should be made to test its feasi'bility. It should hardly be necessary to point outthat all trainees would have experience in workingwith parents, committees of teachers as they planprograms as well as day-to-day operations, and insuch other activities as teachers engage in.

Concurrently with the teaching experience, eachtrainee should be expected to attend a clinicalseminar, conducted by a campus instructor and oneor more clinic teachers, to help the trainee advancehis or her knowledge and skill. These seminars offeropportunities to review videotapes of the trainee'sperformance and to diagnose deficiencies that mayrequire more intensive training by such means asprotocols or microteaching.

The traince should have been under review fromthc very beginning of professional study and shouldnot be passed from one level of preparation toanother without satisfactory performance. The

5 2

final evaluation should be made early in the secondhalf of the last year to determine deficiencies inknowledge and skills so that they can be remediedbefore the end of the year. Inasmuch as the mostpromising candidates for teaching would have beenadmitted to the program. the faculty is obligated touse all the means at its disposal to see that the stu-dent is successful as a trainee.

The faculty-student ratio is fundamental to theprogram's effectiveness. Enrollment in formalcourses can probably run as high as a hundred ormore students per section without serious impair-ment of instruction. However, laboratory courses,being primarily clinical in nature, should not ex-ceed 10 students per section. This approximates theenrollment in other professional schools anddepartments where clinical work emphasizes obser-vation. In any one of the first semester basiccourses, exceptionality for example, a section ofone hundred students would require 10 clinical sec-tions.

The second year of the basic program, beingclinical work where skills of performance areprimary, would require a ratio of not more thanone or two trainees per clinical teacher. Clinicalteachers will be drawn from the public school andspecially prepared to conduct clinical work in bothclassroom and school. In addition, of course, anumber of campus instructors would be required toconduct clinical seminars and to carry on follow-upactivities.

Follow-Up

Ideally. graduates of the program should serve atleast a year as an intern under the supervision oftrained personnel. Whether or not this is realized.the school of pedagogy should establish a team ofcampus instructors and clinical teachers to followup each graduate. Voluntary seminars. meetingmonthly or bimonthly. as the need may indicate.should be set up to assist graduates with problemsof induction and with difficulties encountered in in-struction and in classroom management and con-trol.

Programs Leading to the Doctor's Degree

In chapter 3, two doctoral degrees were pro-posed: Doctor of Pedagogy, a practitioner's degree:

$

and the Doctor of Philosophy, a research degree.These degrees call for specialized programs and canbe discussed here only in general terms.

Programs leading to the Doctorate in Pedagogyshould consist of three components: further work inacademic pedagogy such as the behavioral sciencesand the social and intellectual background of edu-cational institutions; work in a field of specializa-tion; and clinical training.

To suggest courses for a wide diversity of special-ized training would be of little, if any, value. But itmay be appropriate to explore certain areas forconsideration.

Because of the tendency of some pedagogicalleaden as well as citizens to concoct all sorts of in-novations for the improvement of schooling, almostall of which have been tried at one time or another,it is important for those who are preparing tobecome educational leaders to know the history ofeducational thought and practice. It is also usefulfor educational leaders to know some of the historyof schooling, especially in the last two hundredyears when the school has been interwoven with cer-tain social and economic developments having pro-found effects upon today's educational policies andprograms. There is also justification for the study ofpedagogical classics in relation to the political andsocial contexts in which they emerged. This shouldenable the student to view the pedagogical thoughtof our own time with much more wisdom and in-sight than is generally the case.

The work in the behavioral sciences should em-phasize not only the cutting edge of the psychologyof human development but also that of learning.Naturally, the study of these sciences should em-phasize the points at which they impinge upon edu-cational thought and practice.

The sociology and economics of education shouldbe considered. especially for students of administra-tion. Perhaps these subjects should be taught in asingle course because of their close interrelation-ship. This work should deal not only with the socialand economic conditions that influence the indi-vidual and the school but also with the influence ofschooling upon society and particularly the utilityof schooling as it affects certain aspects of societyits economic well-being. its political stability. itsmilitary power, and its influence among nations. Inaddition. it should treat the effect of schoolingupon the community. We are accustomed to think-ing of the advantages of schooling solely in terms of

5.3 45

8

individual benefits, but the truth is that the advantakes of schooling at true to almost every aspect ofcommunity life.

Considering the fact that a great deal of educa-tional knowledge is couched in statistical language.anyone preparing to assume a leadership role inpublic education should have command of statis-tics, This holds also for measurement and evalua-tion. Individuals who must deal with school pro-blems in a broad sense must be able to organize andinterpret data bearing upon various practical prob-lems of educational management and finance.

The language of pedagogy is so entangled witheveryday language and so fraught with metaphors,both dead and living, that every educational leadershould be introduced to philosophical analysis oflanguage after the fashion of the analytic school.This should go a long way toward freeing thoughtof the pitfalls of language encountered so constant-ly in pedagogical discussions and discourse.

In addition to work in academic pedagogy, thestudent should follow a well-planned program in anarea of specialization. Among these areas areteaching. special education. school psychology.pedagogical education. administration, evaluation.counseling. and curriculum. Specialization in suchareas should entail extensive clinical experience intraining laboratories where the clinical instructorand a college advisor work together in designingand conducting a program of clinical experience.The objective is to develop a highly trained practi-tioner. To this end the student should be evaluatedat each level of the program and additional instruc-tion given wherever deficiencies are identified.

The sole objective of a program leading to thedegree of Doctor of Pedagogy is to develop a com-petent practitioner. As emphasized in chapter 3. itis not a research degree and no dissertation orpaper in lieu thereof should be required. To safe-guard the program. however. it is necessary toestablisn a system of evaluation by which to decidethe competence of the individual as progress in theprogram is made. In all probability it will benecessary to build an evaluation package for eachindividual containing records of performance onvideo and audiotapes. records of systematic obser-vation by instructors, the student's written papers

46

and examinations. and any other sources of infor-mation that may be useful. Thoroughness and com-petence should be the criteria. While the programcovers 2 years of professional study, most studentswill find it necessary to spend 3 years to qualify forthe degree.

The program leading to the Doctor of Philosophydegree should include fundamental work in thevarious foundation subjects such as psychology.mathematics and statistics. and methodology.Although fundamental knowledge as well asmastery of methods and techniques of research areindispensable, they are not sufficient. The researchstudent must also work closely with one or moreprofessors who are deeply engaged in research,rather than working alone on some quasi-problem.

The present practice of requiring students to do adissertation, often insignificant if not worthless, justto complete the requirements for the Doctor ofPhilosophy degree should not be tolerated. The stu-dent should have done a significant study for thedoctor's degree. The research for the doctor'sdegree of all too many faculty members has been oflow quality and typically of no particular signifi-cance. Indeed, it is not unusual today for studentsto be told that they should choose some problem forresearch that can be readily completed. This prac-tice of requiring research for a doctor's degree.treating it as something that the student must dojust as he or she is required to pass courses and doterm papers, tends to depreciate not only the qual-ity of research but also the student's confidence in,and respect for, research itself.

In view of what has just been said. it is not toomuch to add that no school should offer a doctoralprogram unless it already has a basic program andthen only if it has sufficient staff to do so. Consider-ing the requirements of the basic program, it seemsobvious that only a few schools should offer workleading to the professional degree of Doctor ofPedagogy. The research program leading to theDoctor of Philosophy degree should be limited tothose schools that have a basic program and enoughprofessors actively engaged in research to providenot only technical courses but also apprentice ex-perience with research professors who are conduct-ing studies.

54

Summary

In this chapter we discussed the bare outlines of a basic program ofpedagogical preparation and doctoral programs only in the mostgeneral terms. But the argument should be clear enough to indicatethat the basic purposes of a professional program are, and should be, tosee that prospective teachers master clinical pedagogical knowledge,both generic and specific; to discipline them in observational skills; andto see that they master the basic skills of planning, diagnosing, feed-back, reinforcement, management of instruction and learning, evalua-tion, and communicating with students, peers. and parents. The doc-toral program for the practitioner extends the basic program into areasof specialization where academic pedagogical knowledge as well asclinical knowledge is emphasized together with specialized skills. Theresearch program does not prepare the student to train school person-nel, but to do research, to train researchers, and to give instruction inacademic pedagogical subjects.

Chapter 5.1. Schalock, Del. "Research on Teacher Selection." in D. C.

Berliner (ed.) Annual Review of Research in Education.Vol. VII. In press.

2. The Protocol Materials Program began in the summer of1970 under the direction of B. Othanel Smith with thesupport of the Bureau of Educational Personnel Develop-ment of the U. S. Office of Education. Protocol materialsare reproductions of behavior that exemplify educationalconcepts. and they are used to help teachers learn to

55

analyze and classify behavior. The first year 11 protocolproject directors were selected across the Nation to receivetraining in the de.elopment and use of protocol materialsfor teacher training. The number of protocol projectsfunded annually varied from 11 to 17. During the 5 ranthe program was funded (July 1970 to June 1975). approx-imately 140 packages of empirically based materials wereproduced under specified criteria, field tested. and disseminated.

47

48

PART TWO

Pedagogical Knowledge

How fares pedagogical knowledge? Is what there is of itgood? Is there plenty of it such as it is?

What is pedagogical knowledge? What are its types, howdoes it differ from skill, and how can it be used in peda-gogical education?

Academic pedagogical knowledge. Is it theoretical? Forwhat can it be used?

What is teaching and how can it be analyzed for purposesof training?

The need to assemble and organize generic clinicalknowledge for skill development and a way to do it.

Content-specific knowledge for skill development in rela-tion to domains of teaching.

56

Chapter 6

Attitudes Toward Pedagogical Knowledge

Pedagogical practice has made significant prog-ress in this century largely because of the rise andgrowth of research. Despite this fact negative atti-tudes toward pedagogical knowledge are wide-spread. As we reconsider pedagogical education inthe broad scope we are immediately confronted bythe claim that there is no adequate knowledge basefor such a program. Examination of this allegedpoverty is the subject of this chapter.

Sources of Pedagogical Knowledge

Pedagogical knowledge is derived from twosources: research and clinical experience. Re-search, as the source of pedagogical knowledge, isjust over 75 years old if the work of Joseph M. Riceis taken as the beginning. During this time an enor-mous amount of research has been published.Monroe estimated in 1937 that some 50,000 studieshad been made.' The number of studies since thattime has probably tripled so that today we mayassume that approximately 150,000 studies havebeen published.

If we use as a criterion of worth that a study isreferred to 10 years after its publication, we esti-mate that approximately 10 percent of pedagogicalresearch persists through any given decade. Thesurvival rate over a period of 75 years would be con-siderably less, perhaps less than 3 percent. Eventhen the residue of important studies would besignificant.

Not all of these studies have been in pedagogyper se. Many have dealt with problems in such areasas administration and supervision, test develop-ment, retardation and dropout rates, teachertenure and salaries, social class origins of teachers,social class and student achievement and equalityof treatment. But teaching has had the benefit of alarge number of studies. Research on teaching hasfocused on at least five areas: a) school and class-room environmentbuildings and facilities, classsize, social and emotional climate; b) characteris-

tics of teacherseducational level, college grades,intelligence, personality; c) generic teachingbehavior questioning. reinforcing, planning,managing student disruption, grouping, and man-aging materials and instruction; d) teaching behav-ior as conditioned by subjects of instructionread-ing, science, mathematics, and so on; e) exception-ality and how to diagnose and treat it.

Pedagogical knowledge is also derived fromclinical experience. The individual case is observed,analyzed, and a decision made as to what to do tohelp the individual. The teacher then tries out hisor her hunch and if it works, the hunch is usedagain in similar circumstances. The same pro-cedure applies to a group. If the group as a whole ishaving difficulties that appear to be similar, theteacher may observe the group and decide whetheror not a particular form of help should be given. Ifit works, the teacher may use the procedure again.

In the early stages of the development of anyhelping profession, most of the knowledge is de-rived from the experience of the practitioners. Thishas been true in all professions agriculture, medi-cine, nursing, law, and others. The history of medi-cine, for example, is replete with modes of diag-nosing and treating illness, some of which havewithstood the test of time.

Teaching is no exception. Over a long period oftime teachers learned from observation of individual cases and groups that certain ways ofbehaving were more effective than others. Some-where in the past of pedagogical practices, so farback that their origins have been lost, teacherslearned that it was more effective to begin with concrete rather than abstract objects, to begin with thesimple rather than the complex, and that rewardsand the fear of punishment could be inducementsto learning. Thus over the centuries what is nowreferred to as the wisdom of the profession or craftknowledge gradually emerged and continues togrow as teachers learn new things from their ex-perience.

5749

Craft knowledge consists of distillations fromdecades, if not centuries, of experience passed onfrom teacher to teacher through conversation andthe printed page. An example of such knowledge,passed on to one of the authors by an older teacher.concerns the way to approach an irate student orparent. Induce the person to sit down with you, theteacher said, for in that posture anger tends todiminish and the person becomes more reasonable.Such knowledge consists of what teachers are awareof and (from experience) know will work. Unfortu.natelv it has not been assembled and organized.

As a profession matures and its research base be-comes more and more highly developed, more andmore knowledge tends to come from researchersand less from practitioners. This is just as true forpedagogy as it is for other empirical professions.Today. the primary source of knowledge comesfrom researchers who are studying the problems ofteaching in the various disciplines and also in themore general problems of student management andgeneric teaching operations. This is not to say thatknowledge no longer comes from practitioners, butrather that the proportion of knowledge contri-buted by the practitioner today is relatively smallcompared to that contributed by researchers.

Another source of pedagogical knowledge is theclinical experience of counselors. Much has beenlearned from counseling experience about how tolisten, how to recognize one's own reactions, how tounderstand the other person, and how to respondeffectively. Out of this experience can be for-mulated a few rules of communication. For exam-ple, as a general rule, it is more conducive tosmooth personal relationships in the classroom toanswer a student's request to do something, no; atthe moment appropriate, by a qualified "yes" thanby a "no." A student says, "May I show John how towork this puzzle?" If the time and conditions arenot appropriate, it would likely be more effectivefor the teacher to say. "Yes, as soon as we finish ourwork" rather than "No."

Criticisms of Pedagogical Knowledge

Despite the advances of research, especially inthe last 3 decades, some practitioners, pedagogicaleducators, and researchers are skeptical of peda-gogical knowledge, questioning it on variouscounts. Attitudes toward the subject matter of

50

pedagogy stay be expressed in the following ways:The knowledge is not dependable because re.search methodology is flawed.There are no general empirical principles andno cause effect relationships.Empirical principles of teaching behavior arenot useful because of the extreme variation ofcircumstances in which they must be applied.Most of our knowledge consists of the effect ofsingle variables which account for minusculeincrements of learning.

Are Research Findings Dependable?

From time to time, some researchers have be.come skeptical of their work. Perhaps one of theearliest skeptics was Stephens. who published hiscritical review of educational research some 50years ago under the title The Influence of theSchool on the Individual.? This review coveredalmost every aspect of pedagogical research.. -methods, class size, teacher behavior, and so onand concluded that the primary, if not the sole,variables that made any difference in studentachievement were reward and punishment. Hereturned to this thesis about 2 decades later andreached abi.it the same conclusion from an analysisof research studies on methods, team teaching, pro.grammed instruction, and a host of other vari-ables.'

Recently a number of voices have been added tothat of Stephens. After reviewing a number of cri.tiques of educational research, Doyle concludedthat there are few consistent results from studies ofteacher variables and student outcomes.' Similarclaims have been made by Shavelson andDempsey.'

In addition to these claims, it is charged thatprocess-product studies are flawed. A recent claimof this kind is that of Heath and Nielson, who criti.cized teacher effectiveness studies for failing toassign pupils randomly to treatments and for failingto show that the assumptions of various statisticaloperations were satisfied.'

Gage has recently reviewed the technical criti-cisms of research and the work of those who havedefended research against its critics.' He calls at.tention to a study by Glass who compared poorlydesigned and well.designed studies with respect toresults. Gage then goes on to say that "Glass's own

58

impression is that the difference in results betweenwell-designed and poorly designed experiments is'so small that to integrate research results byeliminating the poorly done studies is to discard avast amount of important data.' " Gage also pointsto others who have made similar studies andreached the same conclusion. He concludes fromhis review of the pro and con critics, and of theresearch itself, that "we do have some relationshipsbetween teacher behavior and pupil achievementand attitudes on which a scientific basis for the artof teaching may be erected."

After making one of the most, if not the most,rigorous reviews of process-product research onteacher effectiveness to be found in pedagogicalliterature, Medley gave his own interpretation ofwhat we know from this research, admonished usagainst interpreting the findings to suit our ownends, and then warned against the doctrine ofwaiting for definitive results before doing anything:

This is a strategy that appeals to some be.cause it sounds very logical. The argumentseems to be that if you don't do anything, youcan't do any harm. Since we do not yet have afull and complete understanding of the dy-namics of effective teaching, we are expectedto ignore the imperfect knowledge that we dopossess and do nothing that requires suchknowledge.

How fortunate it is for the human race thatat least some of our ancestors did not subscribeto this position. If Columbus had waited untilhe had a complete and accurate map of theworld before setting sail, his little fleet wouldstill be sitting in Genoa.

Very few decisions worth making can be putoff until there is adequate information to basethem on. In medicineand poker, most actionsmust be taken, most decisions made, on insuf-ficient data. Patients die, and money is lost,because action is taken when data are inade-quate but more patients and more moneywould be lost if no action were taken at all.

So too, educators must make decisions every-day, regardless of the availability of hard evi.dente on which to base them. With this needin mind, we have proceeded.

We believe that after reading this report andstudying the findings presented, the reader willagree that no serious student of teaching canafford to be ignorant of the findings producedby research in teacher effectiveness.'

We subscribe to this view. Throughout the next fivechapters we not only have discussed the forms of thisknowledge and its utility in pedagogical educationbut also have emphasized the need to assemble whatwe know from research, process-product studies aswell as other types, and how to relate it to programdevelopment, policymaking, and pedagogical train-ing.

Are There Empirical Principles?

Those who hold that the knowledge base of peda-gogical education is inadequate, if not entirelylacking, offer as evidence of their claim that noprinciples of teaching have been empirically con-firmed. If it is meant that there are no teacherbehaviors uniformly followed by specified studentbehaviors or achievement under the same condi-tions, much can be said for the claim. Neither theschool nor the classroom is a closed system. Outsidefactors influence the classroom, and these factorsapparently cannot be entirely controlled. Predic-tion of the state of the system at time t' from thestate of the system at t is unlikely. Hence, it is riskyto speak of empirical laws, in the classic sense, aspedagogical content.

Another claim that the knowledge base of peda-gogical education is insufficient rests on the beliefthat causal connections between teacher behaviorand student learning have not been established.Some authorities hold that only when we havecausal knowledge can an optimum program ofpedagogical education be developed. Waiving thequestion of what is meant by causation, all canagree that knowledge of causes is advantageous.With such knowledge, it is possible to contrive waysto remove the cause and thus to prevent unwantedoutcomes. It also facilitates the production ofdesired results, for if we know the causal conditionsit is possible to devise treatments for dealing withthem.

Nevertheless, a profession does not depend uponcausal knowledge. It is well-known that meansendsrelationships are established in many areas ofendeavor without knowledge of causes. Striking in-stances are found in medicine and agriculture.Quinine, an effective treatment of malaria, wasused by American Indians and later by physiciansfor centuries before it was known that malaria wascaused by sporozoan parasites or why quinine cured

5951

the disease. Fish were used by the Indians as ferti.lizer centuries before the chemistry of plant foodwas known. There are many means-ends principlesin pedagogy. For example. data show a resultinghigh rate of student engagement and achievementwhen teachers spend a high percentage of instruc-tional time in giving corrective feedback, althoughwhy corrective feedback produces these results isunknown.

Neither the lack of uniform relationships be-tween teacher behavior and achievement variablesnor ignorance of causes can be taken as evidencethat pedagogical education is devoid of scientificknowledge. Statistically significant correlations be.tween variables of teacher behavior and those ofstudent behavior or achievement are well estab-lished. In practical terms. these correlations yieldprescriptions for use in practical settings. For exam-ple. if a teacher plies low achieving students withlow order questions. provides corrective feedback.assigns work, and holds the students accountable.they will do well on a standard test in the subject.This principle yields a prescription: ask low orderquestions, give frequent feedback. make assign-ments. and hold students accountable. However, asin the case of law.like knowledge in all professions,certain conditions not usually stated must be pres-ent. The ttut:znIs must be able to read the text;there must be order in the classroom; and theremust he sufficient time as well as other conditions.

Statements of less than one-to-one correspon-d:nce betwcen sets of data are prevalent in all em-pirical professions such as agriculture andv:terinary meaicine. Nevertheless, law-like proposi-tions in these gelds are used to increase the yield ofagricultural products and to safeguard animal life.

Professional practice requires only probable, notexact. knowledge in order to be successful. Thatknowledge is probable and that there is often morethan one means to an end are reasons why judg-ment is important to successful practice in any pro-fession. For example, the question of whether to ig-nore or give attention to a particular classroomdisruption. or what to do if attention is to be given,typically calls for professional judgment. Suppose adisruption occurs. The teacher must make a quickdiagnosis. Which student did it? Are other studentsinvolved? Is that student normally orderly or onewho often seeks attention? Is the student one whotends toward violence?

The teacher is often in the position of having lessthan sufficient facts. Yet immediate judgment can-

52

not be avoided. In such a situation the teacher willassess the circumstances and call upon prior expert'ence and knowledge of reinforcement. Should theincident be ignored? Should it be stopped? Shouldthe student be counseled by the teacher at a latertime? There is no ready made formula by which toanswer these questions. The teacher must judgeamong optional means of restoring order and seek-ing the prevention of future occurrences.

To sum up. the position that pedagogicalresearch is sterile because it has produced no causalrelations and no empirical laws is without founda-tion, for neither of these is a necessary condition ofeffective professional practice. What is required isnot certainty, but correlational knowledge that isreasonably dependable.

Are Variables of Effective TeachingBehavior Useful?

The reduction of principles to prescriptions islooked upon with skepticism by some and with out-right disapproval by others. No one has stated thisposition more clearly than Fenstermacher in thefollowing passage:

Rules may serve as the means for bridgingeducational research and practice. This hap.pens when the results of research are convertedto imperatives for teachers to follow. For ex-ample. among the findings of phase III of theBTES is that more substantive interactionbetween the student and an instructor is asso.dated with higher percentages of student en.gagement.". . . Loosely restated in the largecontext of the BTES study, this finding stipu-lates that a student is more likely to show a gainin achievement of a basic skill if the teachermaintains a reasonably high level of academi.tally relevant interaction with that student.One way for a person engaged in bridging toemploy this finding is as a rule governingteacher practice. A principal, for example,might ask the school staff to devote not lessthan half the time available in a given instruc-tional period to teacher led, small group in-struction. . . .

Bridging with rules brings little if any ad-vantage to practitioners. Some of the reasonswhy this is so must await further development

130

of the argument. A few of the reasons are ac-cessible now. In general, rules are based exclu-sively on the findings of research, and not onthe research program considered as a whole.There are several faults with this exclusive reli-ance on findings. The first is the great poten-tial for misinterpretation of the findings. Re-search findings read out of the context of theentire research effort may be very misleading.Though researchers make careful attempts todelimit their findings, there is simply no prac-tical way to attach all the exclusions, excep-tions, and "other things being equal." to eachand every finding. Second, the findings them-selves may be unworthy of great confidence, aswould be the case if they were not highly con-firmed by the data, or if they were artifacts ofthe way the data were analyzed, or if they werebased on an inadequate or unrepresentativesample. Third, when findings are converted torules the effect is to generalize the findings toeveryone subject to the rule and the conse-quences of compliance to it. In many in-stances, the research simply will not supportsuch pervasive and uncritical generalizationsof findings. Finally the rule may be an invalidinterpretation of the findings, as would occurif it were shown, in the example above, thatteacher led, small group instruction did notenhance a student's engagement in a task.

Perhaps the most debilitating aspect of bridg-ing with rules is its effect on the practitioner'sperception of his or her stature and compe-tence. Persons expected to change their behav-ior on the basis of rules imposed by others aredenied a portion of their freedom to think andact independently. Certainly we must all toler-ate a degree of imposition in order to fare wellin life. However, if practitioners are to havethe opportunity to grow as professionals, othermeans of bridging research with practice maybe far more productive of professionalism thanthe use of rules,'°

This passage admonishes us on five counts:The practitioner may misinterpret the find-

ings.The research itself may be faulty.

The rule may be generalized to cover everyoneregardless of the limitations of the research.

The rule may be an improper interpretation ofthe findings.Rules are an imposition upon teachers and thustend to rob them of their status as professionals.

These are proper warnings and disregard of themrisks embarrassment and failure. But they do notindicate that the reduction of principles to prescrip-tions is to be avoided.

Granted that the findings of research are to beused within strict limitations, it is not the responsi-bility of the practitioner to translate findings intouseful knowledge nor is it an infringement uponthem to provide rules and the conditions of theiruse. It would be difficult to make a more grievousmistake than to insist that practitioners apply thefindings of research. They have neither the timenor the preparation to ferret out the significantstudies, to evaluate them technically, or to identify_and interpret the limiting conditions that methodology imposes upon the use of research findings tosay nothing of new skills required to apply the find-ings.

This is readily admitted by those who place theresponsibility for using research upon the practi-tioner. But they hasten to add that this deficiencycan be remedied by work in research methodswhere practitioners can learn not only the pro-cedures and techniques of research but also how tointerpret and apply research findings. However,more than a course or two in statistics and researchmethods is required to qualify as a consumer ofresearch findings, as anyone who has undergonesuch experience can readily attest

It is a fundamental error to assume that practi-tioners administrators, teachers, supervisors, andso on are the avenue through which the findingsand conclusions of research are to enter directly in-to practice. No other profession makes such anassumption. And, indeed, even in certain areas ofthe pedagogical profession this assumption is notentertained. The research on reading, for example,is translated into various types of teaching mate-rials, not by practitioners but by researchers them-selves or as advisors to publishers and other pro-ducers of instructional materials.

In all other professions, those who educate thepractitioner build the findings of research into theprograms of professional training. They do not ex-pect the practitioners physicians. farmers, veteri-narians, foresters. or whoever -- to use research save

6153

III

as it is translated into practical materials. pro-cedures, and techniques. If research findings andconclusions are to make any difference in practice,they will do so when incorporated into the profes-sional curriculum for all school personnel.

The function of a pedagogical faculty is not onlyto conduct research but also to translate researchfindings and conclusions into programs of profes-sional preparation, If pedagogical faculties do notmake use of the knowledge resulting from researchto develop a conceptual system for the practitionerand skill in performance in accordance with empirical propositions of a conditionconsequencetype, they should not expect the practitioner tomake use of research findings either.

The failure of research to make as great an im-pact upon practice as it might have done is not tobe attributed so much to lack of research knowl-edge as the fact that pedagogical faculties largelyignore research findings as they train school per-sonnel. especially teachers and administrators.When they have made use of research, they havedone so in courses taught after the fashion of liberalarts courses which are largely verbal, inducing nooperational understanding and no ability to per-form in accordance with research knowledge.

To invade the autonomy of teachers is to treatthem as less than craftsmen, for not even a crafts-man will suffer the effrontery of someone tellinghim how to do his or her work. The charge thatprescriptions reduce the professional status of ateacher would be serious if it were true. It is not theprescription but the administrative behavior thatrobs the teacher of his or her autonomy.

If neither teachers nor administrators are teevaluate and interpret research in order to bridgethe gap between research and practice, who is to doit? The answer. as stated above, is that pedagogicalfaculties who educate teachers and train them forprofessional service are responsible for evaluatingand interpreting research, and for specifying theexceptions. exclusions, and alternatives for specialcases. Principles should be included in programs oftraining. in textbooks, and in handbooks for practi-tioners and all the qualifications stated therein.That little of this is now done by pedagogical facul-ties only indicates the quality of pedagogical e!i.ca-tion.

Most of us are unmindful of the extent to whichour behavior is retNlated by prescriptions. For ex-ample. a package of lawn pesticide. recommendedfor use against chinch bugs, crickets. sod worms

54

6 7

and other pests. carries these instructions on theback. "Distribute at 614 setting on spreader. Don'tuse when grass is wet; don't mow for 24 hours afterapplication; don't use any other control product fora week after application." No research report isgiven to support the prescription or the exclusions.although research on these matters is in all probability available. Would a caretaker feel that hisprerogatives have been abridged? Of course not. forhis responsibility is to select and use the pesticidewhen he sees evidence of its need.

But. some will say, a caretaker is not a profes-sional. Then consider the following passage from aphysician's manual:

1. Treatment of the acute attack: The drugof choice in all types of malaria except drug-resistant falciparum malaria is chloroquine.The dose is 1 Gm of chloroquine phosphate(600 mg base) orally, followed by 500 mg(300

mg base) in 6 h, and then 500 mg (300 mgbase)/day for 2 days. The total dose in 2.5 Gm(1.5 Gm base). Patients who are comatose orvomiting may be given chloroquine hydrochlo-ride 250 to 375 mg (200 to 300 mg base) IM q 6h. Oral therapy with chloroquine phosphateshould be resumed as soon as possible.

Chloroquine-resistant strains of P. falci-parum (any case contracted in Central or SouthAmerica or the Far East may be resistant)should be treated with quinine, pyrimeth-amine, and a sulfonamide, all given concur-rently. Quinine sulfate 600 mg t.i.d. is givenorally for 10 days. If oral therapy is precluded,600 mg of quinine dihydrochloride may be di-luted in 300 ml saline or glucose and given IVover 30 min. The dose may be repeated q 8 h,but oral therapy should be restarted as soon aspossible. In cases with renal failure, the dose islimited to 600 mg once/day. Quinine may causetinnitus and, occasionally, drug fever or aller-gic purpura. Pyrimethamine 25 mg b.i.d. isgiven orally for 2 days. It is a folate antagonistand may cause or accentuate anemia. Sulfadi-azine 500 mg orally q.i.d. is given for 5 days."

The prescription, for acute attacks of malaria, isthat chloroquine should be given in specifiedamounts and time intervals. There are at leastseven exceptions, side effects, and alternative treat-ments suggested. There is no reason to suppose.however. that a physician feels that his professional

status is reduced when he turns to these practicalconsiderations derived from research.

The view that prescriptions for classroom prac-tice, derived from statistical generalizations, is

necessarily misleading and that the use of thembelittles teachers as professionals fails to take intuaccount the nature of principles and how they areused in professional training and practice. An effective program of pedagogical education wouldemphasize principles and their grounding inresearch together with exceptions, exclusions, andalternatives. It would also emphasize the develop-ment of skills indicated by the rules and how toidentify those conditions in the classroom to whichexceptions and alternatives apply.

Recent research is beginning to provide informa-tion about the effects of teacher behavior upon different categories of students. For example, evidenceis increasing that the procedures of teaching effec-tive with low socioeconomic status students are dif-ferent from those that are effective with studentsof high socioeconomic status. There is every reasonto believe that as research advances we shall learnmore and more about how to treat exceptionalcases within a framework of principles pertaining tothe general group.

Is the Effect of the Single Variable Worthwhile?

The view that pedagogical research is frag-mentary and that its findings do not add up to asubstantial body of knowledge is not unrelated tothe criticism that the model of the single variabledoes not fit pedagogical phenomena. If onevariable after another is studied and no way ofrelating them in a pattern of behavior is known.naturally the findings of research will make up ahodgepodge of unrelated propositions.

It has been shown time and again that a singlevariable counts for little in the achievement gains ofstudents. This fact has been advanced as a funda-mental criticism of pedagogical knowledge. But thecriticism is not as severe as it appears to be for tworeasons. First, while a single variable may contri-bute little to the total achievement gains, it may beof tremendous value to the teacher in helping a stu-dent over the hump at a particular point in theteaching process. For example, corrective feedbackto a student who is unable alone to solve a particu-lar type of problem in arithmetic may count for lit-tie in the total picture. but it can make a lot of dif-

ference to the student and the teacher at the time.Seconds in the actual operations of teaching, onevariable alone is seldom, if ever, used in isolationfrom other skills, but usually in a pattern of teach-ing betiavior. Its influence is weighted along withthe effects of the total pattern.

Yet it is important to be able to identify a par-ticular variable at a given time and to know some-thing of its effects. Unless teaching behavior isanalyzed into its elements, it would be almost im-possible to identify the points where a trainee needsfurther practice as well as conceptual enlighten-ment. for teaching behavior taken as a whole is acomplex of variables and the pedagogical professorwho cannot analyze it as it occurs in the classroom isnot likely to be successful in training the prospectiveteacher.

Alternatives to Research Knowledge

It is right and proper that researchers be criticalof their methods and that they weigh the dependability of knowledge by the stringency of theevidence. But their zeal for rigor should not betaken as evidence that the results of research countfor naught. Of course, knowledge derived fromresearch is to be taken cautiously, but not less sothan craft knowledge. And either one is preferable,even when the evidence favoring them is fragile. tofictions and nostrums.

Knowledge derived from scientific study of pedagogy has been held in ill repute almost from thebeginning. When Rice reported his investigationsof the effects of varying time allotments on spellingachievement to the association of superintendentsin Indianapolis in 1897, he was met by a storm ofcriticism. The purpose of spelling, so the superin-tendents proclaimed, was to discipline the mind.Rice "erroneously" assumed that the objective wasto learn to spell.

In this century there has been an increasingtendency among pedagogical leaders, school ad-ministrators. and practitioners to prefer fiction andnostrums to knowledge. Witness the rise and fall ofthe project method. activity movement, childcentered school, core curriculum, structure of thedisciplines, new math, process approach in scienceand social studies. and open education, to mentiona few of the more conspicuous examples. And nowfaintly appearing on the horizon is the futurist

63 55

movement, heralding a society in which schools willdisappear.

This penchant for fictions and wholesaleremedies is not restricted to pedagogy. Opium andcalomel were considered cure-alls by physicians inthe last century. Bloodletting was endorsed as atreatment of pneumonia by William Os ler, a

renowned physician and one of the founders of theJohns Hopkins medical school. as late as 1893."Heroic medicine. the use of supposed powerfultreatments. was not infrequent. The practice is il-lustrated by the treatment of a parturient patient in1887. According to the physician's report to thelocal medical society, he administered the followingheroic treatment during a 24hour period: "cuppedand bled the patient of 80 ounces of blood. dosed

her with castor oil, gave a purgative enema, andvomited her with tartar emetic every two hours.""The physician reported that as an outcome of histreatment the patient was restored to health inabout 4 weeks. Practicing physicians and surgeonsuntil recently fought almost every advancement inscientific medicine the germ theory of disease. theuse of antiseptics and anesthetics, to mention onlysome of the major battlegrounds. It took 25 yearsfor farmers to accept hybrid seed corn. And courtsof justice had to rid themselves of the notion ofwitches and racial superiority along with manyother fictions. As a profession becomes aware ofand respects its knowledge and techniques, thosewho espouse fictions, wholesale remedies, and uto-pian scenarios lose their audience.

644

56

8

Summary

The knowledge base of pedagogy is increasing and will continue to doso at an accelerating rate if research is adequately supported by State,Federal, and private agencies. While research methods and designs willcontinue to evoke controversy as they are perfected, a residue of usefulinformation will fall out as they are applied to problems in differentcontexts.

But it is one thing to do research and quite another thing to exploitresearch findings in the interest of developing ever more effective pro-grams of professional preparation. What is now required is an aboutface for faculties of pedagogy. They are accustomed to thinking interms of what can be done to improve the schools. And professors ofpedagogy have been all too ready to have teachers do thus and so, or ad-ministrators to introduce this and that remedy. But the time has comefor improvements to begin at home, for faculties of pedagogy to look attheir own programs in the light of research knowledge and to create agenuine program of professional education. We can no longer enjoy theluxury of trying to change everything but our own programs.

Chapter 61. Monroe. Walter S. "Progress toward a Seienee of Eduea-

don." School and Society. Vol. 45. pp. 633.639. 1937. Seealso "Evaluation and fnterpretation of EducationalResearch." American Educational Research Association,Official Report of the 1938 Meeting. Washington:American Educational Research Association. pp.190-194.

2. Stephens. John M. The Influence of the School on the In-dividual. Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers, 1933.

3. _ The Prates. of Schooling: A Psychological Ex-amination. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.1967.

4. Doyle. W. "Paradigms for Research on Teacher Effec-tiveness.' In Review of Research in Education, Vol. 5. byL. S. Shulman (editor). Itasca. Illinois: F. E. Peacock,1978.

5. Shavelson. R.. and N. Dempsey. -Generalitability ofMeasures of Teaching Behavior." Review of EducationalResearch. Vol. 46. pp. 553-611. 1976.

6. Heath, R. W., and M. A. Nielson, "The Research Basisfor Performanee-Based Teacher Education." Review ofEducational Research. Vol. 44, pp. 463-483. 1974.

7. Gage. N. L. The Scientifi: Basis of the Art of Teaching.New Yotk: The Teachers College Press. 1977.

8. _ Op. eit., p. 30.9. Medley. Donald M. Teacher Competence and Teacher

Effectiveness. Washington: American Association of Col-leges for Teacher Education. 1977. pp. 3-4.

10. Fenstermacher, Gary D. "On Learning to Teach Effec-tively from Research on Teacher Effectiveness." News-letter 4. Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study. Saera-mento: Commission on Teacher Preparation and Licens-ing. June 1979.

11. Berkow, Robert (editor). The Merck Manual of Diagnosisand Therapy. Rahway. N. J.: Merck Sharp and DohmeResearch Laboratories. (Thirteenth Edition). 1977. p.161.

12. Duffy. John. The Healers. A History of AmericanMedicine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1979. p.233.

13. - Op. eh.. p. 232.

57

Chapter 7

Pedagogical Knowledge:Its Forms and Uses

Pedagogical knowledge can be discussed fromvarious standpoints: how it is come by. its kinds,and its relations to action. In the preceding chapterwe briefly discussed the sources and status of peda-gogical knowledge. In this chapter we shall cxamine the various forms of knowledge. how aca-demic and clinical knowledge differ, and the rela.tion of clinical knowledge to action.

Forms of Pedagogical Knowledge

There are four different forms of pedagogicalknowledge, as follows:

Definition: frustration is an emotional tensionset up by the blocking of a need, desire, or at-tempted action.Principle: if a student is prevented from doingsomething in which he or she is deeply inter-ested, he or she will likely exhibit aggressive orprimitive behavior.Value: frustration is sometimes beneficial.Fact: Mary, a second grader. can recognize lessthan a third of the Dolch basic sightvocabulary.

Definitional Knowledge

The prime elements of pedagogical content aredefined and undefined terms. Undefined terms arethose whose meanings we take for granted. Theyare typically used in defining crucial terms. Start-ing with the word "frustration" we can get at itsmeaning by reference to words whose meanings arederived from other words. The expression "an emo-tional tension set up by the blocking of a need,desire, or attempted action" may be taken as defin.ing "frustration." Now consider the term "tension"that is undefined in the expression. To define it wemay say simply that tension is a state of

66

psychological readiness to act. We stop there, for"state" is ordinarily not defined in pedagogical dis-course. We know its meaning with enough accuracyto suit our purpose without further ado.

Defined terms are our stock in trade. Thedevelopment and use of professional knowledge inany field depends upon the development of a bodyof standard definitions. Pedagogy is no exception.If fundamental terms such as "learning," "intern.gence quotient," "feedback." and "objectives" arenot used in the same sense, no serious professionaldiscussion can be engaged in. Vague or ambiguousdefinitions indicate that our concepts are ill-formedand imprecise.

Professionals who have precise concepts. and usethe same terms to designate them, can work to-gether with a minimum of misunderstanding andwith little friction as they try to reach agreements.But if their definitions are flawed, or if some ofthem insist upon using private language or mean.ings that belong to some special orientation, theirefforts to carry on productive discourse will behampered.

A definition can be viewed as a rule for using aword or expression. Consider the definition of"frustration." First of all it is an equation. so tospeak. The term "frustration" is equal to (has thesame referent as) the expression "emotional tensionset up by the blocking of a need. desire, or attempted action." The rule is that wherever "frustration" occurs we can substitute the equivalent expression and vice versa without loss of meaning.

Substitution of one part of the definition foranother is clear enough, but what does the definition tell us? For one thing, it tells us that frustrationbelongs to a class of things called emotional ten-sion. Perhaps the class includes more than one kindof emotional tension. If so, the definition tells us.for another thing, how frustration differs fromother sorts of motional tensions; it is the kind oftension that results from blocking of a need, desire,

59

or action rather than one that results, for instance.from anxiety. We now know in so many words whatfrustration means: we can use the term in adialogue, in discourse, or in reading.

Suppose we are asked to tell in concrete term:.how to identify a frustrated person. What can wesay? From our knowledge of the definition so far wecan say very little or nothing. To identify a case offrustration is to know the observable attributes ofan emotionally tense person. We can all agree thatamong these attributes are use of vile language.anger, temper tantrums. crying, aggressiveness,and withdrawal. These are manifested in observable behavior which most individuals can identifyfrom their previous experience. Still we do notknow whether these observable attributes indicatefrustration, for individuals can cry, use vilelanguage, and so on, because of other forms ofemotional upset such as grief or anguish. However.if we know that the person was unable to attain agoal when he or she has been repeatedly successfulbefore, as failure to score in a game, we can thensay that this is a case of frustration. From thisanalysis it can be seen that in an empirical fieldsuch as pedagogy, the referent some set of objects.events. or behaviors - of a technical term must beidentified in reality. The generalized idea of the set.expressed as a definition, is a concept. In short adefinition is a concept verbally rendered.

A major flaw of pedagogical thinking is ourfailure to insist on precise and rigorous definitions.Pedagogical educators and teachers typically uselanguage loosely and often spurn standard termsfor vague and catchy expressions. The opposite isfound in other professions where thinking is con-trolled by standard meanings even when the termsare commonsense words.

Law is a case in point. It depends upon preciseuse of language. Offenses are defined in terms ofsuch attributes as motives and types of behavior.Som are defined precisely. For example. assault isdefined so strictly that an attorney knows whether agiven act is a case of assault or assault and battery.Some definitions are open ended: while they arerigorous. they are incomplete. Consider the term"murder.- The act of killing a person is notnecessarily murder. The task of a jury. among otherthings, is to decide whether or not murder has beencommitted in a given case of killing. The term"murder" designates a residual category. A case ofkilling may be judged as murder if it is not knownthat the defendant was insane, acted in self-

60

defense, killed accidentally, and so on, and if amotive for the act is established. The meaning ofthe term is made clear for the most part by the exeditions.

How ih effectiveness of a professional dependsin large part upon the mastery of terms is also illustrated in medicine. Diagnosis in medicine, as inany field. proceeds by definitions. Is X's illness acase of malaria? If it is, X will suffer from fever,chills, a swollen tongue as evidenced by the print ofteeth on its sides, and other observable symptoms, ifwe go by the medical knowledge of the last century.While the diagnosis is made by blood tests today.the diagnosis still rests upon a definition in terms ofthe attributes specified for the test.

The mode of diagnosis in pedagogy such as telling whether a child is frustrated, or lacks the learn-ing prerequisites to perform a task, .r does notcomprehend what is read is made by observation ofmomentto-moment behavior in the classroom andby tests, as in reading and mathematics.

Some critics attribute the lack of discipline in theuse of language in pedagogical discourse to the factthat most information about teaching, derivedfrom practical experience, is couched in the vulgarlanguage. Whatever the truth of that claim, thebody of precise terms grows as pedagogical researchadvances. As research terminology is built intopedagogical education and the language consequently becomes more precise. exact use oflanguage will increase. This consummation will besignificant. for the applicability of pedagogicalprinciples depends upon the rigor of definitions.

It hardly need be said that to think of definitionsas being either true or false is unprofitable. Defini-tions are either fruitful or unfruitful, dependingupon the inferences they yield. If frustration isdefined by reference to distinctions among emo-tional tensions rather than to the presence of somesort of evil spirit, it is not because the first is trueand the other false. The first is preferable, becauseit opens up more effective ways of helping students.

Uses of Definitions

Turning now to the uses of definitions, there arethree to which we wish to give special attention.First. since a definition is the verbal counterpart ofa concept. the definition can be used to test theclarity of the concept and the degree to which it isthe same from one individual to another. To agree

67

about the substance of a definition is to signify thatthe concept is the satne for all parties.

Second, commonly defined concepts enablemembers of the itrofession to know what they areworking with or talking about, They guide observa-tions: as someone has said, concepts are screensthrough which the world is filtered as it enters oursenses. We we with our concepts as well as with oureyes, for what we observe is dependent upon themental content we bring with us. If a physician. apsycholNisi, a minister, and a teacher observe thesame group of children. they will report quite dif-ferent information. Each will see the children fromhis or her concepts about children and theirbehavior. This is why classroom observation bytrainees undisciplined in concepts is often ineffec-tive and why controlled observation as in protocol'materials helps trainees to hecome disciplinedobservers. h cannot be overemphasized that one ofthe primary characteristics of a highly trained pro-femional in pedagogy. as in all professions, is theability to observe dispassionately in accordancewith commonly held sets of technical terms.

It must be pointed out. however, that the rela-tionship between concepts and observations is not aone. way affair. At a fundamental level of researchand analysis, observational discriminations can im'tinge upon our concepts. causing us to reconstructthem and sometimes even our most fundamentalnotions of the grounds of our endeavor. Thus on afundamental plane of analysis and observation. aplane on which practitioners seldom need tooperate, the certainty of our concepts at any time isa delusion, for they are hedged around with un-explored territory. However, that is no reason forbelieving. as some skeptics do. that we shoulddefine terms as we please and that efforts to main-tain a common professional language are misspent.

Unfortunately, pedagogical concepts are typi-cally taught almost exclusively at the verbal level.Their meaning for the student is derived from thecontext of discourse and from the student's or-dinary experience. The referents of terms areseldom identified. and when they are the identifica-tion is likely to be made by verbal rather than con-crete examples. If a student asks for an instance offrustration, anger over a teacher's failure to returnexamination papers on time may be cited. Whilethis verbal instance may be clear. it lacks the realityof a classroom incident. How many practitioners.or even professors of pedagogy, can identify in the

classroom instances of feedback, reinforcement,motivating behavior, sex discrimination, anxiety,advance organizers. or chaitting to mention only asprinkling of concepts? And how many of their col-leagues would agree with their identifications? If 5years experience of some 17 professors in develop.ing protocols to exemplify concepts by actualbehavior can be taken as evidence, the number willapproach zero. Perhaps the failure of teachers touse technical terminology, as observed by Jackson.'is attributahle to the disregard for precise defini-tions of terms and their referents, a deficiency thatprotocol materials were designed to correct.

In the third place. definitions are useful in theapplication of principles to teaching. We learnfrom research that children who are persistently on-task are more likely to learn than those who are in-termittently so. But this principle will be of littleuse unless we can tell from observation whetherstudents are ontask or not. What does it mean tobe on-task? If the concept of on-task is taught sothat we can identify ontask behavior in the class-room, we can apply the principle. Otherwise. theprinciple is of little use.

Principles

A principle is a statement of relationships amongvariables. A variable is a measure of concept andwhen the concept is expressed verbally it becomes adefinition. The relationship between sets ofvariables in a principle is that of condition-conse-quence. For example. if teachers avoid negative af-fect when working with students whose socks-economic status is low, student gain is increased.The condition is that the teacher avoid negative af-fect. The consequence of this condition is that stu-dent gain is increased. Now, the condition is madeup of conceptsavoid, negative affect, and lowsocioeconomic status. The consequence is com-posed of two conceptsstudent gain and increase.Both sets are expressed in research as variables.

Now, a principle is not a prescription, it is simplya statement of a relationship among two sets ofvariables. Some principles do yield prescriptionswhile others do not. The principle just cited has ahigh prescriptive potential. The prescription isavoid negative affects when teaching low socio-economic status pupils. A prescription is simply astatement of what can be done in a given case. But

Cs61

whether to use this or that prescription is a matterof professional judgment.

Some principles yield no prescriptions and othershave low prescriptive potential. Consider thefollowing principle: If groups have establishednorms, it is extremely difficult for a new leader,however capable, to shift the group's activities.' It isnot easy to read a prescription from this principle.Probably the best that one can do is to say that if aleader wants to continue the leadership role, he orshe should not try hard to change the group's ac-tivities. But there is no prescriptive potential in thisprinciple for one who wishes to change the activitiesof the group.

Principles are approximations, and their exact-ness can be increased by analysis of variables. Justfor illustration let us consider first a principle fromanother field. We take this apparent detourbecause the case is simple. and, because it is inphysical science, it will enable us to escape theengrossing attitudes about the complexities ofhuman behavior. After looking at this case we canturn to a pedagogical parallel. Consider the state-ment: Iron rusts when exposed to the elements.This principle is known even to common sense.What we refer to colloquially as iron usually is infact steel. Now steel consists of iron and carbon, theproportions determining the properties of steel.Steel can also be mixed with manganese, tungsten,chromium, and nickel to produce properties suchas hardness, resistance to rust. stains, and so on. Sowhen we speak of steel it may appear that we aretalking about a homogeneous substance when infact it is an alloy.

Now, suppose we look at the pedagogical princi-ple: If a teacher makes clear assignments. makessure that the students understand the assignmentsand how they are to be done. gives corrective feedback and reinforcement. assigns homework, con-ducts reviews. and holds students responsible. thestudents will do well on tests. We note that anumber of variables appear in the conditional partof the statement: teacher, assignment. student. andso forth. It goes without saying that teachers, likesteel. are not all of a kind. Neither are the students.Some teachers are secure and some are not, someare better educated than others, some more unsure.some tend to individualize and some do not, andso on. Students also differ. Some are low achievers.some dependent. some high achievers. some inde-pendent, and so on.

62

In any study of teaching based on a random sam-ple of undifferentiated students and teachers alltypes of both students and teachers will be in-cluded. Suppose an experiment is conducted withsuch a sample and that the subject matter of in-struction as well as the pattern of instruction areheld constant according to the principle above. Itwill turn out that some students do well on tests,some poorly. and others somewhere between. Thisresult is comparable to the physical example. Somesteel does not rust when exposed to moist air.Whether it does or not depends upon its composi-tion. The principle that steel rusts when exposed tomoist air must therefore be qualified. It all dependsupon its composition. Some types of steel will rust.others will not. This same mode of analysis holdsfor pedagogical knowledge. When the type ofteacher is known and is matched with the appropri-ate type of student. as determined by analysis andexperimentation, the number of students who suc-ceed on tests is likely to increase.*

Research in pedagogy no less than in other fieldsadvances our knowledge by successive approxima-tions. Our knowledge is built step by step. no one ofwhich takes us very far, but taken in tandem theylead on to more and more knowledge.

To sum up, if the concepts composing the condi-tional part of a principle are spelled out in beha-vioral terms, we can tell from our knowledge of aparticular case whether the principle applies. If theconcepts remain undefined, or if they are notspelled out in pedagogical settings, the principlewill be of little or no use to teachers. Neglect of thisaspect of both correlational and experimentalknowledge by researchers as well as by instructorsaccounts for much negative reaction to pedagogicalresearch.

Value Knowledge

Pedagogical discourse constantly resorts to valueclaims. We express value judgments about teachers.administrators, students. practices, conduct. pro-grams. and so on. Here are some examples:

Miss B is a good teacher.John is a poor student.

Mrs. A is a good person but an ineffectivegroup leader.

This test is unreliable.This is a beautiful school building.

9,

We should involve students in planning whatthey are to do.We ought to abandon that sort of classroomcontrol.

In these examples the value terms are "good.""poor," "ineffecive." "unreliable." and "beautiful."They are applied to a teacher, a student, a groupleader, a test, and a building, and are commonlyused. as in these examples, to rate persons, objects.and the like. To say that Ms. Baxter is a goodteacher is to rate her she is at the upper end of ascale from poor to good. The terms "ought" and"should" are indirectly value terms, for they are in-tended to move us to take certain actions which aredeemed to be desirable, worthwhile, or beneficial '

Values are a special kind of concept and areoften confused with attitudes to which they arerelated. Values are ratings; attitudes are dispositions to be for, against. or neutral toward some-thing.' If a teacher says "poor old John." she is ex-pressing an attitude, and in no way valuing him.But if the teacher says, "John is a good principal,"she is rating him attributing value to him as aprincipal. As noted above value statements containtwo kinds of expression: object terms and valueterms. In the statement just given. "good" is thevalue term, and "John" designates the value object.The value object is that which is rated and the valueterm tells what the rating is.

Value questions are seldom analyzed in pedagogical education. This is attributable to ::.:" failureto distinguish values from attitudes and to the inabilicy of instructors to analyze value language. To de-fine a value term is to state the criteria for using theterm. If one says that Ms. Baxter is a good teacher.the assertion tells us nothing about Ms. Baxterunless the criteria for using the term "good" in thatcontext is given. "Good" is the most general term ofcommendation in the English language, as someonehas said. It can be applied to almost any objectstones, animals, plants, persons, or what have you.But other than the fact that the object is commended, the bald term tells us nothing. Withoutthe criteria for using "good" in a particular context,its meaning is indefinite. If anyone disagrees thatMs. Baxter is a good teacher, we can suggest thatthe criteria have not been given and that each partyto the dispute is using its own criteria. But if thecriteria are given and still there is disagreement, wecan assume that either the criteria or the dataabout Ms. Baxter's teaching behavior are not ac-

ceptable to all parties.From what has just been said, it should require

only a bit more discussion to show that values are aspecial kind of concept. To say that Ms. Baxter is agood teacher is to say that she is a member of a setof teachers that the speaker calls "good." When thecriteria of that set are given, the teaching behaviorof Ms. Baxter, or of any other teacher, can beobserved to decide whether the teacher is or is not amember of that set. Value designates a special typeof concept because the value term evokes differingand often conflicting preferences. And efforts toallay these preferences in the interest of an °pdmum set of criteria is the unique problem of valueanalysis in the context of research and practice.

Some progress has been made toward standardiz-ing the use of value terms. Yet value language inpedagogy is far from being an adequate tool. Thecriteria of some value terms are now relatively set-tied. others are becoming settled, and still othersare openly controversial. The terms "validity" and"unreliability" were once controversial value terms.They were loaded with preferential connotationsand without acceptable criteria for the use of eitherexpression. But, in test development, criteria andprocedures for applying them have now settled theuse of these terms.

Effectiveness, as a value term, applied toteaching, is becoming technical in the same way.When academic learningin reading, writing,arithmetic, science, and so on is taken as the out-come of teaching, effectiveness can be defined interms of student outcomes associated closely withteaching behaviors not only in one school but alsoacross schools for all teachers exhibiting thosebehaviors. Teachers whose behavior is comparableare members of the set of effective teachers.

The catch is that some authorities claim thatacademic achievement is not the sole purpose ofteaching and others that it is not even the primarypurpose. They will consequently deny the foregoingcriterion of effectiveness. These objections can beanswered by showing that certain concomitant learn-ings problem solving ability, positive attitudes ofstudents toward themselves and the school, interestin further learning, and the like are enhancedalong with academic achievement. That these con-comitants actually occur when teachers are effec-tive is now apparent from recent research.'

Were the results of research to turn out other-wise, however, teacher effectiveness might then be

706S

defined by reference to other types of outcomes. Inthat case. there would be a multiplicity of concep-tions of effectiveness. If choices must then be made,and the profession cannot reconcile its divisions.some higher authority such as the State will in.tervene to say what the public supports its schools todo. or the State may allow alternative schools. Ineither case, the ultimate result will be the same.assuming that alternative schools are competitive.as Adam Smith proposed. From 2 centuries of com-petitive economic life it is clear that competitionleads to standardization.

Perhaps it should be noted in passing that pre-occupation of professionals with questions of valueis indirectly proportional to their knowledge ofmeans. This fact is borne out by the history ofscience in general as well as by the history of suchprofessions as medicine and agriculture. A greatdeal of controversy a hout values ultimately boilsdown to questions of means, and as these questionsbecome settled the value questions tend toevaporate. The weight of values is greater in antici-pation than in a fait accompli. This is not to denythat there are genuine questions of value in all in-tellectual undertakings, nor is it to be interpreted tomean that those who raise value questions are sim-ply throwing up smoke screens, although valuequestions have not infrequently served that pur-pose.

Factual Knowledge

The word "fact" is used in a number of ways.° Itis used synonymously with the word "true." Thestatement "It is a fact that Thomas Jefferson diedon July 4. 1826" means the same as "It is true thatThomas Jefferson died on July 4, 1826." We are notconcerned with this usage as an element in peda-gogical knowledge.

"Fact" is also used in the same sense as "datum.""John's score on the test is 85" or "Mary was on-task20 minutes" are examples. Or again, it is used in aninterpretive way. We say that John's score placeshim in the upper quartile of his class. But to placehis score in the upper quartile is to interpret it. Wehave classified his score as a member of a set ofscores and thereby added further meaning to it. Wealso use "fact" to cover statements of an invariablesequence or conjunction of characteristics. "Anadolescents go through a period of strain and ad.

64

justment" is a statement that exemplifies this mean-ing. When "fact" is used in this sense, it designatesan instantial generalization similar to the statement"All crows are black."

The importance of facts in pedagogy. as in otherfields, is found partly in their use as evidence andpartly as sheer information relevant to professionalperformance. For instance, to diagnose the learn-ing problems of students is to note facts about thetypes of errors they make. And principles are war-ranted by the facts adduced to support them. Muchof the content of special methods courses in readingand other subjects consists of information about theelements of various processes, the kinds of errorschildren make, and differences among children.These are important items of information and arenonetheless useful because they are facts.

Academic and Clinical Knowledge Distinguished

Pedagogical knowledge consists of two types:clinical and academic. Clinical knowledge is thatwhich teachers use as they help students. either in-dividually or in groups. It is the verbal counterpartof pedagogical behavior, and is expressed as defini-tions. principles, facts, and values. It is used asteachers give instruction in the performance of askill such as giving feedback. asking contrary to factquestions, making diagnoses or other judgments.

Academic pedagogical knowledge consists of thedefinitions, principles, facts, and values that com-prise the content of educational history. philosophy,sociology. psychology. and so on. It is used mainlyin developing and justifying educational policiesand programs. Clinical knowledge. on the otherhand, is closely associated with classroom perfor-mance and with performance on other clinical taskssuch as counseling.

Admittedly this distinction is not clear-cut. Peda-gogical practices are often illuminated by flashes ofinsight from academic ideas, and experiences fromactual performance often enrich abstract notionsabout learning and development as well as pro-grams of instruction. But if the line is not too finelydrawn, it roughly separates what is loosely, if noterroneously. referred to as theory and practice.

Academic and clinical knowledge are furtherdistinguished in two ways: first. by the content ofthe forms of knowledge; and. second. by differencesin prescriptive potential. Cenerally speaking, con

7 1

cepts in clinical knowledge are teacher-behaviorvariables and student-behavior variables. In contram. concepts in academic knowledge are social.economic, psychological. and institutional vari.ables and variables having to do with their effectsupon children and youth. teachers. and the school.

These differences in conceptual content aremanifested in the following principles:

Lower class boys who go to college are morelikely than others to have parents who aredissatisfied with their own class position.If teachers structure lessons and give directionson task procedures. students experience highsuccess rates with learning.

The first principle gives no information as towhat to do. as far as the school is concerned. to in-crease the number of lower class boys at higher in-stitutions. We can infer from the proposition thatone way to increase the number of lower class boysin college would be to increase the number ofparents who are dissatisfied with their social posi-tion. To this extent, the principle can be said tohave a prescriptive potential, but its significance foraction is feeble. Most principles in academic peda-gogical knowledge either have a low potential. as inthis case. or none at all. They describe a state of af-fairs, typically static. and its consequence. How-ever. they can be very significant in the shaping ofprograms, policies, and decisions.

The second principle represents clinical peda-gogical knowledge. It has a high prescriptive capac.ity. It tells us what a teacher is to do if the teacherwishes students to experience high success rates.Clinical principles are typically those whoseprescriptive potential is high.

It can readily be seen from the foregoing analysisthat the content of clinical principles differs mark-edly from the content of academic principles. It per-tains to dynamic variables. variables that can be ma-nipulated and controlled in order to help studentsachieve specifiable outcomes. It embraces both di-agnosis and prescription and is involved. as will beseen in Chapters 10 and U, in all domains of peda.gogical training, The content of academic princi-ples, on the other hand, typically consists of staticvariables such as social class, welfare level, peergroup. and social mobility, which are least amens'ble to deliberate manipulation and control. Aca-demic principles indicate relationships to be takeninto account as clinical knowledge is used and asprograms and policies are made.

While academic pedagogical knowledge is drawnin part from sociology and economics and from thepsychology of human development. intelligence.and learning. it is worthy of note that pedagogicalpsychology is in a state of flux.' Only recently itconsisted largely of a study of concepts and prin-ciples of learning and development without pro-viding treatments. except in the very broadestterms, and of how these could be used by teachersin the classroom. In the last two decades, however.pedagogical psychology has become ever more likea technological study whose content consists largelyof prescriptive principles. This trend is obviousfrom a casual examination of textbooks in peda.gogical psychology. It is attributable to demandsfor practical measures and to the success of researchon teacher effectiveness. As psychology becomesmore and more a study in pedagogical technology.it tends to lose its status as an academic pedagogicalstudy and to take on more and more the color of aclinical subject. Perhaps this is as it should be, andthere is little reason to believe that this trend will bereversed.

However, there is another part of pedagogicalpsychology which is academic. The study of humandevelopment in relation to curriculum develop-ment, the study of the relation between intelligenceand the social environment, and countless otherrelations that can be expressed as descriptiveknowledge are pedagogically significant. and, whilethey yield no prescriptions as to how to do this andthat as one teaches, they do provide information toguide school personnel as they formulate programsand policies.

The Uses of Clinical Principles

Clinical principles constitute a large part of thecontent of a training program. We can learn themverbally, and. when so learned, they can be ana.lyzed and discussed, but we may not be able therebyto use them in practice. They can also be learned asways of behaving. Both modes of learning arenecessary in a profession. Just to learn them verbal.ly is to render the principles useless in practice. Tofollow them behaviorally without understanding isto use them mindlessly.

The shortcomings of mere verbal learning whereperformance is required are well known. but thedisadvantage of performance without conceptual

79ti

65

/

understanding requires discussion. If teachers donot have command of the principles underlyingtheir practice, they are at the mercy of their ownpropensities. Two teachers are discussing misbehavior in their classes. Susan, a fourth gradeteacher, says that she nips disruption in the budand that it works for her, implying that since thisremedy works in my class it will work in yours. John,another teacher, goes back to his classroom andtries out the suggestion but it does not work. Whatcan be wrong? This case is like that of two mothers.one of whom says my child was sick and I gave it soand so and she got well. The second mother triesthe remedy only to find that her child's illness con-tinues. The inference is that since this remedycured my child. it will cure yours. The mother hasno way of knowing whether the two children havethe same disease. for she has no principle specifyingthe conditions to which her treatment is relevant.Reasoning from case to case without mediatingprinciples is groundless and points up both thenecessity for teaching principles per se and for usingthem to mediate skillful performance in profes-sional training.

How do principles function as mediators? If theteacher correctly identifies students who cause dis-ruptions and acts to deter them (conditions). therewill be fewer instances of disruptive behavior (con-sequence). The task of the teacher is to institute theconditions. To do this the teacher does not nip anyand all disturbances in the bud. but only selectedones. A teacher who knows the criteria of disrup-tions that require attention and develops the abilityto recognize instances that satisfy the criteria, iswell on the way to acquiring control of classroomconduct. This ability can enable the teacher to nipdisturbances in the bud successfully. Without it theteacher may nip the wrong bud and thereby in-crease the disruptions. In short. principles providethe basis for distinguishing among cases anddeciding whether the means used in one case arelikely to work in another.

A clinical principle. as described above. yields aprescription for attaining a specified end. To knowa principle, however, is not the same as knowinghow to perform according to the prescription. Atrainee may be able to recite a principle, write it inhis or her own words, discuss it and identify thereferents of its terms and yet be incapable of per-forming the activities the prescription calls for.Suppose that the prescription says: make your

66

assignments clear if you want your students to dothem. Now, a trainee does not know how to makeclear assignments, if all he or she can do is to recitethe principle any more than he or she knows how toplay tennis if only the rules are known. Somethingelse is required and that something else is skill.

What do we mean by "skill"? This is one of themost loosely used psychological terms, and we can-not analyze here the vagaries and ambiguities thatsurround its uses. But a few distinctions will help topin down its meaning for the purposes of peda-gogical education.

A child learns the multiplication tables, not bythinking them out or reasoning about them, but bysheer repetition. They are rehearsed in memory,recited aloud, written out, and so on until thevarious products can be used automatically. As theyare repeated in various ways the child does not haveto reflect upon whether he or she is following theright procedure or any procedure at all. The tablesbecome habitual by repetition so that any elementcan be used at will without either reflection orvariation. Learnings of this sort are habits and arcacquired by sheer drill.

Now, skills are not to be confused with habits.Habits, as we have just noted, are identified byfixed patterns of behavior. Skills arc flexible. Ateacher is said to be skilled in making assignments ifthe performance varies from one assignment toanother. depending upon the interests and priorlearning of students, content. time allocation, ob.jectives, and so on. At one time the assignment maybe written on the blackboard, given orally atanother, or typed and given out at still another.

Just as skills are not habits so are they not perfor-mance. Skills are dispositions and are manifested inperformance. but they are dispositions which areexpressed in a variety of ways. They are acquirednot by sheer drill, as are habits, but by repetitionunder the critical eye of one who can look objective.ly at the performance from moment to moment.identifying mistakes and providing feedback, en-couragement, and other help. Skills are also ac-quired by practice under the control of self.observation as well as by the observation of atrainer. To practice a skill is to modify one's perfor-mance by what is learned from the preceding per-formance. Learning a skill involves constant use ofintelligence. and that is how training differs fromsheer drill.

To teach a skill, corrective feedback for instance,we must know its various forms and how they areexecuted so that if a certain kind of mistake is madeby a trainee, we can say: "This is what you do and

how you do it." What we say to the trainee is peda-gogical content. When the trainee can give feed-back in a variety of ways in response to the situa-tion, he or she has acquired a skill.

74 67

Summary

We have discussed the subject matter of pedagogical education froma particular viewpoint. As we think about subject matter, we can con-sider its components and how to classify and organize them for instruc-don. Or we can climb up out of and above the subject matter and lookback at it. noting its elements and their form and utility. We have takenthe latter perch. We have analyzed the subject matter into its logicalforms and discussed their usefulness in pedagogical education, and, inaddition. identified and distinguished two types of subject matteracademic and clinical. In the next chapter we shall continue thisperspective as we examine the academic subject matter of pedagogy andthe claim that it is practical in a clinical sense because it is theoretical.Then in chapters 10 and 11 we shall turn again to clinical knowledgeand how it is related to pedagogical training.

Chapter 71. "Thematic Section on Protocols and Other Training

Materials." Journal of Teacher Education. Vol. XXV.number 4: 1974. pp. 298-343.

2. Jackson. P. W. Life in the Classroom. New York: Holt.Rinehart and Winston. 1968.

3. Berelson. Bernard. and Gary A. Steiner. HumanBehavior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings. New York:Harcourt. Brace and World, 1964. p. 343.

4. Good. Tom. and T. Beckerman. "An Examination ofTeachers Effects on High. Middle, and Low AptitudeStudents." American Educational Research Journal,1978, Vol. 15, pp. 477482.

5. Metcalf, Laurence E. (editor). Values Education.Washington. D. C.: National Council for Social Studies.1971,

68

6. Wilson. John. Language and the Pursuit of Truth. Cam-bridge: At the University Press. 1956. pp. 65-70; Urmson.J. 0. "On Grading" in Logic and Language. edited byAnthony Flew. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1953.

7. Rosenshine. Barak. "Content. Time, and Direct Instruction." Peterson. Penelope L., and Herbert J. Walberg.(editors). Research on Teaching: Concepts. Findings, andImplications. Berkeley: McCutchen. 1979. pp. 28.56.

8. Cohen. Morris R., and Ernest Nagel. An Introduction toLogic and the Scientific Method. New York: Harcourt,Brace, 1934. pp. 217.219.

9. Berliner, David. "Clinical Studies of Classroom Teachingand Learning.' Paper presented at the meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, Toronto.Canada. March 1978.

Chapter 8

Academic Pedagogical Knowledge:Its Nature and Utility

As noted in the preceding chapter, the knowl-edge base of pedagogy consists of those conceptsand principles which guide and illuminate practiceand those which provide the overall intellectualcontcxt within which policies and decisions aremade. The first of these we call clinical and the sec-ond academic pedagogical knowledge. The word"academic" was chosen deliberately because thisknowledge is derived in part from academicdisciplines and, for the most part, can be taughtapart from immediate practical operations.

Academic Pedagogical Studies

Pedagogy. like other empirical professions.depends upon supporting bodies of systematizedknowledge. For example. engineering draws heavilyfrom physics and chemistry; agriculture fromchemistry and biology; and medicine fromchemistry and molecular biology. Pedagogydepends upon the basic sciences of psychology,sociology, anthropology, history. and philosophy.Elements of knowledge about learning and develop-ment. the sociology and anthropology of the schooland community, the economics of schooling, andabout existence, Weltansicht. and knowledge itselfare all fibers of the intellectual web in which peda-gogical issues are discussed. resolved, and theresolutions justified.

These pedagogical studies can be grouped intothree categories, depending upon the nature oftheir content: empirical and correlational: em-pirical and noncorrelational: and nonempirical.The first consists of pedagogical psychology.sociology. anthropology, and economics. Theircontent consists largely of facts. definitions. and thecorrelates of independent variables. For example,we learn in educational sociology that on theaverage disruptive behavior of a lowersocial-classchild is more harshly dealt with than that of a child

of more favored classes. From a study of peda-gogical anthropology we learn that the mores ofminority groups are sometimes at odds with therules and regulations of the school. If one mustdecide in a given situation how to handle a problemof conduct, or the reticence of a minority child todo something he or she has been asked to do. a wisedecision is more likely if the ways of the social classor the minority group are known. It is the academicpedagogical studies that supply the knowledge basefor such practical judgments.

Pedagogical history is somewhat different fromthcse empirical studies. While history is an em-pirical discipline it provides no correlational find-ings. but instead facts about past pedagogicalundertakings. It tells us not only about the forcesand influences that have shaped the institution ofschooling but also about the ideas, the hopes, andthe struggles of individuals who have devoted them .selves to the task of providing education for all thechildren. Its content is largely factual and descrip'live. yielding few if any empirical generalizations.

Philosophy, on the other hand. is a nonempiricalstudy. It consists largely of an examination andcriticism of the mores of society as they affectschooling, of the nature and types of knowledge, ofa broad context of thought within which peda-gogical knowledge is viewed and criticized, and ofskill in the analysis of language and fundamentalideas about the human condition.

It is interesting to note again that in the last cen-tury. at the very beginning of pedagogical schools.history and philosophy of education were considered of primary importance. They had statuswithin the university programs and were the domi-nant subjects. Clinical knowledge typically constituted methods courses and was not looked uponwith as much favor. often being taught in institutesrather than in the university. Today the order ofimportance is being reversed with more and moreattention being given to clinical subjects and less

7669

and less to academic ones. Most of the State andfederally financed research is committed to the ex.pansion of clinical knowledge. In the light of publicdemand for more effective instruction this emphasisupon clinical research is understandable. But interms of long range development of pedagogy theneglect of research in the academic areas is to saythe least disconcerting.

Not all of the loss of prestige by academic peda-gogical subjects can be attributed to the demandfor more effective instruction. Most of the loss is at-tributable to the fact that the usefulness of aca-demic pedagogical knowledge to teachers and otherschool personnel is understood neither by those whoespouse academic pedagogy nor by those who op-pose it. Those who have attempted to justifyacademic pedagogical subjects have done so withthe general claim that they are theoretical and thattheory is the most practical fotm of knowledge. Yetthe question of what is meant by theory has seldombeen explored, nor has the bearing of theory uponclassroom practice been attended to. It is the pur-pose of this chapter to explore the nature ofacademic pedagogical knowledge and to set forthits utility.

What Is Theory?

When we speak of theory. just what do we mean?This question can be answered by simply providinga definition and then showing whether or not aca-demic pedagogical knowledge is in fact theoreticalas defined. Another approach is to give examples ofhow "theory" is used and from these examples ar-rive at the nature of theory and its utility. In short,we can look to see what is meant by "theory" not on-ly in pedagogical discourse but also in other fields.This approach is more desirable than that of simplygiving a formal definition, for the latter isnecessarily more arbitrary than definitions derivedfrom the use of "theory."

"Theory" is used in a number of ways; sometrivial and some significant. The following are fourtrivial uses with which we shall not be concerned:

I . to refer to abstract and unfamiliar language.as when it is said: "Don't give me all thattheory."

2, to mention a conjecture, as when we say, "Mytheory is that he didn't study for the examination."

3. to refer to a plan we have in mind for attain-ing an objective; for example, a teacher says:"My theory is that we can increase student appredation of art by placing pictures and otherart objects in the classroom rather than bygiving courses in art appreciation."

4. to refer to a verifiable proposition that has notyet been tested empirically, as when we speakof our hunch that feeblemindedness is pre.mature senility as a theory.

In addition, there are five usages of varying degreesof significance, as follows:

1. to refer to propositions that explain certainphenomena as, for example, those that comprise the theory of light

2. to refer to a system of ideals and a set ofhunches for realizing them, as when we speakof the humanistic theory of teaching

3. to refer to an extensive and detailed explica-tion of a concept; for example, Dewey's theoryof democracy

4. to refer to a set of principles from which prac-tice is derived; for example, the psycholin-guistic thcory of reading which embraces a setof concepts and principles upon which todevelop modes of reading instruction

5. to refer to the codified principles of adiscipline, as when we speak of chemicaltheory.

Theory as Explanatory

Workers in almost all scientific disciplines havesought to develop theory in the sense of number LTo understand this sophisticated meaning of theoryis to see that the relation of theory to practice ismore indirect and tenuous than is generally sup-posed.

Let us consider first the Darwinian theory ofevolution. Darwin had made extensive observationsof the different species of animals and plants overthe earth. especially on the voyage of the Beagle.He had also noted with equal interest the fossil remains of animals and plants buried in the variousgeological strata, indicating the dynamics of lifeforms throughout eons of time.

The problem confronted by Darwin was how toaccount for all these different forms of life and theemergence of new forms from one geological periodto another. It occurred to him while reading

70 t t 77

Malthus that in the struggle for existence amongmembers of a species some are more favored byvariation than others to cope with changes in theenvironment. This meant that with environmentalchanges some members of a species were lost andothers survived. Over time the surviving formsmultiply and establish themselves. Thus the speciesis modified and a new and permanent variety isslowly established. Observations about the forms oflife were explained by changes in circumstances inwhich some variations survived and others did not.Thus by variation and natural selection thedynamics of forms was explained.

It should be noted that the utility of the theory ofevolution was simply to explain a set of conclusionsthat had been reached; namely. that various formsof life had existed at different geological periodsand that in the present period there is also a multi-plicity of forms. How these came into existence wasa question answered by the theory of evolution. Thepractical value of the theory. if it can be said tohave had any, is simply that it explained how lifeforms had come to be as they are. No use could bemade of it by turning the theory to an economic ad-vantage in the production of better crops. animalforms. or whatever. Yet it has shaped in largemeasure the basic mentality of the Western Worldfor the past hundred years.

"rhe biomedical theory of disease is another in-teresting explanatory system. The observable symp-toms of disease are posture, facial expression. color.expressions of pain. physical disability. irritability.and general discomfort. These symptoms werenoted by early man as indications of sickness and inextreme cases impending death. Sickness has beenexplained in various ways throughout history. Bio-medical theory is the modern, Western explanation.' According to this theory. disease is theorganic dysfunctioning of the body. and if thedysfunctioning is not at the biochemical level theterm "disease" does not apply. Within the frame-work of this theory medical science has been able todevelop a taxonomy of diseases from the findings ofpathological studies.

Although the biomedical theory of disease hasbeen remarkably successful in alleviating the dis-comforts of illness and the reduction of death fromalmost all diseases. it has been criticized for itsfailure to explain psychological illness. Defenders ofthe biomedical theory have been quick to point outthat psychological problems rooted in the dysfunc-

tioning of the nervous system or the biochemicalsystem are rightly diseases and can be treatedultimately by substantive means. Other problems ofbehavior such as character disorders. dependencybehavior, social maladaptations, social deviancies,and problems of living are pure and simplebehavioral problems and should be treated bypsychologists, theologians. and counselors and arenot within the domain of the science and art ofmedicine. This exclusion of behavioral problemsfrom the biomedical theory of disease has beencountered by arguments seeking to create a bio-psychosocial theory that would be more compre-hensive.? The modern theory of disease is thereforein a state of flux and is likely to remain that way forsome time to come.

We are not concerned here, however, with thecontroversy about the theory of disease, but ratherwith the utility of the theory. It is to be noted that,like theory in the foregoing fields. the biomedicaltheory serves to explain phenomena, to make senseout of that which is either puzzling or disturbing. Itexplains disease, it does not produce remedies ortreatments. These are typically developed by clini-cians and pharmaceutical scientists who neverthe-less approach their task within the framework of thebiochemical theory.

Medical scientists have been able to get inside ofthe black box, as it were, and to explain the symp-toms of illness in terms of pathological findings.Psychologists have attempted to follow the same ap.proach. but have been handicapped by the factthat the inside of the black box is not accessible.Consequently. the psychologist must hypothesizewhat goes on inside.

Experimentally. as far as learning is concerned.the psychologist attempts to relate responses to en-vironmental factors and conditions under whichthey occur. Thorndike found that as the cat at-tempted to escape from the puzzle box it finallyreaches a point, after many trials, at which the cor-rect response is made directly upon being placedagain in the box. In short, incorrect responses arenumerically large for the first escape and graduallydiminish from one escape to another until theanimal makes the correct response on first trial.From these observations he formulated his threelaws of learning readiness. exercise. and effect.These were empirical laws derived from observationof animal behavior. To explain these laws heresorted to physiological entities: namely the

7871

neurons and synaptic connections. But the explana-tory value of these entities was never established.

Since Thorndike, several learning theorists haveattempted to account for the learned relationshipbetween the response and the environmental situation by reference to some sort of intervening varia-ble; e.g., Tolman's needs and goals and Hull'sstimulus trace and habit strength. A striking excep-tion is Skinner, who ruled out any attempt to ex-plain learning by reference to what goes on in theblack box. He did not deny that something goes on,but refused to speculate about it.

Now, we see in the case of psychology the sameuse of theory that was observed in the other fields.Theory, in the form of intervening variables, is usedto explain that which is strange, puzzling, or dis-turbing. It should be noted, however, that such ex-planations have not been accorded scientific status.But these "theories," even were they established,would not provide us with prescriptions for ac-complishing given ends. These are developed at amuch lower level of abstraction and intellectualconstruction.

Many other theories could be cited from thebiological sciences, physical sciences, andbehavioral sciences. But these few casts are typicalof what would be found were we to recite a more ex-tended list. We can therefore say that a theory, inthis sophisticated sense, is a set of concepts andprinciples that explains some phenomena andwhich in its most highly developed form, as intheoretical physics. enables us to derive proposi-tions testable by observation and in consequence toestablish unsuspected relationships among observa-ble variables. This form of theory is explanatory,not prescriptive.

What then do pedagogical authorities meanwhen they ask what is the relationship betweentheory and practice? Or when they assert thattheory is practical? It seems reasonable to assumethat they are using the term "theory" in a differentsense from the use of the term in other empiricallybased professions and disciplines. For it is clearfrom the foregoing analysis that theory is not prac-tical in any sense other than that it satisfies ourdesire for explanations and for an intellectual basisfrom which to derive relations among phenomenaas yet unknown. If there were genuine scientificpedagogical theories, and there is none, they wouldyield prescriptions of what to do in neither class-

72

room nor school, but would serve to explainspecified phenomena.

Theory as Ideology

"Theory" in the number 2 sense designates apedagogical ideology, a formula put forth as ageneral remedy for educational ills. An ideologyconsists of a network of loosely defined concepts lac-ed with undefined values. a set of concepts thatdetermines social reality for its believers,' conceptsdefined so loosely that failure to achieve their pro.mises can be explained away. Ideology does notlend itself to an objective analysis of a situation butaims either to justify it or to replace it with a newand untried reality. The child centered movementof yesteryears, or open education today. are expres-sions of a liberal ideology, exposing the assumptionsand biases of conventional practices rather thanassessing the pedagogical condition and improvingit by instituting tested programs and practices. Asrelated to practice, an ideology is little more thanan ill-assorted set of hunches.

What practitioners object to when they exclaimagainst such theory, e.g., open education orpsychosocial humanism, is that the ideas threatento destroy the grounds of their activities vouched forby their professional experience. So long as ideasare perceived as an improvement in their activities,or as replacement of them by others compatiblewith their general situation, ideas are not likely tobe decried as theory.

In the absence of thorough preparation inclinical and academic pedagogy, ideologies moveinto an intellectual vacuum, giving rise to oneradical innovation after another. These ideologiesare put forth as if they were valid theories, justifiedby facts, values, impeccable logic. and theories oflearning and development. Today, as in much ofthe past, pedagogical thought is rife withideologies. It is easy for the proponents of anyideology to claim superiority over the existing stateof school affairs and to make its case plausible aslong as no test of its claims is required.

This is precisely the predicament of the peda-gogical profession today. Its intellectual life is

saturated with struggles among conflicting ideolo'gies, unmindful that in a profession. as in society,too many ideologies lead in the end to the denial of

79

every system of meaning. Partly because ofideological conflicts pedagogical faculties are todayon the verge of defeatism, consoled in some cases bythe thought that perhaps a coherent prngram nfpedagogical education is undesirable anyway.

It would be shortsighted to dismiss ideolngy outof hand, for it can be a source of speculativethought, enabling the profession to think beyondthe grounds of its dominant conceptual boundaries.All points nf view, if coherent. possibly have some-thing to contribute to our understanding of humanlearning and lc-aching, and each also suffers omis-sions and thus fails to embrace the totality of peda-gogical phenomena. But no point of view, howeverconsistent and promising in application, can betaken as inherently valid. Its ideas must stand up tothe rignrs of research and be warranted at the levelof practice. or else treated as mere speculation. Justas children should not be subjected to the vagaries ofindividual teachers so should they not Ise requiredto ur dergo unwarranted programs and practicesemanating from notions that transcend the conven-tional order. The place of ideologies is not at theforefront of pedagogical training and practice butrather in the intellectual seedbed of those who areworking at the cutting edge of pedagogical re-search. seeking to advance the knowledge base ofpedagogy.

Theory as Explication of Concepts

In some pedagngical studies. particularly philo-sophy, explication of concepts is considered theory.A concept, typically one composed of several sub-ordinate concepts. is analyzed and each componentis interpreted so extensively as to expand the con-cept's meaning into a systematic essay. A classic ex-ample is G. E. Moores elaboration of the utilitariantheory of ethics in which he answers the question ofwhether there is any general characteristic which allright or good actions have in common.' He setsforth the concept of voluntary action and then goeson to show how pleasure characterizes a givenvoluntary action as right. if and only if no other ac-tion the individual could have taker would haveproduced more pleasure under the circumstances.

A case from pedagogical literature is Dewey'stheory of democracy as set forth in his Democracyand Education.' With far more care than we cangive here Dewey elaborates the concept of demo-

cracy and the relation it bears to the quality ofeducation. He hegins with the claim that educationdepends upon the quality of group life. But therearc all sorts of groups business, professional.family, gang. robbers, or what have you. So whatkind of group life best fosters education? it is onethat maximizes both the number and types ofshared interests and the interchange among groupscomprising the society. And these, according toDewey. are the earmarks of a democratic communi-ty. A gang. for example. minimizes its associationswith other groups and restricts the sharing of in-terests within itself. It is hence undemocratic andprovides an undesirable context for education. Aclassroom optimizes its quality of life and educationas it provides increasingly for shared experienceand human associations within and beyond theclassroom.

In his elaboration of the concept of democracyDewey tells us only in very general terms how thesetwo criteria of democratic life are to be realized inthe school. Among other things. we are to abandonthe notion that utilitarian studies are inferior to so-called cultural studies, to develop a curriculum thatmakes thinking its central feature. and to em-phasize teaching and learning as inquiry. But justhow these exhortations are to be implemented is notsuggested. A teacher who understood Dewey'stheory of democracy, who clearly recognized whatit called for. would still not know specifically whatto do in order to put it into practice. So. whatDewey gives us is a rich and insightful explication ofthe cnncept of democracy that, like other notions oftheory thus far discussed. is operationally ground-less. However, the failure to suggest operations isnot surprising. for it is not the province of philo-sophy to provide procedures and techniques forputting its theoretical constructions into practice.

Yet philosophy can make a significant contribu-tion to the teacher's stock of skills. although thisfact is seldom recognized. Philosophy is an explica-tory study par excellence. There is no otherpedagogical discipline that depends upon an ex-haustive analysis of concepts as its primary intellec-tual tool.' This analytic tool can be constantlyuseful to the teacher as he or she carries on the pro-cess of teaching. It can be said with little risk of em-barrassment that skills in explication are as impor-tant perhaps as any skill used in classroom perfor-mance. especially at the higher levels of instruction.But the program of pedagogical education has

So73

given all too little attention to the development ofthese skills.

Theory as a Body of Prescriptive Principles

"Theory' is sometimes used to designate a set ofpropositions that tell how to accomplish a par-ticular objective. Usually these are correlationalprinciples functionally harmonized to a set of objec-tives. They tell the consequence of a given way ofbehaving in a particular set of circumstances. Forexample, Morrison's theory of teaching distin-guishes three types of learning outcomes- under -standing, appreciation, and ability. These give riseto different modes of teaching, but certain prin-ciples are common to all modes. as follows:

- Objectives are to be identified as a guide toteaching, testing, and learning.

- The learning cycle of each mode consists ofstimulus. assimilation, and reaction.

-All learning begins with unfocused activitiesand the teacher must exercise patience as learn-ing gets underway.

- Teaching is to be direct as determined by thetype of objective. Reading. for example, is nottaught by lecturing but by engaging the stu-dent in practice.

- Learning comes from study - "learning byone's own effort."

- An adequate apperceptive mass must be estab-lished: new things are learned by relating themto what one already knows.'

This sketch is not even the bare bones of Morrison'stheory, which includes a number of other elementssuch as on-task behavior, formula for masterylearning and teaching, and control of pupil prog-ress. But this brief sketch, although incomplete,gives a rough idea of prescriptive theory.

Theory in this sense was foreshadowed in thepreceding chapter where condition-consequenceprinciples were discussed as a form of pedagogicalknowledge. All that is meant by this notion oftheory is a generalized plan of operation togetherwith its conceptual underpinnings.

Theory as a Body of Descriptive Principles

Another conception has it that theory consists ofa body of concepts and principles woven partlyfrom the substance of academic disciplines and

74

partly from pedagogical research rooted in thesedisciplines. These concepts and principles comprisesystematized bodies of knowledge referred to aseducational sociology, anthropology, psychology,philosophy, and so on, and are theoretical in thesense that. with few exceptions. they are seldomrelated to the classroom work of the teacher. Con-sider the following statements as empirical prin-ciples from educational sociology:

- "The higher the parents' status, the better thechild's equipment for retaining his status, butthe less his chances of improving it (simply be-cause there is nowhere to go from high statusbut down)."

-"The child's chances for upward mobility aredirectly influenced by his experience withinthe family. For example. the more the child isinvolved with his parents and other adults andthe less with his peers, the more likely his up-ward mobility."

-"Those ethnic groups that value learning, pro-mote early independence of children, and de-fer gratifications are particularly likely to ad-vance in the class system."

-"The further lower-class youths go in school,the less vocational their training, the more op-portunities open to them and the more deliber-ate and less fortuitous is their choice of a firstjob.-

- "In broad terms, class continuity is more con-stant in a society than interclass mobility."'

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to justifythese principles in a program of pedagogical educa-tion on the grounds that they are useful in the art ofteaching. Yet there are good reasons why theyshould be included in any defensible program,

Are These Types of Theories Useful toSchool Personnel?

When the claim is made that academic peda-gogical knowledge is theoretical and that it is

thereby practical, which of the foregoing senses oftheory is meant and in what context and for whatpurpose is it practical? Since explanatory theory isseldom found. if ever, in the science of pedagogy.there is little likelihood that reference is made tothis type of theory when academic pedagogy is de-fended. But even if explanatory theory were in-tended. the claim would be untenable because. aswe have amply seen, such theory is useless except to

81

explain some set of phenomena or to predict newrelationships among phenomena,

The second use of the term theory, namely, as anideology. is apparently not what is meant by theoryin academic pedagogical studies, for these studies,with the possible exception of philosophy, do notdeal with ideologies. However, if this were what wasmeant by theory, the claim of teachers that theoryis not practical would be easy to defend, for anideology at best is an ill-assorted bundle of hunchesabout what might conceivably be done in the class-room but without any empirical validation of themeans of achieving its ends.

With the exception of philosophy, theory as ex-plication can be ruled out of consideration for thesimple reason that other studies give little or no at-tendon to this view of theory, nor do they engage toany significant degree in explication itself.

It is unlikely that a body of prescriptive principlesis what is meant by theory in academic pedagogy,for such pedagogy does not include prescriptionsbut rather descriptive propositions about howthings are. verified to some degree and operational-ly groundless.

The concepts and principles comprising descrip-tive knowledge most nearly conforms to the contentof academic pedagogical studies. save philosophy.and is perhaps what is frequently meant by "theory"when theory is said to be practical. But, in anyevent, academic pedagogy yields few. if any, rulesof teaching behavior.

The Utility of Academic Pedagogical Knowledge

The upshot of the foregoing discussion of theoryis that academic pedagogical studies are not prac-tical in the clinical sense. They yield few, if any.principles that tell how to attain a given effect.Teachers are correct when they assert that whatthey learn in the so-called foundations of educationis not helpful in managing the classroom and carry-ing on instructional activities. But this should notbe taken to mean, as it often has been. thatacademic pedagogy is useless. On the contrary. itprovides a body of descriptive principles which tellhow things are, statements describing relationshipsbetween factors of the environment and the growthof children, the impact of the socioeconomic en-vironment upon the school and the teacher's work.

Let us now face the real question: ft what is thecontent of academic pedagogy to be used?

Academic pedagogical knowledge functions in atleast three ways:

- as the wellspring of our hunches-- as the substance out of which policies are

formedas ingredients entering into and shaping ourdecisions.

Just as discourse never exhausts its subject mat-ter, so thinking never exhausts its knowledge. Thereis always something left over, unspoken, andperhaps unspeakable. This reservoir of hidden in-tellectual resources gives rise to "happy thoughts"about what to do, how to handle situations, how tosolve problems. or whatever. We are not born withthese intellectual resources. They are acquiredperhaps as by-products of our experiences that sink.so to speak, into the deeper layers of the self. Fromthis wellspring come our most productive hunches.As Dewey said, we do not deliberately bring themabout; they just happen to us.

While we have no scientific evidence of how sucha reservoir of intellectual resources is developed, wedo know that individuals who have little or no ex-perience in a given area of knowledge are unlikelyto have fruitful hunches. An extensive literature at-tests the fact that almost everyone steeped in theknowledge of a discipline has had the experience ofsuch ideas occurring at off moments after havingworked intensively at a problem. It seems reason-able to assume that without some sort of intellectualresource not immediately expressible thesemoments of illumination would not occur. It mustbe recognized. however, that clinical knowledgecontributes to this function perhaps no less thanacademic knowledge.

The other two uses of academic pedagogicalknowledge are more direct and evident. The class-room is not the sole domain of teachers. for they arenecessarily caught up in networks of organizationsand community relationships from which policiesand actions arise that affect directly themselves.students, and school operations. What is true ofteachers in this regard is no less true of all peda-gogical personnel. To take part in efforts of theprofession to turn these influences in constructivedirections is the responsibility of teachers as well asof administrators and other personnel. if they areto understand and influence these social and

8275

Ill

political forces, the personnel must have commandof the elements of academic pedagogical studies.

It is equally important to recognize that teachersare also daily involved in the making of decisionsand from time to time in the formulation ofpolicies. Just as it is necessary to have certainacademic pedagogical knowledge to understandand participate in the network of relationships thatinvolve the school, so is it equally important thatthe teacher have such knowledge for the purpose ofengaging in the process of forming policies andmaking decisions.

Up to this point we have proceeded as if therewere common understanding about the meaning of"policy" and "decision," Since there is probably nocommon understanding of these terms. it is in orderto briefly indicate their use. By a policy we meanrules by which to behave in a set of similar situa-dons.' For example, teachers and school authoritiesare confronted by a variety of instances in which thequestion of whether to promote a child to anothergrade must be considered and answered. To con-sider each and every case as though it were uniquewould require endless time and energy. To obviatethis possibility a set of rules is worked out so that topromote or not to promote in a given case dependsupon how it fits the rules. Such a set of rules is apolicy.

It is a well-known fact that as institutions becomemore complex it becomes necessary to deal less andless with each case as a distinct problem and to de-pend more and more upon rules that define the ac-tions to be taken in all similar cases. Thus bureau-cracies are the mother of policies. The more highlyorganized the school, the more the teacher is in-volved in the formulation of policies and in the ap-plication of them to particular instances. In peda'gogicai work there are policies about promotions,about student conduct, about the uses of thelibrary, about participation in athletics, aboutfaculty conduct, about bussing, about program re-quirements, and so on without end. Sometimesthese policies are crescive, as when they are formedbit by bit over time; more often they are deliberate-ly constructed by teachers and other school per-sonnel, by parent-school committees, by profes-sional organizations, by boards of education, andby State and Federal governments.

It should be emphasized again that the tise ofacademic pedagogical knowledge. unlike clinicalknowledge, is not appropriate for the development

76

of skills for either classroom or interaction withpeers and laypersons. its value lies in the fact that itcan enhance the chances that wise policies will bemade about children, educational programs. com-munity relations, evaluation of va- :otts features ofthe pedagogical enterprise, and so on. School per.sonnel, including teachers, who are uninformed inacademic pedagogy are simply at a disadvantagewhen they have to deal with the political and socialissues in which the school is necessarily involved.when they must confront pressure groups of onekind or another who are either protesting ordefending a given policy or set of policies, or whenconfronted by the necessity for developing policiesor programs to alleviate anxieties of various seg-ments of the school community.

Academic pedagogical knowledge is also usefulin decisionmaking. But in order to understand thefunction of knowledge in this respect it is necessaryto clarify what is meant by "decision." A decisionmarks the termination of thought and the point atwhich action may be taken. The need for a decisionarises out of a situation in which the individual doesnot know what course of action to take.

There are two kinds of decisions. The first kind iscomparatively simple and is made by the applica-tion of policies to particular cases. If we have aschool policy with respect to class attendance and astudent is absent, we know what to do provided weknow the circumstances and whether those circum-stances come within the rules of the policy. if theydo, a straightforward decision can be made with 1k-de or no further consideration.

However, there are situations for which nopolicies exist. if a teacher, or some other member ofthe school personnel, is confronted by a situation ofthis kind, he, or she must make a decision and thatdecision should rest on as much evidence as possi-ble. if, for example. there is a school activity suchas the traditional celebration of a particular day,say May Day, and a child refuses to participate inthe activities. the teacher may be in a quandary asto what to do with respect to that particular stu-dent. However, if the teacher knows that the childcomes from a minority group. let us say somereligious sect or some minority that does not ap-prove of the exercises. the teacher will likely treatthe child differently if he or she is aware of thecultural orientation of the child. A decision in sucha case may very well be different from what it wouldbe were the child from a group quite in harmony

with the exercises. In the latter case, the teacherwould have grounds for suspecting that the childhad ulterior reasons. and might seek further infor-mation.

In the Foregoing case a decision situation is some-what similar to a problem situation. In a problemsituation data are collected and hunches are triedout in imagination. Finally the most defensiblehunch is tested, and, if it satisfies the test, is takenas a warranted conclusion. Decision situations, likeproblems, require information for their resolution.But the two situations are fundamentally different.The termination of thought in a problem situationsettles a question of belief: in a decision situation itsettles a course of action. Unlike a conclusion. adecision is neither true nor false but rather wise orunwise.

When we speak of decisionmaking for teachersand most school personnel below the level of majoradministrative positions, we do not have referenceto sophisticated models emanating from decisionsciences. In recent years an extensive body of scien-tific knowledge has been developed concerningdecision and policy analysis, much of it stemmingfrom research on strategies and decisions in gametheory. Those of us in pedagogy have not infre-quently become enamored of developments in otherfields that have limited application to our own,and, despite this limited utility, have attempted to

build a complex structure of procedures that in theend proved to be more burdensome and less effec-tive in pedagogical work than we had anticipated.

In the preparation of administrators for univer-sities and school systems as well as governmentalagencies and research firms, there is probably goodreason for intensive training in the decision sciencesand policy analysis. Pedagogical schools should beprepared to equip school administrators in thetechniques and procedures of the decision sciences.

However, there is little reason to emphasize thissort of preparation for teachers. This seemsjustified on two grounds. First, many decisions thatteachers make are for situations that are constantlyrecurring, and the teacher soon learns, on the basisof the recurring evidence, that such and such is thebest course of action to take. In the second place.many other decisions are made by reference topolicies well-formulated and understood.

Nevertheless, teachers need to have experience inthe course of their preparation in the use ofacademic pedagogical knowledge in formulatingpolicies and decisions. This means that a case studyand field approach to the teaching of academicpedagogical studies should be given serious con-sideration as a way of helping the teacher not onlyto understand the knowledge itself but also how tomake use of it in all sorts of decision situations.

Summary

We have examined the claim that academic pedagogical studies aretheoretical and for this reason practical. We found it necessary to ex-amine this claim at some length in order to clear the ground for adiscussion of how academic pedagogy can contribute to the activities ofthe school personnel. The analysis of the various conceptions of theoryenables us to see that theory in these senses, save prescriptive theory.have little or no clinical utility. If this analysis is correct, then it is clear-ly indicated that academic pedagogy must be taught for other purposes.These purposes. as we have seen, are to provide a seedbed of knowledge,to provide information for policy formulation and decisionmaking. Ifthese studies are taught with these purposes in mind, and if they aredefinitely related in field experiences and in case studies to these pur-poses. they can come into their own and prove their worth.

8.177

Chapter 81. Engei, George L. "The Need fora New Medical Model: A

Challenge for Biomedicine." Science. Vol. 196. No. 4286.April 1977, pp. 129.136.

2. -Op. cit.3. Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia. New York: Hair.

court. Brace. 1936. pp. 49ff.

4. Moore. G. E. Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.1912.

5. Dewey. John. Democracy and Education. New York:Macmillan, 1916. pp. 100.102.

6. Wilson. John. Thinking with Concepts. New York: Cam.bridge University Press. 1963.

78

7. Morrison. Henry C. The Practice of Teaching in theSecondary School. Chicago: Chicago University Press.1926. pp. 161.179.

8. Berelson. Bernard. and Gary A. Steiner. Human Deka°.ior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings. New York: Harcourt. Brace and World. 1964, pp. 468ff.

9. Benne, Kenneth D.. and Max Birnbaum, Teaching andLearning about Science and Social Policy. Boulder.Colo.: Social Science Education Consortium. 1978, pp.25.34: Raup, R. B.. Kenneth D. Benne. B. OthanelSmith. and G. Axtelle, The Improvement of Practical In.telligence. New York: Teachers College Press. 1963.

passim.

S5

Chapter 9

Teaching and the Domains of TrainingWhat is teaching? is it an amorphous behavior so

pliable that it can take on any form whipped up bythe winds of doctrine? Or does it have a definitecharacter, varying little with conditions, and strict-ly limited as to form? Implicit in this issue are cer-tain fundamental questions: Whether in researchand training to model the teacher or use the teacheras the model; whether teaching is a derived or indi-genous form of behavior having its own structureand amenable to study and improvement in its ownright.

That teaching can take almost any form is a pre-supposition of much current thinking. This pre-supposition is here directly held in question. Effortsto formulate models of teaching such as behaviormodification and nondirective teaching reflect thisassumption. The multiplicity of models ofteaching, one compilation consisting of 16,' puzzlesthe mind and makes one wonder whether the pover-ty of pedagogical education as well as muchresearch is attributable to divisions of opinionabout the nature of teaching itself.

Is teaching so complex, so many-sided, sovariable with circumstances that it must be concep-tualized in many ways? How can research resultsfrom a multiplicity of models be synthesized into asystem of practice when a particular practice isitself held to be peculiar to a model? Or is it likelythat behavior modification, nondirective teaching,and so on are not models at all but simply an exag-geration of certain components of teaching? Do themodels spring from psychological, moral, andpolitical doctrines and beliefs justified only by amodicum of data and the sentiment of logicality? isit advantageous to view teaching as a pedagogicalformula out forth as a logical consequence ofallegedly sound principles of some discipline such aspsychology or philosophy? Have we dissolved thequestionwhat is teachingin a pool of models?

Teaching As Indigenous Behavior

Teaching is an ancient behavioral structure; itsorigin lost in antiquity. It antedates schools. and so

far as is knewn, it was neither created nor enactedbut evolved out of crude necessity as humankindbegan to pass on its folkways and mores to theyoung. Noninstinctual behavior was perhaps firstlearned by imitation, and as the complexity of theculture increased teaching began to take shape,first, as primitive ways of showing and telling, andthen gradually, as a behavioral structure to servethe interests of the group; the whole course of itsevolution guided perhaps from the beginning bysome obscure sense of tribal welfare.

Some idea of the early notion of teaching can begained from the history of the word. "Teach" comesfrom the Teutonic term "taikjan," meaning toshow. To teach is to show someone something. Theterm "token" is a conjugate of "taikjan" meaning asign or symbol. "Teach" and "token" are relatedetymologically. To teach is to show, point to. callattention to acts, events, objects by signs or sym-bols. This primitive notion of "teach" appears to besimple bu. its complex ramifications can be seenfrom the following uses of "show:"

to reveal one's feelings, as the teacher showedhis dissatisfaction with the work or his anger inthe situationto direct a person's attention to something, asthe teacher showed them a pictureto guide behavior, as the teachers showed themhow to place their fingers on the keyboard

to make clear analytically, as the teachershowed them the parts of the flower

to make clear by comparing, as the teachershowed them the difference between a rectan-gle and a squareto make clear by a series of operations, as theteacher showed them how to connect lights in aseries or how to work the problemto make evident by logical steps, as the teachershowed them how to prove the proposition.t

By trial and error, showing and telling turnedout to be more successful in inducing learning thanmere imitation or situational learning without in-tervention. These successful modes were retainedand through the ages became fixed in culture afterculture.

86 79

It is plausible that ways of obtaining food,clothing, and shelter were first passed on by exam-pie. although not deliberately, and learned by im-itation much as speech is learned today. But thesymbolic elements of the tribal culture- -cere-monies and incantationswere likely instilleddeliberately. These were rituals, and teaching hadto be explicit to assure preciseness of performance.Language as an instructional medium becameprominent because ceremonies and incantationswere partly vocal. Speech also probably became in-creasingly used in teaching as deviations in per-formance were noted. and corrected by calling at-tention to them and showing how to correct the er-ror. These individuals medicine men, sorcerers.priests. call them what you will were probably thefirst teachers although not designated as such. Asprimitive societies advanced, these early teachersdeveloped priest hoods. and in time some in-dividuals were given special instruction for admis-sion to the priesthood. Teaching then probablybecame more formal and more explicit as a distinctform of behavior.

Early teaching foreshadowed today's moresophisticated teaching. Whether it occurred in thetribe or family, teaching almost certainly consistedof a learner in a situation. being shown or told howto do something and corrected and approved or dis-approved, depending upon his or her performance.or else. allowing learners to work themselves out ofsituations with little intervention.

The point is that teaching is not a derivedphenomenon. It was not evolved from psychologicalconcepts and principles or from the principles ofany other discipline. Just as the principles of cook-ing cannot be derived from studying eating, so theprinciples of teaching cannot come from the studyof learning.' Throughout most of the current cen-tury the prevailing pedagogical opinion has held.however, that in order to know how to teach onemust first know what learning is and the conditionsunder which it occurs. Since psychology is thesource of such knowledge, modes of teaching, so itwas believed, can and should be derived from it.This view has the ring of logical certainty, for if weknow how to create these conditions it follows thatwe thereby know how to teach. This argument isnot only logical but it also contains an element oftruth. Teaching certainly has been improved bystudying its components, and many of these im-provements can be traced to psychological research

80

itself and to the use of psychological concepts andprinciples in pedagogical research. But all this is afar cry from the notion that teaching has been orcan be derived from psychological knowledge.

It is well-known that the practical arts originatedlong before the sciences that provide insights fortheir improvement. The domestication of plantsand animals preceded the development of agricul-tural sciences, and. while these sciences haverevolutionized the production of food, the art offarming is in its basic elements unchanged. Treat-ment of the sick began long before the science ofmedicine emerged. Yet the art of the physician isbasically the same as it was at the beginningdiag-nosing and treating. Only the knowiedge base, rna-terials. techniques. and procedures have changed.It is the same with the art of teaching.

The psychology of learning itself has beendeveloped, unwittingly to be sure, from experi-mental conditions that were replicas of primitiveteaching situations. Thorndike contrived puzzleboxes and mazes for his experiments that placedanimals in situations from which they learned asthey escaped by trial and error. The animals learnedby working themselves out of situationsrudimen-tary problem solving. Skinner's experiments werebuilt upon Thorndike's work, refining it by intro-ducing reinforcers, a form of rudimentary interven-tion. to shape the animal's random movements in apredetermined direction. These experimental con-ditions are mirrored by primitive teaching situa-tions where the individual learned either by copingwith a situation or by being shown or told how to dosomething. In other words, these studies of learningcould be presented as studies of primitive teaching.

The Prototype of Teaching

Teaching is not only a natural form of behaviorbut also an interdependent system. In its primitiveform it included the components of its most highlydeveloped state: agent, subjects. ends. and circum-stances. The circumstances consist of materialmeans tools and other paraphernalia overwhich the agent has control; and conditionsmaterial setting under which the material meansarc used and over which the agent has much lesscontrol. The ends are abilities and other disposi-tions engendered in the subjects. The agent is abearer of knowledge superior to that of the subjectsand who guides the learning.

87

In the advanced stage of teaching its componentsbecome so ramified and interrelated that teachingbecomes a very intricate phenomenon, not only ex-hibiting a multiplicity of new relations among itscomponents but also involving ends not served in itsearly development.

Research is enabling us to understand the compo-nents as an interdependent system. While researchis a long way from giving a description of teachingin its total variety, recognition of its components asfoci of research is not a mean achievement. We shallnot attempt to discuss the system in the context ofresearch findings, for that will require more carethan can be given here. Rather ours is a simple in-terest in showing the interdependence of the com-ponents.

The material setting no less than the materialwith which they work influence learners andteachers alike. The interdependence of the learnerand the material environment varies with the levelof personal development. The very young child haslittle capacity to cushion the impact of environ-mental stimuli. The older child can more easilycounter this influence by directing attention toother aspects of his or her world. Thus the materialsurroundings of the nursery school and kinder.garten are more important than those of the highschool, although they are not to be neglected eventhere.

Likewise. the teacher as agent is influenced by thecircumstances of work. What teachers have to workwith and the conditions of their work affect whatthey do. what they think is possible. and their feel-ings of satisfaction, and these in turn affect thelearners. However, the teacher can modify thematerial setting, although narrowly. and therebyaffect the students. The characteristics ofstudents achievement. level of .;evelopment.capacity and interests affect the choice of ends.The ends-in-view influence the behavior of teachers,their choice of materials of instruction, and howthey are to be used. The learner's reaction to thesein turn affects the teacher's decision about what todo next. These components form a network of rela-tionships so intricate, so wrapped in personal per-spectives and interpersonal relationships, so per-vaded with symbolic and linguistic behavior as tochallenge our research knowledge as well as ourunderstanding.

Subsystem: Teacher-Student Interaction

Within the interdependent system is a subsystemof interaction between teacher and students. This isthe heart of the system with respect to pedagogicaltraining, for the skids of teaching are exercisedprimarily in this part of the system. The teacheracts and the learner reacts to the teacher and in sodoing influences the teacher's subsequent acts. Forthe students state of learning achievement, diffi-cultk.s, tendencies. and needsis reflected in theirreactions and these reflections, as observed byteachers, are cues which guide the teachers' perfor-mances. These reciprocating acts can be initiatedor terminated by either the teacher or the student.

Such interaction is not the same as the inter-action in a dogfight, although there are similarities.In the dogfight. the act of one dog is a stimulus tothe other to act and its act then becomes a stimulusfor the first dog to act. So the fight goes on in a sortof "conversation of gestures" as George HerbertMead called it.' There is no reflection, for the actof one dog immediately follows the act of the other.But the interaction between teacher and student,except in cases of sudden and serious disruptivebehavior, is guided by considerations stemmingpartly from the teacher's knowledge of how to pro-ceed and partly from the fact that there is subjectmatter involved in the interaction. The teacher in-teracts with the student through a body of knowl-edge. and the student in turn interacts with theteacher through the same material. In this way thestudent and teacher interact until the student haseither acquired the knowledge, or else has learnedenough to pursue it alone.

The component dominating the entire inter-dependent system is the teacher. In the finalanalysis, it is the teacher more than any other com-ponent that makes the system effective as measuredby the ends achieved. While teachers can and doact deliberately from moment to moment, in ageneral and unobtrusive sense their performance iscolored by the demands of the system. Uninten-tionally, but quite necessarily, teachers shapestudents in the image of themselves in the sense thatthey intend for students to acquire certainknowledge they have themselves acquired and inthat sense become like themselves. Furthermore,teachers intend that objectives, when attained,

88 81

shall become useful and permanent characteristicsof their students as persons. No other occupation.save perhaps the priesthood, bears such formativerelationship between the agent and the subject.This relationship, generalized to cover the teacheras a person, lies at the root of public concern aboutthe preparation and conduct of teachers. Further-more, because teachers intend to change the abilities and dispositions of their students as they inter-act with them. their discourse differs from ordinaryutterance. They intend that what they say shall beremembered, not in so many words but in meaning.Their discourse tends to be cadenced and is perhapsmost effective when it is free of ambiguity, vague.ness, and indefiniteness.5

Didactics and Heuristics

Historically, the subsystem of interaction hasbeen conceptualized in two ways. In the first, thedirection and character of the activities involved inthe teacher student relationship are shaped by theteacher in terms of information about students,principles and techniques of teaching, the contentof instruction, and other resources. The teacherdetermines what is to be done, how and when it is tobe done, and what it is to be done for. This is didac-tics, sometimes called direct teaching. In the sec-ond, the formula specifies that the acts of teachingbecome acts performed conjointly by students andteachers. The students plan with the teacher what isto be done, how and when it is to be done, and theassessment of results. This is heuristics, variouslycalled inductive method, discovery method. inquiryteaching. child-centered teaching, and the like.

Didactics is the art and science of instructingstudents in knowledge and skills; heuristics is the atand science of training students how to search andfind out for themselves. Both of these stem from theprimitive conditions of learning. As noted earlier.teaching originally took one or the other of two ap-proaches to learning; first, the learners acquire cer-tain abilities by deliberate instruction, as in the fix-ing of ritual behavior. and second, by workingthemselves out of situations with little or no inter-vention.

These two modes of teaching are not entirelydistinct, for they result in somewhat similar outcomes. Didactics develops the ability to solve prob.

82

lems and a positive feeling toward learning no lessthan heuristics. But if the distinction is not over-drawn, it is useful to recognize the difference be-tween them. Since heuristics tends on the whole toallow more flexibility and variation of learning ac-tivities, it provides a freer change of pace for bothteachers and students than didactic instruction.This was recognized by Carlton Washburn, super.intendent of Winnetka Schools in the 1920's, whenhe introduced a program of systematic teaching forone part of the school day and an activity programfor the other part.'

These forms of teaching have become more ac-curately understood from research on the processesof human interaction in a variety of contextsclinical, social, political, scientific, and educa-tional. But unfortunately leaders of the pedagogical professions have failed to assimilate therelevant elements of this research to the didacticand heuristic modes of interaction. Instead theyhave attempted to mold the results of research inthese various contexts into one model of teachingafter another. Among these are such -models" asinquiry, group inquiry, inductive, advanceorganizers, nondirective, awareness training, con-ceptual, and operant.' Aside from the fact thatthese either are peripheral or are emphases uponone or another aspect of didactic, or heuristicmodes, they accentuate the tendency amongfaculties of pedagogy to separate into camps, onetrying to shape the teacher as a developer of the af-fective and personal side of students and the otherthe cognitive side.

While these two patterns of teaching differ in theamount of student collaboration in determining thedirection and activities of learning, the heuristic noless than the didactic teachers plan and direct theirown acts by reference to their knowledge ofstudents, principles of reaching, and content of in-struction. The heuristic teacher decides how tomanage and conduct his or her classroom as in-dependently of students as does the didacticteacher. They both must decide how to engagetheir students, how to maintain momentum, how tomanage materials, how to deal with disruptions,and so on. They differ in what they plan for; theheuristic teacher plans how to help the studentshelp themselves, whereas the didactic teacher takesthem directly to what they would find out if theirself-search were successful.

S9

The Knowledge Approach to Training

Knowledge about these two modes of teachingfalls into six categories and these constitute the do-mains of training as follows:'

I. Observation2. Diagnosis of

a) student abilitiesb) learning obstaclesc) environmental conditionsd) programs of instruction

3. Planning ofa) short-range programb) long-range program

4. Management ofa) space. time, and resourcesb) instructionc) students

5. Communication witha) peersb) parents and other laymenc) students

6. Evaluation ofa) student achievement and conductb) instructional program

We are not concerned here with ways to conducttraining, for they will be discussed in subsequentpages. Instead the categories of knowledge withwhich to carry on training is now the focus of ourattention. To construct a program of professionaltraining is to have a knowledge base and to knowthe categories of performance to which the knowl-edge belongs. In other words, we must identify thedomains of performance for which the skills ofpedagogy are to be developed. Once the domainsare identified and principles of effective teachingclassified according to these domains, it is then ap.propriate to develop the conditions of training.

This reverses the current procedure for develop.ing a program of pedagogical training that beginswill) objectives and then works out activities andprocedures deemed to be appropriate to their reali-zatiort. Where the knowledge of a field is well-established and understood alike by those whorepresent it. the initiation of program developmentvia instructional objectives is defensible. Since in-structional objectives are derived from knowledge.there is little possibility of a disjunction between thetwo. But to approach program development by firstfonnuIating objea ivcs in a field when its knowledgeis not held in common or mutually understood islikely to be misleading and unproductive. This has

been a defect of pedagogical education throughoutthe current century.

Anyone familiar with pedagogical faculties canattest the fact that their members are of manystripes. Some are familiar with research on teachingbut make no use of it. Others try to apply it but donot know how, or else find they have no resourcesfor doing so. By far the largest number knownothing about it and some claim it does not exist.

To begin with objectives where such disparity exists is to court faculty frustration and ultimatelyfailure. For one thing. some objectives especiallythose derived from ideological formulaswill beput forth without knowledge to validate and realizethem. For example. efforts to prepare teachers tohelp students to be self-realizing individuals or tobecome creative have resulted in less than effectiveinstruction when judged by either the intendedgoals or cognitive criteria. For another thing. tobegin with objectives is to miss the range of clinicalpedagogical knowledge and, in consequence, toneglect some elements of teaching which have beenshown empirically to be effective. Were this not so,the research on didactics would have had more in-fluence on practice during the last 25 years. For stillanother thing. professors are typically ill-informedabout clinical pedagogical knowledge, not to men.tion research on training itself, and this is attribut.able in large part to preoccupation with objectivesinstead of knowledge from which objectives. itvalid, are derived. No one has stated the matter asclearly as Medley when he said:

Teacher education. both at the preserviceand the inservice level, should adopt as primarygoals the development of the competenciesneeded to create and maintain the learning en-vironment, to engage pupils in learningrelatedactivities, and to implement the kind of in.struction that research indicates is provided byeffective teachers. There is an abundance ofpractical knowledge available about how to dothese things: what has been missing in the pastis a clear conviction on the part of teacher edu-cators that these things are what teachers oughtto be doing. Much effort has been wasted intraining teachers to behave in the ways that theleast effective ones do. A change in direction,so that beginning teachers will no longer needto unlearn so much, should produce a substan-tial. if not a dramatic, improvement in theachievement of pupils.'

83

We are approaching the problem of programdevelopment by identifying the domains of trainingand in the next chapter we shall present enooghsamples of knowledge in each of these domains toindicate the character of the knowledge appro-priate for training.

Domains of Training

The first domain, the ore that permeates all theothers. is observation. The ability to observe aphenomenon objectively is one of the primarymarks of a professional in any field. In a field thatinvolves relationships among human being objec-tive observation is especially important. It is a safe-guard against biases and prejudices of all sorts .-racial. class, socioeconomic. ideological. and per-sonal. Equally important is the fact that only by ob-jective observation of phenomena can a profes-sional know what he i6 working with. The skills ofobservation are basic to the teacher's performancein the classroom. For a teacher who cannot tellwhat is going on will be unable to respond appro-priately and effectively to the events.

Failure to develop skills of observation accountsin no small measure for the fact that pedagogicalfaculties no less than public school teachers find itextremely difficult to observe what goes on in theclassroom without making judgments about itsworth. Rating scales of instruction have tended onthe whole to reinforce this failure to distinguishbetween objectivity and valuation in the process ofobservation. Rating scales are by nature evaluativeinstruments, and the ose of them tends to inculcatehabits of biased observation.

As one observes the students in a class or the per-formance of a teacher he or she must be able tostate what is happening without reference to anyopinion about its value. What is the teacher doingat a given moment? is the teacher teaching a con-cept. asking contrary-to-fact question, teaching aprinciple, a skill, or whatever? Is the teacher rein-forcing the behavior of a student? Or is the teachergiving feedback? Is the teacher identifying anobstacle to learning? is the student's conduct dis-ruptive? Is the student on task? What proportion ofthe class is on task? These are only samples of thesimpler sorts of things that a professional should beable to identify objectively in a classroom situation.

84

The question of how to develop the skills ofobservation is not of concern at the moment, butone or two points need to be made. In the firstplace, learning to observe is extremely difficult. Itrequires that there be criteria, attributes, so tospeak, which mark a particular bit of behavior asbeing one of this kind or that. It requires also thatthe individual be so familiar with these criteria thattheir occurrence in behavior can be recognizedalmost automatically in complex teaching situa-tions. To acquire this ability requires extendedpractice in observing and analyzing behavior.

Another domain of training is diagnosis. Diag-nosis pertains to at least four aspects of the teacher'swork: student abilities, learning difficulties. environment, and program of instruction. Whileteachers have for a long time been aware that somestudents do not learn because of one factor oranother failure to apply themselves, lack of pro-per parental influence, lack of interest, and soon the skills and techniques of diagnosis havebeen identified and developed only in recent years.One needs only to note improvements in tests andother instruments for identifying pupils who sufferfrom physical handicaps such as sight. hearing.brain damage. and from psychological maladjust-ments of one sort or another to realize how peda-gogical diagnosis has come into its own.

Moreover, it has become evident that a large pro-portion of the difficulties students experience inlearning are content specific. The difficulties children encounter in learning to read are quite differ-ent from those confronted in the learning of scienceor social studies. For example. there are obstacles tolearning such as lack of knowledge or skill prerequi-site to the learning of a task. In such cases, it is in-cumbent on the teacher to ascertain whether thestudent has the prerequisite learning if he is unableto cope with the task.

The teacher must also have the knowledge andskill that enables him or her to identify environmental deficiencies that impede teaching andlearning. The skills that are involved in this aspectof diagnosis are not as well-established as others,but there is at least enough information now avail-able to enable the teacher to be sensitive to theclassroom environment in its physical. social, andpsychological dimensions.

Diagnosing the environment from the physicalstandpoint is comparatively simple, for it involves

91

such matters as temperature. arrangement of seatsappropriate to the immediate objectives of instruc-tion. bulletin board displays, and appropriate booksand other equipment of instruction.

The diagnosis of the social aspects of the environmeat is somewhat more difficult, for it requiresjudgments about the degree of control to be exer-cised and the amount of warmth the teacher shoulddisplay toward the students. It is well-known thatthere is some sort of middle ground with respect tothe amount of freedom students may exercise in theclass situation as opposed to the amount of system-atic regulation the teacher may exercise. Too muchof either will tend to depreciate the results of studyand instruction.

Diagnosing the instructional program is some-thing that the teacher has to do in terms of his orher knowledge of the subject matter of instruction.For example, a teacher who does not know the hier-archical structure of arithmetic will be at a disad-vantage not only in identifying the difficulty a stu-dent has for lack of prerequisite knowledge but alsoin sequencing the content of instruction.

Planning, as an area of training. is an activity inwhich the future teacher must learn to exercise awide range of judgments. Planning has reference towhat the teacher does to get ready for the activitiesto be carried on during a class period. all classperiods of a day, a week or longer. Planning for oneor mare class periods is usually thought of as in-structional planning. Planning of a total programover a long period of time, say. for a semester, isconsidered program planning. Usually programplanning is carried on by a group of teachers whoare concerned with the same grades or a combina-tion of grades. But the sort of judgments and skillsrequired for planning a class may be involved inone way or another in program planning.

In planning. the teacher gives attention to thefollowing: objectives, assignments, flexibility. in-structional activities, net cis of individual students,the content to be included or emphasized. activitiesthe students are to engage in. conduct problems.and evaluation. During the period of training at-tention should be given to all these aspects andperhaps others. although. as the teacher becomesexperienced, some of these will be performed auto-matically and thus drop out of planning. Recentresearch suggest3, for example. that experiencedteachers tend to give more attention to content andless to objectives."O

The fourth domain of training is management. Itincludes a number of components. Among otherthings. the teacher manages the process of instruction. the utilization of time. space, resources, andpupil conduct. With the exception of diagnosis. thisis the domain in which more time must he devotedto training than perhaps any other. It is here thatthe prospective teacher must be disciplined in theskills of teaching and all the various aspects of class-room management. It is here that skills involved insuch activities as lesson development, conduct of in-dependent work, recitation. reinforcement, feed-back, assignment making, and student account-ability are to be developed.

Professional communication is a domain of train-ing that is typically neglected in almost all pedagogical programs. The teacher converses not onlywith students but also with teachers and parents inface-to-face settings. in committees. and in largeorganizations as well as with administrative andsupervisory staff. This entails skills of listening, interpreting. translating, and responding in ways toelicit further information. A great deal of theelementary aspects of counseling should be taughtto teachers in order that they learn to communicatein ways that are ingratiating and at the same timeeffective in getting and giving information.

The domain of evaluation is one in which theteacher must be trained not only in the techniquesand procedures of evaluating pupil progress butalso in the analysis of data related to diagnosingand planning of instruction. Hence, there is goodreason to develop skills in evaluation along withdiagnostic and feedback skills. The present practiceof separating evaluation from diagnosis and in-struction in a training program helps to perpetuatethe isolation of work in evaluation as a form ofstudy useful mainly at advanced levels.

The Training Component Is Crucial

The training component should consume themajor part of the pedagogical. program regardlessof whether the student intends to become a teacher.counselor. administrator. education director, orwhatever. for teaching ability is basic to all peda-gogical positions. The skills of teaching cannot beacquired by formal courses in method, or by uncon-trolled experience in practice situations. or by anyother means than that of systematic and progressivetraining.

Q 985

Moreover, the teacher of teachers must use testedprocedures, techniques. and materials of trainingas they are available. And they must themselvespossess the skills in which they are training thefuture teacher as well as the techniques and pro-cedures of the training operation. We definitelyknow what we are about when we proceed to trainstudents for teaching. so that we can now carry ontraining with the thoroughness and are that thecommitment of the profession to the Nation'schildren requires.

The program of training must have first claim onthe time, energy. and the resources of the institu-tion. This training must be carried on. and carriedon systematically and thoroughly, to the end thatthe teacher is skilled and in possession of knowledgeto justify and defend the skills.

A considerable amount of research on the pro.cedures and techniques of pedagogical training isavailable. In general, it bears upon two aspects ofthe teacher's preparation: the acquisition of con-cepts and principles, and discipline in skills ofobservation and classroom performance.

The conventional practice has been to teach theconcepts of psychology and other pedagogical sub.jeers very much as the concepts of academicdisciplines are taught. That is to say, the conceptsare either verbally defined, or the student is left togarner the meaning from the context of thediscourse. The definitions are frequently loose.lacking the sharpness that distinguishes the con-cepts from other concepts with which they are easilyconfused. For example, it is difficult to find clear-cut distinctions between reinforcement and feed-back either in the research literature or textbooks.Consequently. it is not unusual to find teachers whoare unable to distinguish verbally the two concepts.not to mention the ability to recognize them inbehavior. Even when behavioral definitions aregiven, the behavior is simply described. The stu-dent is thus more often than not unable to recog-nize the classroom behavior that corresponds to thedescription. Although this matter has not beenthoroughly studied. there is good reason to assumethat the failure of teachers to use pedagogical ter-minology is related to their inability to identify thebehavior corresponding to the terms.

One of the most thoroughgoing efforts to remedythis defect in the training of school personnel wasthe development of protocol materials. These con-sisted of films and videotapes to exemplify specified

86

pedagogical concepts. These films or vicletitaixs areused to train school personnel and prospectiveteachers to recognize and identify the classroombehaviors that correspond to the definition of con-cepts. Student manuals and instructor guides areprovided for the film or videotape. The researchevidence on this approach to the teaching of con.cepts indicates that it is effective."

When the concept is exemplified as a skill, theamount of practice necessary to acquire the skillonce the trainee can identify it behaviorally is

reduced almost to zero. This appears to be especial.ly the case where elements of the skill are already inthe repertoire of the trainee and can be readilyorganized into a pattern of behavior.

While skills can be developed through the use ofprotocol materials, there ate other procedures andtechniques for doing so. Among the more effectiveof these is the minicourse which incorporates theprinciples of microteaching and the use of films toexemplify the teaching behavior to be acquired.Protocol materials and minicourses are similar inthe sense that they emphasize the exemplification ofconcepts and teaching behaviors. Protocol mate-rials, however. place greater stress upon skills ofobservation and concept acquisition, whereas mini-courses emphasize acquisition of particular teach-ing behaviors." These are complementary mate,rials, each contributing to the other's effectivenessin a program that emphasizes both conceptualknowledge and know-how.

While it is not possible here to present all the pro-cedures, techniques, and materials that have beendeveloped to train teachers. it is useful to call atten-tion to one of the most comprehensive surveys oftraining materials to be found in the literature.This is the catalog of teacher training materials.designed to develop teaching skills in various sub-ject areas and at various grade levels, developed atStanford University. It describes more than 800products. The following classification of theseproducts indicates their scope and generalcharacter.

(4

I. The product's subject matter specificity.(Did it apply to the teaching of English.mathematics. science, social studies, orschool subjects in general?)

2. The target audience. (Was the product intended for preservice trainee. inserviccteachers. or what?)

4.3

3. The grade level specificity. (Was theteaching skill pertinent to early childhoodeducation, to the high school level, tosomething in between, or to all levels?)

4. The so-called target outcome. (Which aspectof teachingsuch as planning. presentation,interaction with pupils, attitude towardteaching, or teacher's self-concept was theproduct concerned with?)

5. The target outcomes for students. (Which ofvarious kinds of cognitive and socialemotional outcomes?)

6. The training situation. (What materials wereprovided with the product and whatmaterials and equipment had to be providedby the user?)

7. The time nd number of persons required toadminister training with the product. (Howmany trainees could use the product at onetime?)

8. The kind of practice provided. (Was itpaper-hand-penciled exercises, or classifyingincidents in a film, or playing a simulatedteaching game, or teaching actual students?)

9. The phase of teaching in which the acquiredskills would be used. (Did the training applyto the teacher's work before, during, or afterinteraction with the student?)""

In the development of a training program it isnecessary to screen materials discussed in the fore-going paragraph to be sure that they are basedupon adequate empirical evidence as to the effec-tiveness of the skills they purport to develop as wellas to their effectiveness in the actual training ofteachers.

These kinds of materials are useful in laboratorywork carried on in connection with formal coursessuch as those set forth in Chapter 5. They of coursecannot take the place of actual experience in theclassroom. but their utilization in laboratory situa-tions can prepare the teacher for successful ex-perience in the classroom and in subsequentemployment. Suer materials have advantages overon-hands experience in the classroom in that, in theinitial phases of training, it is desirable for thetrainee to study the same behavior over and overagain. Protocol and minicourse materials make thispossible. Classroom behavior perishes as it happensand consequently cannot be observed a secondtime. For a trainee to gain maximally from observa-tion of, and performance in, actual classroomsituations, it is necessary that he or she be well-disciplined in the skills of observation and class-room performance as developed in laboratories.

Summary

We have identified and clarified the primary target of pedagogicaleducation and set forth the areas in which training should be concen-trated. If the faculty of a pedagogical institution is in thorough com-mand of its knowledge base and of its priorities, it will not be prone torun off in new and often irrelevant directions with each new pressurethat outside organizations and agencies bring to bear upon it. When thefaculty of pedagogy does not know what it is about. it grabs any andevery newfangled idea and purpose that any organization or agency of-fers, suggests, or insists upon. It will take on the task of providingcourse?. workshops. or any other device for meeting such demands asthe call for urban education, sex education, drug education, or humanrelations education. even though the faculty is already falling far shortof performing the task it was created to do: to train teachers in theknowledge and skills of classroom work.

94

87

Chapter 9I. Joyce. Bruce, and Marsha Weil, Models of Teaching.

Englewood Cliffs. N. J.: Prentice Hall. 1972,

2. Smith, B. Othanel. "Teaching: Its Elements and Structurc: in Teacher Compelence. Proceedings of the 1963Summer Conference, edited by J. Alan Roo and RalphThompson. Bellingham. Washington: Western Washing.ton State College. Vol. LV I V, No, 3, fanner, 1964. p. 28.

3. This sentence is quoted with permission from a letter ofDavid Berliner to one of the authors.

4. Mead. George H. Mind, UV and Society, Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1934. p. 63. passim.

S. Ryle. Gilbert, The Concept of Mind, London: Hutchin'son's University Library, Hutchinson House. 1949. pp.309ff: Land. M. L., and L. R. Smith. "The Effect of LowInference Teacher Clarity Inhibitors on Student Achieve.meat. "Journal of Teacher Education. Vol. XXX. No. S.1979, pp. 55-57.

6. Washburn, Carlton. "Winnetka." School and Society.Vol. XXIX. 1929, pp. 37.50. See also Adjusting theSchool to the Child. Yonkers, No. 4: World Book Com-pany, 1937.

7. Joyce. Bruce, and Marsha Weil, Op. cit.

8. We thank Margaret Lindsey for these categories. Withminor adaptations, they are a set suggested in conferencewhen the manuscript was being prepared.

9. Medley, Donald M. "Efkctiveness of Teachers' inResearch on Teaching: Concepts. Findings. and implica.lions, edited by Penelope L. Peterson and Herbert J.Walberg. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.1979, pp. 25-26.

10. Peterson. Penelope, et al. "Teacher Planning. TeacherBehavior, and Student Achievement." American Educa-tional Research Journal. Vol. 15, No. 3. 1978. pp.417.432.

1 . Borg, Walter R. "Protocol Materials as Related toTeacher Performance and Pupil Achievement."Journalof Educational Research, 1975: 69:1. 23.30: Borg. WalterR. "Protocols: Competency Based Teacher EducationModules." Educational Technology, 1973: 13:10. 17.20:Borg. Walter R., P. Unger. and J. Wilson, "TeacherClassroom Management Skills and Pupil Behavior."four.nal of Experimental Education, 1975. 44:2, 5258; Borg.Walter R., and David R. Stone. "Protocol Materials as aTool for Changing Teacher Behavior."Journal of Experi-mental Education. 1974: 43 (1) 54.39: Gliessman. David.and Richard C. Pugh. "The Development and Evaluation

88

of Protocol Films of Teacher Behavior." AY Commun.*.cation Reiser)) 24 (Spring, 1976). 21.48; (Amman.David; Pugh, Richard C: and Perry, Fred L. "Effects of aProtocol Film Series in Terms of Learning Outcomes andReactions of Users." Bloomington: Indiana University.National Center for the Development of Training KIM.Oils in Teacher Education. 1974: Kleucker, Joy C. "Ef.kris of Protocol and Training Materials." AcquiringTeaching Competencies. Report 6. Bloomington: Indiana University, National Center for the Development ofTraining Materials in Teacher Education, 1974; Rentel,Victor M, "A Protocol Materials Evaluation: TheLanguage of Children." Journal of Teacher Education 25

(Winter. 1974): 323.29; Zidonis, Frank, and Sharon Foe,"Protocols of Children's Language," Theory Into Practice(Volume XIV, Number 5). December 1975: 312.317.College of Education, The Ohio State University. Colton.bus, Ohio 43210.

12. Borg. W. R.. M. L. Kelley. Philip Langer. and MeredithGall. The Minicourne: A Microseaching Approach toTeacher Education. Beverly Hills, California: MacmillanEducational Services. 1970: Borg, W. R.. Kallenbach,W., M. Morris. and A. Friebel. "Videotape feedback andmicroteaching in a teacher training model." Journal ofExperimental Education. 1969. 37, 9.16: Copeland0W,D. "The relationship between microteaching and studentteacher classroom performance." Journal of EducationalResearch, 1975. 68. 289.93; Copeland, W. D., and W.Doyle. "Laboratory skill training and student teacherclassroom perfonnance."fournal of Experimental Educa-lion, 1973. 42, 16-21: Fortune. J. C., J. M. Cooper, andD. W. Allen. "The Stanford summer microteachingclinic." 1965. Journal of Teacher Education, 1967. 18,389-93: Huber, J.. and B. E. Ward. "Preservice con.fidence through microteaching." Education, 1969. 90,65.68; Kallenbach, W. W., and M. D. Gall. "Microteachlog versus conventional methods in training elementaryintern teachers." journal of Educational Research. 1969.

63, 136.41: McCollum, R., and D. La Due. "Microteach'ing in a teacher training program." Social Education.1970. 34, 333.36: McDonald, F. J,. and D. W. Allen.Training effects of feedback and modeling procedures onteacher perfo;nianca Stanford University: School ofEducation, 1967, Boyato. N. J., W. D. Copeland. R. G.Sell. The Instructional Supervision Training Program.Santa Barbara. Ca.: University of California, 1973.

13. Gage, N. L. The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching.New York: Teachers College Press, 1977, p. 54.

Chapter 10

A Profile of Generic Knowledge forPedagogical Training

Chapters 7 and 8 set forth the types and uses ofboth clinical and academic pedagogical knowledge.Three propositions were elaborated. First. empirical condition-consequence statements representpractical classroom knowledge. where variables ofteaching behavior are the conditions, and variablesof student achievement. attitudes, or conduct arethe consequences. These statements were calledclinical pedagogical knowledge. Second. academicpedagogical knowledge. although containing con-ditional statements, seldom yields teaching pre-scriptions. However, such knowledge is particularlyuseful in making policies and decisions when it con-sists of social. economic, or psychosocial correlatesof success and failure variables of students in schooland community life. Third, theory has value in thart of teaching only if "theory" is used to mean empirical clinical knowledge. Since this form of know!edge is not called theory in either pedagogy or othersciences, the appeal to theory as practical knowl-edge in classroom teaching is bootless.

Finally. we noted in chapter 9 that programdevelopment which begins with objectives wherethe knowledge has not been assembled. sifted, andsystematized either wallows in controversy orrelapses into barren repetition resulting in varyingdegrees of disappointment and frustration. As analternative. we suggested that we first assemble andorganize the knowledge accumulated from almost acentury of research, and from that knowledgederive objectives and programs, revising them asfurther research. program evaluation, and ex-perience indicate.

The purpose of this chapter is to suggest aschema for collecting and organizing genericclinical knowledge. to sample this knowledge. andto explore further the role of clinical knowledge indeveloping a training program.

96

Prerequisites of Program Development

In an empirically based profession. whoseresearch has not been assembled and sifted, certainsteps are prerequisite to program development, asfollows:

1. The research must be assembled and classi-fied with reference to various components of profes-sional work.

2. The knowledgeyield of research must beclassified by types. particularly definitions andprinciples.

3. Definitional knowledge must be analyzed as toits clarity and the directness of its referents.

4. Both independent and dependent variables ofcondition- consequence knowledge (principles) mustbe treated as in 5 above.

5. For generic knowledge. both definitions andcondition-consequence statements must be classi-fied by domains of training; and for content-specific knowledge by levels of schooling and con-tent areas as well.

When these steps have been completed an effec-tive program of pedagogical education can bedeveloped: one built upon knowledge that providesenough detailed information at the behavioral andmanipulatory level for training to be direct. con-trollable. and challenging to both trainees and in-structional staff.

The failure to assemble the knowledge and thenreduce it to an observable and manipulatory levelpartly explains the miscarriage of previous efforts todesign and institutionalize an effective program ofpedagogical education. To design a program bybeginning with objectives or outcomes before %now-ing what the research of the last 75 years says inconcrete terms is to provide ends without means.

89

Research is now our chiel source of knowledge.However. except for a few quality textbooks, thevast amount of research of the last 75 years is almostin complete disarray when considered withreference to the systematization needed for pro-gram development in pedagogical education. Ofcourse, encyclopedias of research, handbooks ofresearch on teaching, and reviews of research areavailable, but these summaries are not orientedtoward program development. From the informa-tion they contain, even when the knowledge is rele-vant, it is difficult to decide what grade level, sub.ject. or domain of training it belongs to.

Moreover, research knowledge is so looselyorganized that researchers themselves have beenshown to do over again. perhaps unwittingly andsomewhat differently. studies made by others, Forexample. there is a recrudescence of research onadult learning, telling us over again much of whatE. L. Thorndike discovered over 50 years ago thatan old dog can learn new tricks and that intellec-tual deterioration with age is much less thanpopular opinion had supposed,

EDefinitional

Early research on teaching usually defined thevariables as static characteristics personalitytraits, academic achievement. years of experience.and so on instead of dynamic variables, a practicecontinued by Coleman in his study of educationalinequality. Beginning in die late 40's and early 50sa new emphasis crept into research teacher behavior became the object of study together with its ef-feels on student behavior and achievement. Thisapproach is now beginning to yield dependableknowledge of teacher effectiveness. It is to thisresearch that we go primarily for much of theknowledge referred to in this chapter.

Generic and Specific Clinical Knowledge

We have mentioned various types of clinicalknowledge: definitional, conditional, generic. andspecific. How these are related is depicted indiagram 5:

Diagram 5. Types of Clinical Knowledge

Clinical Knowledge

generic I specific71

Definitional and conditional knowledge weredistinguished in Chapter 7, We must now considerthe distinction between generic and specificknowledge. The essential feature of specific clinicalknowledge is that it suggests skills that are effectiveonly in teaching a particular kind of instructionalcontent: But the expression "kind of instructionalcontent- is ambiguous. What is to be counted as akind? Is it the content of a particular discipline orarea of knowledge such as physics or language arts?

90

Or is it logical types of content such as definitions,principles, and particulars?

Content identified with a field is exemplified bythe teacher's knowledge of manuscript writing. andthe pedagogical principle pertaining to it is asfollows: If a teacher uses manuscript writing whenteaching young children, achievement in writingand reading will be more assured than if hand-writing is used. This principle tells how to teachparticular abilities at a particular level of school-

9 1,-/

6-0 I

ing. It is content.specific as to the language-artsarea.

A definition (concept) is an example of a logicaltype of content. a kind of content found in mostdisciplines or areas of knowledge. If a teacher usesrules (some form of definition) and instances inteaching concepts, students are more likely to at'quire them than if other practices are followed.This principle tells how to teach a particular kindof knowledge. in this case definitional. regardless ofthe discipline to which it belongs or the level ofschooling at which the teaching takes place.Although the principle is content-specifie, as toconcepts, we count it as generic because it is ap-plicable to all subjects containing concepts and toall levels of schooling. We shall use the expression"content-specific" to refer to those principles thatpertain to a particular discipline or area of the cur-riculum. and "generic" to refer to principles ofmore general application.

However, a caveat is in order. Some principlesappear to be grade-specific rather than content-specific and others appear to be both grade andcontent bound. We have not concerned ourselveswith this distinction. It is sometimes difficult to tellfrom the research whether the principle is contentspecific respecting a particular grade or a numberof grades. We have, therefore. ignored this refinement in the present chapter as well as in chapter 11where content specific knowledge is treated.

Generic Definitional Knowledge and Skillof Observation

Anyone in pedagogical circles who insists upondear definitions is likely to be counted as an advo-cate of unpopular causes. Definitions channel ourthinking just as they provide the basis of soundreasoning. All of which can get in the way of brain-storming, a popular but not unrewarding activity.While freewheeling is to the good, there comes atime when the ideas thus turned up must be refinedif they are to be useful, For clear definitions are notonly essential in research but also in practice. Aspoint7e1 out in an earlier chapter, they renderclinical principles applicable and provide the basisfor the development of observational skills.

The activities of the classroom are complexbecause of the density and rapidity of events. Somany things happen at the same time and in suchrapid sequence that only a highly trained observer

can tell what is going on. and only then for someportion of the activities. Little wonder that tobeginners everything in the classroom seems to hap.pen at once. They have few concepts and no skillswith which to analyze the flow of events and to sortout the significant from the insignificant. Even theexperienced teacher, having had little training inobservation, not infrequently makes unwise deci-sions because of inability either to see or to correctlyclassify events.

It is well-known that we observe with our con-cepts as well as with our senses. Definitional knowl-edge is therefore a guide to observation. Definitionshave two dimensions verbal and referential. Ifdefinitions are clear at the symbolic level and usedconsistently in discourse, they provide a necessarycondition for rigorous thinking where thoughtmoves from one proposition to annther.

However, we can understand definitions in theverbal sense and still be unable to use them in thereferential sense. That is to say. we may not knowwhat the terms of a definition designate at the levelof observation and manipulation even though weknow what a definition says verbally. Suppose wedefine corrective feedback as any utterance,gesture, technique. or procedure that provideshints to help the student respond correctly after anincorrect response. Although this definition is ver-bally clear, the trainee may still not be able to iden-tify the actual utterances, gestures. techniques. orprocedures as the referents denoted by the defini-tion.

The training procedure must be such as todiscipline the student in the ability to identify theappropriate teacher behaviors. The complexity ofthis training task can be indicated by noting somedifferent ways of giving feedback. For example, itcan be given by an analysis of the student's oralresponse, explaining why the answer is incorrect orgiving the correct answer: or by analyzing the stu-dent's written response. explaining why the answeris incorrect or giving the correct answer: or by prob-ing questions to try to elicit the correct answer: orgiving examples to clarify and help correct the stu-dent's response. Unless teachers are trained to do sothey will not be able to identify corrective feedbackeven though they know the verbal definition. Thetraining program must of course go on beyond thedevelopment of the ability to identify feedbackbehavior. It must make sure that the trainee canperform these behaviors also.

9891

The importance of definitions in the diagnosticaspects of teaching is crucial, for in diagnosis we arerequired to observe student work performance ob-jectively and to classify deficiencies correctly as anecessary eordition of effective instruction.

The utility of definitions in pedagogical trainingis consistently neglected. Despite the fact thatdefinitional knowledge is at the heart of peda-gogical training. only one collection of such knowl-edge, although limited in scope, is available) Eventhat study has been all but ignored. It provides anumber of definitions pertaining to groups and in-dividuals, classroom cognitive processes, and con-trol of content in teaching. It also gives referents aswell as verbal definitions of :erms. The followingexamples from this collection exemplify the sort ofdefinitional knowledge needed to develop programsof training.

Suppose it is desired that the trainee learn torecognize dependency behavior in the classroom.The term "dependency" must be defined not onlyverbally but also in terms of observable indicatorsthat the trainee can be taught to identify in class-room situations. Here is an illustration.

Definition:"Dependency is reliance on other persons andtheir actions for assistance and support."

Indicators:1. "Continuous attempts to obtain assistance are

symptomatic of dependency."2. "Dependency is indicated by reluctance to

take independent action."

Illustrations:1. "Everyday it was the same. One could predict

the pattern of activity after an assignment wasgiven. Some of the students would beginworking immediately. Most would ask addi-tional questions and then begin to work. Afew would demand constant help until theyhad finished. On occasion these demands forhelp would become irritating: however, at-tempts to reduce the behavior had resulted infailure."

2. "The next day after Mrs. Jones had attendedthe symposium on individualized instruction.she tried out a few of the ideas in her ownclassroom. A major obstacle soon appeared.Many students were unable or unwilling to

92

work independently. So she went back to theold ways."

Now consider A definition that pertains toteacher behavior. The ability to hold students ac-countable is closely associated with teaching suc-cess. But how does a teacher, or even a professor ofpedagogy. know when a teacher's behavior is of thekind that holds students accountable? The answer isforeshadowed in the following definition:

Definition:"Accountability is a dimension of group focusthat refers to the degree to which the teacherholds the pupils responsible for their task perfor-mance during recitation sessions."

Indicators:I. The teacher makes an effort to assess

children's behavior and communicates tothem her knowledge of it."

2. "The teacher requires pupils to demonstratethe skill or knowledge in question."

3. 'The teacher may employ the accountabilitytactic in focusing upon one pupil or the entireclass."

Illustrations:I. "The teacher may require an individual stu-

dent to recite alone during which the otherpupils may or may not be attending. The reci-tation may be an arithmetic procedure. therehearsal of memorized material. or the location of States on a map. As the pupilresponds. the teacher attends to his or herprogress. asks questions. praises correctresponses, corrects mistakes, calls for repeti-don. etc. He is focusing upon that pupil andholding that pupil accountable."

2. "The teacher has several children working atthe board on a set of problems. Children attheir desks are working the same problems onpaper. The teacher attends to the work at theboard, and at the same time moves aboutamong the seated children. From time to timeshe comments to members of both groups. Atone point she stops and says. 'I think Tom ishaving some trouble with a real tough prob-lem here. Let's all watch him at the board andsee if we can help.'

Definitions thus analyzed make it possible todevelop training materials such as protocols2 (con-

T)

cept films) and to discipline students in the difficultart of observation.

Discipline in observation also requires thatstudents learn to control their personal and socialclass prejudices as well as ideological preferences asobservations are made. In other words. they mustlearn to observe with neutrality except for the tech-nical concepts that guide observation. In a fieldwhere prejudices and value orientations play aheavy role, as in pedagogy, to learn to observe neu-trally is a considerable achievement.

Since objective observation is the sine qua non ofprofessional work, it must be considered as aprimary domain of pedagogical training. It willneed to be attended to throughout the period ofprofessional preparation. although the programshould doubtless give particular attention to it atthe very outset. Perhaps observation of exceptionalstudents should be the point to begin. If teachers intraining can learn to observe exceptionality withdetachment and neutrality just as they can observethe behavior of other students. they are well on theway to becoming disciplined observers.

Generic Conditional Clinical Knowledge

Generic clinical knowledge must be caled fromresearch studies, professional wisdom, and counsel-ing practices and then classified by training domainsand in some cases perhaps by levels of schooling.The following items, classified by training domains,are examples of generic knowledge. Although someof these items were derived from studies at theelementary level, management of pupils for exam-ple, there are good reasons to believe they will holdfor all levels.

I. Diagnosisa) If teachers identify prekindergarten

children with potential learning problemsfrom genetic etiological factors and provideintervention, amelioration. preventativeand/or remedial programs, they can avoidor reduce the long-term frustration. emo-tional consequences. and academic failureexperienced often inappropriately labeledas obstreperous. lazy. ill-behaved. or men-tally retarded.'

2. Planninga) If teachers study and plan materials to be

taught in order to reduce vagueness of pre-sentation. student achievement will in-crease. This is true when the teacher is theonly source of information about a topicas in a lecture on a special area.'

b) If teachers plan a host of alternatives inlight of their estimate of appropriateness ofthe alternatives for the student or group ofstudents who are in particular "learningstates" with respect to given objectives, thenthe utility of the teaching alternative will bemaximized.5

$a. Management of Time, Space and ResourcesIf teachers spend a large amount of time onacademic activities, then student achieve-ment on both low and high complexity tasksincreases.If teachers arrange the physical layout ofthe classroom to allow for whole classmonitoring during small group instruction.then classroom disruptions will decreaseand student learning will increase.'If teachers involve parents in educationalprograms, then they are utilizing the mostimportant influence on the pupils' intellec-tual and emotional development, and theywill increase the possibility of obtaining op-timal results.

a)

b)

c)

3b. Management of Instructiona) If teachers direct classroom activities with-

out giving students choices, approach thesubject matter in a direct. businesslike way.organize learning around questions they pose.and occupy the center of attention. thenstudents show greater task orientation andgreater gains in achievement, creativity, in-quiry, writing ability, and self-esteem.°If teachers adjust the cognitive demands oftheir lessons to the level of students'capabilities, then student achievement in-creases."'If teachers make use of probing techniquesin instruction, then students will make moreinferences, and more accurate inferencesconcerning subject matter."If teachers give complete instructions anddemonstrations of new materials and

b)

c)

d)

93

assignments, and check to see that thestudents do understand how to do theassignments before releasing them to workou their own, then students will show gainsin achievement."

Sc. Management of student conducta) If a teacher gives a simple reprimand, say-

ing in a matter-of-fact tone: "Don't do thatagain, please sit down in your seat now,"send resumes the lesson, students will paymore attention to the lesson following theevent and evaluate the teacher as fair andable to maintain order, in most class-rooms."

b) If teachers use desist techniques that communicate to the students, through teacherbehavior, that they know what the studentsare doing. then student work involvement in-creases and disruptive behavior decreases.

c) If teachers use contingency managementprinciples of personal attention and socialreinforcement to increase attending beha-vior of students, then students will increasestudy behavior and there will be gains inacademic achievement and I.Q. scores."

4. CommunicationThe literature of counseling and group deliberation is the source of our knowledge aboutface-to-face communication. It should becombed for pfinciples essential for effectivecommunication of teachers with students,parents. peers, and others. The following areexamples of likely findings:a) If teachers persistently ask "what" rather

than "why" and do not accept "why" fromthe student, the student is more likely to feelresponsible for his behavior."

b) If the teacher persistently asks questionsrather than makes statements Is it worth.while to learn to add and subtract? Is itworthwhile to take someone's book? thestudent is more likely to engage in self-evaluation."

c) If a teacher appears relaxed voice, rate ofspeech. facial expressions, etc., to a

parent who comes to talk about his or herchild. the parent is likely to feel more relax-ed."

94

5a. Evaluation of student achievementlf secondary teachers take the tune and troubleto write comments (believed to be "encourag-ing") on student papers, then student perfor-mance improves significantly."

5b. Evaluation of instructional programlf teachers provide a stimulating environmentfor culturally deprived children through specialprograms such as Head Start then children per-form better on standardized tests immediatelyfollowing their exposure. The fact that they losetheir gains after several years in a regular classroom might indicate the need for a continuingspecial program."

Knowledge as Basic to Training

Now that examples of generic knowledge. bothdefinitional and conditional. are before us, it istime to emphasize certain aspects of this knowledgeas they bear upon its utility in training. To empha-size an important point made in a previous chapter,attention is called again to the distinction betweenknowledge and skill. Knowledge is the accumulateddefinitions. principles. and other forms of infonnation typically preserved and expressed in symbolicfoi mt. A skill is not knowledge. but rather behaviorin which stimulus-response-feedback processes arehighly organized with respect to an objective. It isnot a habit in the sense of a fixed response, but act-ing so that subsequent responses are modifiable inthe light of emerging conditions and the precedingresponses."

How are knowledge and skill related? Considerthe following principle: If teachers hold studentsaccountable for task performance during thelesson, behavior disruption decreases during therecitation. The teacher behavior referred to by theexpression "hold students accountable or responsi-ble" is the skill. Now, the behavior what theteacher says or does and how it is said or done tohold students responsibleis not given in this partitular principle. The original research defines ordescribes the behavior, otherwise the principle isworthless in a training program unless professionalwisdom can supply the missing information aboutwhat the teacher does to hold students accountable.This is the chief reason why researchers must pro-vide exact descriptions of teacher performance in

studies of teacher effectiveness if usefulness of theirfindings is to be assured in training programs.

Unfortunately. the utility of conditioned knowl-edge is often diminished by failure to providedescriptions of teacher performance. This is readilyseen by reference to the forms of clinical knowledgefound in research literature. Some principles arecomposed of two and some of three sets of variables.as follows:

1. A C2. A B C3. B C

Where A is the variables of teacher behavior; B isintervening variables. and C is the variables of stu-tient behavior achievement, attitudes. conduct.

In the first case, the teacher behaves in a

specified way and student effect is direct. Here is anex ampl,.:

A C

Teacher ignores student behav-ior by turning back on disrup-tive student, pays attention to Student disrup-desirably behaving student, or tion ceases orwalks away from misbehaving diminishes.student (where teacher atten-tion is the reinforcer).

In the second form, the teacher's behavior evokesan intervening set of behaviors which in turn resultsin the desired student conduct. The teacher's per-formance thus leads indirectly to the desired stu-dent behavior. An example is the following:

A

Teacher en-gages studentsin a variety ofactivities dur-ing a seatworklesson.

The third ease is one in which the principle doesnot include teacher behavior. This is an example.

B

Student workinvolvementincreases.

C

Pupil deviancydecreases.

A B

Students understand thelesson. accord-ing to theirown rating ofthe lesson. (asshown by a re-search study).

C

Achievementgains in socialstudies cor-relate withtheir ratings.56 and .44.

Someone could ask wit( tiler it is expected thatstudents will learn from presentations they do notunderstand. However, the crucial point is not thatstudents are more likely to learn what they under-stand. but that the principle provides no teacherbehavior. The intervening variable studentunderstanding is given, but what the teacher doesto induce understanding is absent. For purposes oftraining such principles are worthless.

Principles of this type occur all too often in pm.fessional wisdom and not infrequently in researchstudies. Wisdom as well as research tells us thatmotivated students learn, that good classroom at-mosphere leads to good student conduct, and thatstudents who apply themselves learn more thanthose who do not. But, as in these instances, pre-scriptions are not infrequently lacking.

Patterns of Classroom Operation

The skills, of which definitional atoll conditionalknot ledge are the verbal counterparts. are effectivewhen they are orchestrated in the performance ofteachers who are aware of what they are doing andwhere they are going.

It has long been recognized by students of peda-gogy that teaching is a pattern of behavior and notjust a set of desultory acts. Historically the patternhas been referred to as methods of teaching, fre-quently referred to now as management, and thesecorrespond to two forms didactics and heuristics.

Historically, one of the most influential formula-tions of didactics was Ziller's elaboration ofHerbart's conception of teaching into five steps.** asfollows:

1. Preparation. This phase prepares tne studentsfor reception of new ideas by calling uprelated ideas already known. This operationrevives the apperceptive mass as a basis of fur-ther learning.

2. Presentation. This sets forth the new ideas ofthe lesson.

3. Association. In this step the new is actuallycombined with the old through imaginationand reflection.

4. Generalization. In this step the general idea isseparated from concrete particulars. It is aform of abstraction and occurs by reflectionand expression through language.

5. Application. The learner applies the generalidea. This helps to fix the learning and to pro-vide further insight into what has beenlearned.

111295

Another influential pattern of teaching, somewhat similar to Herbari's, was advanced by Mor-rison some fifty years ago. He called it directteaching, by which he meant that objectives areunderstood, content directly related to objectives isselected. students are introduced to the new mate-rial after a pretest to determine what the studentsknow already. assignments are made and thestudents kept on task and given corrective feedbackwhen needed. His formula was: "Pretest. teach,test the results, adapt procedures, teach and testagain to the point of actual learning.") He said:

'reaching which aims at the objective directly.records pupil performance, and then passes onis however only half direct teaching. The moreessential half is found in the principle of cor-rective teaching. or the application of the test-ing and reteaching members of the mastery for-mula. Apart from corrective instruction, thereis fundamentally no systematic teaching at allbut only the administration of one form of in-telligence test."

Recently. direct teaching has been enjoyingrenewed attention because of research results thatsupport systematic performance not essentially dif-ferent from Morrison's conception. Essentially,direct teaching is now conceived as teaching inwhich objectives are understood by students, content directly related to objectives is used and is extensive, presentation or lesson development is

specific and relatively short, questions pertain tothe content and are at a low cognitive level. seat-work and home assignments are required. studentsare monitored and held accountable for assignedwork, corrective feedback is provided, and the workis paced at an optimum level."

It is evident from what has just been said that thepattern of didactic teaching has changed very littlewith time. Diagnosis. feedback, and objectives havebecome more pronounced since Herbart. But othercomponents are essentially the same. althoughchanges in pedagogical language may give the impression that wholly new energizing ideas haveemerged. This is not to depreciate advances madein clinical knowledge and skills. If didactic teachingis a natural form of behavior. as we suggestedearlier, its basic pattern should show little or nochange over the years. What research can and isproviding is the knowledge by which to identify andimprove the skills that make didactic teaching moreeffective.

96

Heuristics and Its Knowledge Base

Hew istics, like- didactics, is a natural form ofteaching. Its point of departure is the students andtheir interests, active or potential, rather that thecontent of instruction. Its primary objective is toprovide an experiential context for students 'o learnthe skills of identifying and solving problems. Asthey engage in problem solving. students come intopurposeful relationship with the knowledge rele-vant to the problem. It is claimed that they therebyacquire the concepts. principles. skills of thinking,attitudes. and so on that they need to deal with theproblems of life.

I.ike didactics, the origins of the heuristic pattern-ere lost in antiquity. Its components have beenidentified from time to time and tagged withvarious labels. Perhaps the clearest description ofthis pattern, at least in the current century. is thatof Kilpatrick, in which he proposed four opera-tions: purposing, planning. execution of plan. andevaluation." Each of these components is carriedout by the students under the guidance. coopera-tion, and assistance of the teacher.

It will be readily recognized that these dementsof the heuristic pattern are primarily the same asthe elements of Dewey's complete act of thought:namely. felt needs. identification of the difficulty tobe Overcome in satisfying the needs. collection ofdata and formulation of a hypothesis or plan of ac-tion. elaboration of the hypothesis. and testing iteither as a conclusion m as a course of action.There have been a number of other statements ofthe heuristic pattern since Kilpatrick's, but theyconsist essentially of the same ingredients.

Research bearing on the efficaciousness ofheuristics in comparison to didactics leaves much tobe desired. Nevertheless. it appears from recentresearch that students who are taught didacticallyare just as effective at problem solving and have justas good attitudes toward themselves and the schoolas students who are taught heuristically." Thisshould not be taken to mean that teachers shouldbe given no training in heuristic skills. We do notyet know enough about the cognitive makeup ofteachers and students. or the effects of differentdisciplines upon teaching behavior, to do anythingother than to encourage further research onheuristics and to insist that teachers be prepared inheuristic as well as didactic skills.

Training in these different modes of teachingshould be clearly separated. Students should know

1 0 3

when they are being trained in either heuristic ordidactic skills and modes of management, and noattempt should be made to mingle the ideas ofheuristics with those of didactics and vice versa.They should be kept seprrate. It may be that someof the problems teachers are now having with stu-dent conduct are attributable to the fact that pro-grams of pedagogical education have for some timetended to assimilate these two modes of teaching.and, as a consequence, many teachers have enteredthe service of the schools without clearcut ideas andskills of management.

The problem of developing a program of train-

ing in heuristic skills is difficult because of the scar-city and poverty of research on the effectiveness ofvariations in heuristic performance from teacher toteacher." Consequently, there is little researchknowledge for heuristic training. forcing us to fallback upon craft knowledge to develop a trainingprogram, More specifically, we do not know the ef-fectiveness of various teaching behaviors for helpingstudents learn how to clarify their purposes or planto realize them. Neither do we know what teachingbehaviors are effective in working with students asthey carry out their plans and evaluate the out-comes.

Summary

The domains of training constitute the categories of knowledge re-quired for training in generic classroom skills. The task of programdevelopment can he carried out only if we have the knowledge appropriate to each of these categories. This knowledge is now sufficient tounderwrite a program of professional preparation, a program that canguarantee a greater measure of work success than our pedagogicalschools have heretofore provided. However, the knowledge base of pro-fessional training is only partly supplied by generic knowledge. The re-mainder must come from contentspecific knowledge, to which we turnin the next chapter.

Chapter 101 Hudgins. Bryce 13 4 Catalogue of Concepts to the Peclu.

gogtcal Domain of Teacher Education tivraiuse, NewYork: National Dissemination Center, Svrat use Univercity, 123 Huntington Hall, 1974

2. Smith, B Othanel: Donald E Orloskv, and jean Borg.llantlbook on the Development and Use of ProtocolMaterials for Teacher Education United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Offieeof Eduealion. Leadership Training Institute Chitties., FlatlfillPanhandle Education Cooperative. 1973. 164 pg.: Borg.Walter R -Withitness." Protocol Materials StudentManual. Logan, Utah Utah State I:nom-soy. July 1Q7437 pg . Borg, Walter R Protocol Materials Instructorllandhooli for the Protocol Materials on ClassroomMantegement Tampa. Florida. National Resource andDissemination C:enter. Finset-so. of ',ono Fl Lt. n d

88 pg . "Protocol Materials What Are Thev)- 16 itoncolor 61m. Tampa. Florida: National Recount. andDissemtnation Center, University of South Florida: Smith,B. Othanel. Teachers for the Real World Washington,D.C.. The American Association of Colleges for TeacherEducation, 1969. 183 p

1 Glaser. Kurt and Ras-mm.(1 I. Clemmens. -SehoolFailure.- Pedtatrics, 35, 1965. pp. 128-141, Ilallgren, 13.-Specific Dyslexia: A Clinical and Genetic Study.- .4ecoPssirhsor Neuroi Supplement, Vol 65, 1960: Glaser,Kurt. Learning Diffieulties Causes and Psychological linplications A Guide for Professionals Springfield. IIMoats- Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1974. pp 18.19.

4 Hiller. Pik II., Gerald Fisher, and Wallet Karts "AComputer losestigation of Verbal C:haraeteristies of Effestive Classroom Lecturing,- A merecan EducationalResearch lournal. VI. No 4, November 1969, pp

10.197

98

6111 675; Hiller. Jai k 11 "Verhal Itesposis Int licatins ofCunt eptlial Vagueness." doorman Educational Re Sedrch/aurthd, VIII. No 1, January 1971, pp. 151-161. Bing.Waite: K "Improviog Pupil Au 1111n eniene thmogli1 acht r Language." Field reu Report. Tampa.:tonal Resource' anal Dts.semination Centel. 1/niversity ofSmith Florida, scil pp. 1-21o; Belgart1 M II Rosen

shine. and N l.. Gage. "Fhe ratlilreS Effectiveness soExplaining Esidence tat Bs Generality and Correlaitonwith Pupils' Ratings and Attemion St ores. Its Gage etai . Technical Report No 4 Siantord Stanford Grusinton Resrars It and Development on "I eaching. 1968; Walk'',N E. Relationships between Teacher Chnratteruties andStudent Behavior. Pare 111 Salt Lake City: University of

soli Tito, tl' S (1 E Coop Res. Tint. Ni. SAE. El)5 II) 1811: Torratire, F P. Charm-trusties of Aflaitemotifs teachers that Affect Students' Learning. FowlRetool U.S 0 E. Bureau of Reward' (Coop Res Proj.No pelts Cmxtrat t No SAE 11993). 1966 (ERIC no. ED101 378 ). Solo ,,,,, n. 1).. L. Rosenberg., and W Fl.Bertiek Teas het Behavior anti Student Leariting,"jourha/ oi Ftlactritotta/ Ms:tiro/fogy, 54. 196. pp 23 ;its.Bloom. Benjamin S human Charm touters and SchoolLearning. New York. Mn Grass-Iiill Book Company.076, pp 258260: Dunkin, M and B. Biddle. TheStudy of Teaching. New Yotk- Holt. Rinehart, andkViiiston 197-1 p 108.

Stu Yelson. KR hard J. -What Is the Basic 'Teachinghumid of Teacher Education. Vol. 24 (Sumnirr 1973),pp. 1.14151, Shayelson R. J -Teachers' DecisionSlaking.'" N. 1.. Gage (ed.), The Psychology ofTeaching Methods The 75th Yearbook of the NationalSociety /or the Study of Education, Part 1. Chicagollnisersity of Chicago Press, 1976, pp. 372 114; Notions.Jacob. Durtp/me and Group Mairagentent as ClassroomsNew York: !loft. Rinehart ant) Winston. 1970; Rosenshine. Barak. -Objectively Measured Behavioral Predic-tors of Effectiveness in Explaining." In I I). Westburyand A. A. Brllack (eds.). Researrh into Classroom Proc-esses New York. Teachers College Press, 1971. Rosen-shine, Barak. rearheng Behaviors nod Student Achievemerit. London. National Foundation for Falutattor atResearch in England and Wales. 1971.

6 Brophy. Jere E.. and Carolyn M. Evertston. Learning fromTeaching A Developmental Perspective. Boston: Allynand Bacon. inc., 1976: Stallings, J. A., and D. Kaskowitt.Follow through Classroom Observation 1972.77 MenloPark, California- Stanford Research Institute, 1974-

Medley. Donald M. Tischer Compesencr and Trite/terEfferriwness A Reverts, of Proress Product ResearchWashington, D. C.: American Association of Colleges forTeacher F.ducation, August 1977: Fisher, C. W.. I) CBerliner. N. N. Filby. R. Marliave. I. S. Cahen, M. M.Dishaw. and J. E. Moore. Teaching and Learning in theElementary School A Summary of the Beginning TeacherEsaluation Study. San Francisco: Far West Laboratoryfor Educational Research and Development. BTF.S

Report V11 I. September 1978; Conley. W.. andLeinhartit The hutructional Dimensions Study. Final

Report Pittslittigh, retiosylvanta: training Researchand Drveloptortit Centel. University 111 1°itislittrgb, 1978

7. K iamb Discipline and Group Management inChao-Omni New Holt, Rinehatt. Old WillSielel,19711: Brophy, Jere E.. .m4 Calolyit M. Everlsoo. Learn-ing from Teaching A Developmental Per *retireBoston. Allyn and Bacon, Inc . 1976: (:laser, Nutt.Looming Difficulties, Springfield, Illinois: Charles C-1 homes. Publisher. 1974. p 61, Gottlieb, J. ass( BadoifM. "Sot 'al Act eptahility (11 Retarded Children in Nonparted St !tools Differing m Artlitterture." AmericanPurim! of Mental Deficiency, 78, 1973, pp. 15 19;Medley, Donald M. Teacher Competence and Teat herEffectiveness. A RevIew of Proress-Product ResearchWashiogiun, I), C.. The American Assotiatimi al Col.loges For Teacher F.docation, August 1977

ri Bloom. B. S.; A Davis. and R. lieu. CompensatoryEducation /or ("Ultima Deprivation Based Int workingpapers contributed by participants in the Reset, shtrem e on F:tlutation and Cultural Deprivation. NewYork. Holt. Itineltari, and Winston, 1965; Gordon. I. J.(ed.) Reaching the Child through Parent Education TheFlorida Approach Gaioesville: institute for the Develop-ment of Human Resources, University of Florida. 1969:Colvin. Ralph W., and Esther M. Zaffiro. PreschoolEdutattem. A Handbook for the Training of Early Childhood Educators. New York: Springer Publishing ComIwo:, 197-1. p. Kagan. J., and 11 A Muss Birth toMaturity A Study. to Psychological Development NewYork. John Wiley. 1962; Strickland, S. P. "Can SlumChildren 1- earn!" American Education, July 1971, pp.

7

9. G 1, T.. and Beckerman. E. The Effect of ClassroomContext tio Student Achievement Terhnical Report N.145. Columbia, Missouri: Center for Iteseart b in SocialBehaviot. University of Missouri. 1978; Ktounin, J. S.. andP. il. Doyle. "Degree of Continuity of a Lesson's SignalSystem and Task Involvement of Children." Journal ofEducational Psychology, 67, 1975. pp. 159.164, Kounin,Jar ob S . and Paul Gump. "Signal Systems of Lesson Set-tings and the Taskltelated Behavior of Preschool ChMtlren,"jourrtal of Educational Psychology, 66, 1974. pp.554-562; Rosenshine, Barak. Teaching Behayrors andStudent Arkievement Windsor, Berkshire: NationalFoundation for Educational Itesearth in England andWales, 1971; Soar, R. S. Follow through Classroom Proc-ess Measurement and Pupil Growth (1970-71)- FinalReport Gainesville: College of Education. University ofFlorida. 1973; Solomon, 11. and A. J. Kendall. FinalReport lodoydual Chnraeteruhts and Childen's Performanse in Varied Educational Settings Chicago: SpencerFoundation Project, 1976; Stallings, J.. and D.

Kaskowitr, Follow through Classroom °IncitationEvaluation 1972-73 Menlo Park. California. StanfordReseart h Institute. 1974. :Medley. Donald M. TeacherCorn/retrace and Tea riser Eller:worts A Review ofProrrifProdurt Research Washington, I) C . TheAmer% an Assr Winn of Colleges for '1 eat her F.ritts anon,August 1977.

1 5

10. 1hiokin, M. , and B. Biddle The Study of Teaching NewYolk. Holt. Ripsaw, t. and Winston, 1974. p 24441:

Brophy. Jere E., and Carolyn M. Evertson. Learning fromTeaching A Developmental Perspective Ras . Allynand Bacon. Inc.. 1976: Fisher, C. W., D. C. Berliner, N.N. Filby. R. Marliove, L. S Cohen. M. M. Dishow. and JE. Mutate. Teaching and Learning in the ElementarySchou, A Summary of the Beginning Teacher EvaluationStudy. San Francisco: Far West Lahoratory for Educational Research and Development, B'I'TS Report VH.I,September 1978.

11 Abraham, E. C., M. A. Nelson. anti W. W. Reynolds. Jr.Discussion Strategies and Student Cognitive Skills. Apaper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanEducolional Research Association. New York, 1971:Dunkin. M., and B. Biddle. The Study of Teaching. NewYork: Holt. Rinehart. and Winston. 1974. pp. DO, 335.:Brophy, Jere E., and Carolyn M. Evertson. Learning fromTeaching A Developmental Perspective. Boston: Allynand Bacon, Inc.. 1976, p, 146; Soar. R. S. An IntegrativeApproach to Classroom Learning. Philadelphia: Collegeof Education, Temple University. 1966.

12 Brophy. Jere E.. and Carolyn M. Evertson. Learning fromTeaching. A Developmental Perspective Boson: Allynand Raclin, Inc. 1976.

13. Kounin, Jacob. Discipline and Group Management inClassrooms New York: Holt. Rinehart. and Winston,1970.

14. Kounin, Jacob. Discipline and Group Management anClassrooms New York. link, Rinehart. and Winston.1970.

15 Thompson, M.. W. Brassell, S. Persons, K. Tucker, andII. Rollins. "Contingency Management in the Schools.How Often and Ilow Well Does It Work?" American Edurational Research Journal. 1974, pp. 19.28: Brophy, f.. J.Colosimo, and "F. Carter. "Applying a Contingency Alanogement System to All Students in Each Classroom in anEntire Elementary School." Research Report Austin.Texas. T1w Resents h and Development Centet for TeacherEducotion. The University of Tex.'s at Austin, 1974.Rollins. H.: B. McCandless, M. Thompson. and W.Brassell. "Project Success Environment: An Extended Ap-plo atom of Comingencv Management in Inner-CosSt hook Journal o/ Educational Psychology. 66 197.1,pp. 167.178; Dunkin, M., and B. Biddle, The Study ofTeaching New York: link, Rinehart, and Winston.1974. p. 169: Duke. Daniel L. (ed.) Classroom Manage.mint The 78th Yearbook of the National Society for theStudy of Education Chicago- he University of Chicago)Press. 1979.

16. Walsh. William M (ed.) Calinsehng Children and Adolescent .4n Anthology ty Contemporary TechniquesBerkeley, California Mt Cuicheti Publishing Corp.. 1975,pp. 375 397.

17. Hawes, Richard M. -Reality Therapy: An Arwood) toEncourage Individual and Social Responsibility in 'beElememory School. In Walsh, William M. (rd.) Coun-seling Children and Adolescents. All Anthology of Con.lernporery Techniques. Berkeley. California: McCutchanPublishing Corp. 1975. pp. 390,397.

18. Peitrofesn, John J., Alan Millman, Howard II. Spiels.Diana V. P. . Counseling. rheumy, Research and Prattire Chit ago. Rand McNally College Publishing Compasty, 1978, pp. l0$'205.

19. Page. Ellis Nitro. -Teacher Comments and Student Peronce: A SeveitivFour Classroom) F.xpriment in

St hoot Monsanto, Journal o/ l eluseateonal Psychology,49, August 1958. pp. 173,181.

20. McDill. Edward L.. Mary S. McDill. and J. TimothySprehe. Strategies for Success in Contemporary Educa.tion: An Appraisal of Evaluation Research. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins Press. 1969: Rosenberg, Leon A. Achiew-ment Motivation in Young Children. 1. An Evaluation ofa Community Intervention Program. IL The Role of theQuality of Adult Behavior Mimeographed ProgressReport, 1973: White. Sheldon If. ''The National ImpactStudy of Head Start.- in Duadtantaged Child, Volume J.Compensatory Education A National Debate. Ilellintith,Jerome (ed.) New York. Brunet 'Matel, 1970; Glaser,Kurt. Learning Difficulties. Springfield. Illinois: CharlesC. Thomas Publisher, 1974. p. 25.

21. Melton, Arthur W. (ed.). Categories of !tumor: Learning.New York: Academic Press, 1964, pp. 243.285

22. Ruediger. William C. Teaching Procedures Boston:Houghton Mifflin. 1932, p. 55f.

23. Morrison, Henry C. Practice of Teaching an the Second.as), School. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1926, p.81.

24 Ibid . p 17025. Peterson, Penelope L., and Iletbert J. Wilbert. Research

on Teaching- Concepts. Findings. and ImplicationsBerkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corporation. 1979. p.3$

26. Kilpatrick. William li. Foundations of Method NewYork. Macmillan Company, 1926, pp. 203-205.

27. Peterson, Penelope 1.. and Herbert J. Walberg. Op. cit.p. 48.

28 Horwitz, R. A -Psychological Effects of the Open Class-room. RI.17941 of Educational Research Vol 49 No. 1,1979, pp 71 85.

99

Chapter 11

A Profile of Specific Knowledge ForPedagogical Training

We distinguished generic from specific knowl-edge in the preceding chapter. pointing out thatteaching skills uniquely related to a particular in-structional subject are said to be content-specificand its verbal counterpart to be content-specificknowledge.

Research on content-specific problems ofteaching was among the early research develop-ments along with studies of the relation of achieve-ment to such contextual variables as class size,grouping, child interest, intelligence, and gradeplacement. Teaching behavior per se, although ofsporadic interest. did not come into its own as anobject of research until the early 1950's. Even thenthe problems of criteria, research design. and con-troversy over the relation of psychology to teachingdogged researchers almost until the 1970's. Butsince then marked progress has been made towardunraveling the generic variables of teachingbehavior and their relation to the variables ofachievement. attitudes. and conduct.

Although little progress was made in the study ofgeneric variables prior to the 1950's. clinical knowl-edge of instruction in reading. arithmetic, gram-mar. and foreign language had become extensiveby that time and has continued to accumulate.Research in the teaching of science. social sciences.musk. art. and literature is far less impressive. It isworthy of note. however, that the body of clinicalknowledge applicable to the elementary curriculumexceeds by far that actually used in training as op-posed to verbal courses. It must be admitted. how-ever, that the amount of research on the teaching ofsubjects at advanced levels is comparatively small.

Schema for Ordering Specific Knowledge

To classify content-specific knowledge the pro-gram dimensions to which the knowledge is relevantmust first be identified. One dimension is the level

of schooling such as preschool primary. interme-diate, and secondary. This dimension roughlyrepresents the developmental gradient of studentsas well as their levels of knowledge. Specific instruc-tional behavior differs somewhat from level to level,a fact recognized for centuries and now supportedby research findings.

Another dimension is the subject matter of in-struction. That the character of teaching differs insome important respects from one subject toanother has been a constant theme of research andpedagogical education for most of this century.

The third dimension is the domains of trainingset forth in the preceding chapter. it is a mistake toconsider the training of pedagogical personnel inthese domains apart from clinical knowledge ap-propriate to them. for the knowledge tells us whatskills to develop. For example. the knowledge usedto decide the diagnostic skills to be taught is quitedifferent from that used to decide the skills of in-struction. if we know that manuscript writing(printing) is more effective than handwriting inteaching young children to write, we know therebythat teachers should acquire skill in manuscriptwriting and in identifying the difficulties childrenhave as they try to form letters and words. Theclinical knowledge required for skill developmentvaries from one domain to another and in somecases from subject to subject and from level to levelof schooling.

These three dimensions are represented in thediagram on the next page.

To fill in the cells from the research literaturewould require a team of individuals workingthroughout a considerable period of time. Even thetask of giving examples of knowledge for each cell istoo overwhelming to be undertaken under ourrestraints of time and resources. However, we cangive a few illustrations of such items of knowledgeto emphasize what must be done to develop an ef-fective program of pedagogical training. The

107 101

Diagram 8. Master Schema for Specific ClinicalKnowledge by Subject. School Levels. andTraining Domains

OthersVocational-Industrial Education

Agricultural Education

Distributive EducationBusiness Education

Health and Physical Education

ArtMusic

[tome FAAMOMICS

Foreign Language

Social ScienceNatural Science

MathematicsLanguage Arts

Secondary School

Intermediate School

Primary School

Preschool

I

et.

S

following items are examples of the language artscells for each domain and school level, except forlevels where knowledge is not readily available andwhere the domains primarily include genericknowledge.

Diagnosis:A. Preschool

a) If a child is having reading problems, theteacher should determine if he or she isconfused about what it means to "read,"that is, (I) understanding the communica-tion purpose of written language. (2) con-ceptualizing the symbolic function ofwriting, (3) understanding the concepts ofdecoding and encoding, (4) learning thelinguistic concepts, and (5) developing thecorresponding technical terminology forsuch abstract units of language.

102

The state of cognitive confusion about thepurpose and nature of reading has a cu-mulative effect as the child advances tohigher grades.'

Diagnosis:B. Primary

11) If a child is having difficulty in makingcertain letters in manuscript writing,observe the child to see which of the basicstrokes is not being properly performed.'

Diagnosis:C. Intermediate.

a) If teachers want to assess the sight vocabu-lary problems of pupils, they should usewords tha are similar in their spellingpatterns so children must look at thewhole word rather than just its initial orfinal ?otter for identification.'

b) If teachers force children to create asentence that is a logical or meaningfulcontinuation of one they have read, it in-dicates understanding of the givensentence.'

Planning:Research in this domain is just new gettingunderway. The knowledge generated by researchis likely to be generic instead of content specific.

ManagementA. Preschool.

a) Instruction.If teachers require students to describe anobject they request to use. languagedevelopment is facilitated.'

b) Students.Research on this aspect of managementhas resulted in considerable knowledgeabout the control of students, but theknowledge appears to be generic althoughit resulted from studies of the perfor-mance of elementary teachers.

Management:B. Primary.

a) Instruction.If the teacher of reading frequently pro-vides for structured learning Achievementamong low SES students %ill increase.'

If second-grade teachers follow a patternof instruction which allows them to be ac-cessible to pupils, work in small groups.and use a variety of materials, thenstudents make higher gains on achieve-ment.'

If a student is having sight vocabularyproblems in reading. teachers can facili-tate word recognition by teaching chil-dren to focus on spelling patterns.'

If teachers select words that have highassociative connections. such as butterbread: wet rain; dog bark . . . the stu-dent's skill in recognition of words in con-text improves.'

b) Students.See generic knowledge.

Management:C. Intermediate.

a) Instruction.If teachers provide reading materials thatare image evoking and easily visualizedand not beyond the children's experientialbackground, comprehension improves.(Films. field trips, concrete objects. groupactivities, and pictures can prepare chi).dren for comprehension.)"

If teachers change the format of readingmaterials or their mode of presentation.reading comprehension is facilitated. Forexample. the use of phrase grouping ofsentences helps the comprehension ofpoorer readers . . . . "The cat ran underthe table." "The cat ran . . . under thetable. ""'

b) Students.See generic knowledge.Resources.If teachers select reading stories with goodstructure. student comprehension improves.(Structure includes characteristics of suchstory features as setting, theme. plot, andresolution.)"

c)

Management.D. Secondary.

a) Instruction.If teachers provide sufficient definitions,details, and examples of concepts in socialstudies, reading comprehension i.-nproves."

b) Students.See generic knowledge.

c) Environment.If teachers of adolescents with readingproblems show acceptance and positive at-titudes, disabled readers are less anxiousand function at their best."

d) Materials.When teachers select textbooks and sup-plementary materials, the readability andrange of levels of materials should be con-sidered to determine the demands of thereaders' tasks. whether comprehension willbe enhanced or diminished."

109103

e) Resources.If teachers provide for counseling to im-prove the self-concept of adolescents alongwith reading instruction, there is signifi-candy greater improvement in readingachievement."

Communication.This domain contains only generic knowledge.

Evaluation.This domain contains generic knowledge,

although test items are typically content specific.When clinical pedagogical knowledge is assembledand assorted into the various cells of the schema, itmay turn out that most content-specific knowledgepertains to diagnosis and instruction and very littleto observation, planning, management, evaluation,and communication. Were this to be the case, itwould have fundamental implications for programdevelopment. Work in the teaching of particulardisciplines would then deal almost entirely with

, diagnosis and specific skills of instruction; that is.with how to identify obstacles to learning inherent

104

in the content as well as those arising from what thestudent brings to the learning task, such as priorlearnings, capacity. psychological and physical dis-functions; and also with how to help students withproblems thus identified. This would entail study ofthe subject matter of instruction from quite a dif-ferent standpoint. Treated in detail would be itshierarchical structure. where it exists; its logicalforms; the logic and psychology of the elements ofknowledge most difficult to learn; and modes ofidentifying learning difficulties in the spot.

The other domains of trainingobservation,planning, management, evaluation, and communi-cationwould consist of generic knowledge, andthese could be treated in that part of the programspecially designed to teach the skills implied bygeneric principles.

Of course, all of this borders on speculation, forwe cannot know how to organize a program ofpedagogical training until we have assembled andclassified the knowledge accumulated fromresearch, craft experience, and counseling. Never-theless, speculation of this sort at once presents thenegative effects of the disarray of the knowledgebase of pedagogy.

Summary

Attention should be called again to the distinction between genericand specific knowledge. The teacher must organize and control theclassroom group as well as manage the general operations of instruc-tion. The knowledge pertaining directly to these responsibilities isgeneric and the teacher behaviors that follow from such knowledge aregeneric :kills. At the same time the teacher must teach the knowledgeand ski..s comprising the curriculum. Some of the tasks of teaching areuniquely related to curriculum content, and the knowledge pertainingto these tasks and the skills they require are content-specific.

Admittedly, this distinction can be overdrawn, but, if used withcaution, it can be a guide to separating the generic knowledge and skillsthat are now duplicated in special methods courses from the content-specific materials. This would not only eliminate much duplication butalso enable the special courses to concentrate upon the pedagogicalknowledge and skills peculiar to the particular subject matter.

Chapter 11

Because of limited resources and time we havefound it necessary to rely heavily upon textbooks onthe teaching of particular subjects. For no reasonother than accessiblity to the authors, the followingwere used to direct us to references in which thevarious items are treated: Hallahan, Daniel P., andKauffman, James M. Introduction to Learning Dis-abilities: A Psycho-Behavioral Approach. Engle.wood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1976: Tinker,Miles A., and McCullough, Constance M. Teach.ing Elementary Reading, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:Prentice-Hall, 1975: Rupley, William H., and Blair,Timothy R. Reading Diagnosis and Remediation:A Primer for Classroom and Clinic. Chicago: RandMcNally, 1979; Roe, Betty D.. Stoodt, Barbara D..and Burns. Paul C. Reading Instruction in theSecondary School. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1978.

1. Seralica, F, C.. and J. E. Suigel, "Styles of Categorisationand Reading Disability." Journal of Reading Behavior, 2,1970, pp. 105.115; Vernon, M. D. Reading and Its Diffi-culties. London: Cambridge University Press, 1971:

Downing, John. "Children's Concepts in Learning toRead." Educational Research, 12. 1970, pp. 106.112:Downing, John. **Children's Developing Concept ofSpoken and Written Language. Journal of ReadingBehaviors. 4. 1972, pp. 1.19: Downing, John. "SomeCurious Paradoxes in Reading Research." Reading, 8.1974, pp, 2.10.

2. Anderson, D. W. "Teaching Handwriting." WhatResearch Says to the Teacher, No. 4. Washington. D. C.:National Education Association. 1968.

3. Samuels, S. Jay. "Letter Name Knowledge vs. Letter-Sound Knowledge as Factors in Reading Acquisition."Reading Teacher, 24. 1971, pp. 604.608: Samuels. S. Jay."Modes of Word Recognition." In Theoretical Modelsand Process of Reading, second edition, edited by HarrySinger and Robert Ruddell. pp, 270-282. Newark. Dela-ware: International Reading Association, 1976.

4. Bobrow, S. A.. and G. H. Bower. "Comprehension andRecall of Sentences." Journal of Experimental PO'chology, 80, 1969. pp. 455.461: Anderson, Richard C..Sheila R. Goldberg, and Janet L. Hidde, "MeaningfulProcessing of Sentences. Journal of Educational Pay-chology, 62, 1971, pp. 395.399: Anderson. C., et al."Thematic Prompting in PairedAssociate Learning."Journal of Educational Psychology. 62. 1971. pp.315-321.

5. Hart, B. M and T. R. Risley. "Establishing Use ofDescriptive Adjectives in the Spontaneous Speech of Disadvantaged Preschool Children." Journal of AppliedBehavior Analysis, I. 1968, pp. 109-120.

6. Medley, Donald M. Teacher Competence and TeacherEffectiveness: A Review of Process-Product Research,

Washington, D. C.: American Association of Colleges forTeacher Education. August 1977. Soar, Robert S. Follow'Through Classroom Process Measurement and Ft. pi 1

Growth (197071). Final Report. Gainesville, Fl.: Collegeof Education, University of Florida, 1973.

7. McDonald. Frederick 1. Beginning Teacher EvaluationStudy, Phase II Summary. Princeton, N. J.: EducationalTesting Service, 1976. p. 21.

8. Gibson, E., J. Farber, and S. Shepala, Test of a LearningSet Procedure for the Abstraction of Spelling Patterns.Project Literacy Report No. 8. Ithaca, N. Y.: CornellUniversity. 1967. pp. 21-31.

9. Samuels. S. Jay. "Modes of Word Recognition." InTheoretical Models and Process of Reading. Second Edition, edited by Harry Singer and Robert Ruddell, pp.270-282. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Asso-ciation, 1976.

10. Anderson, Richard C.. and Raymond W. Kulhavy."Learning Concepts from Definitions," American Educa-tional Research Journal, 9, (Summer 1972). pp. 385390;Levin, Joel R. "When is a Picture Worth a ThousandWords?" In Issues in Imagery and Learning: Four Papers.Madison. Wisconsin: Wisconsin Research and Develop.ment Center for Cognitive Learning, 1972.

I I. Cromer. W. "The Difference Model: A New Explanationfor Some Reading Difficulties." Journal of EducattonalPsychology, 61. 1970. pp. 471. 483: Levin, Joel R. "Com-prehending What We Read: An Outsider Looks In." InTheoretical Models and Processes of Reading. second edi-tion, edited by Harry Singer and Robert Ruddell, pp.320-330. Newark. Delaware: International Reading Association, 1976.

12. Guthrie. John T. "Story Comprehension." The ReadingTeacher, 30. February 1977, pp, 574.577; Goodman.Kenneth S. "Miscues: Windows on the Reading Process."In Miscues Analysis: Application to Reading Instruction,edited by Kenneth Goodman, pp. 3-14. Urbana, Illinois:National Council of Teachers of English. 1973: Ander-son. Richard C. "How to Construct Achievement Tests toAssess Comprehension. Review of Edueational Research,42. Spring 1972. pp. 145.170.

13. Lee, ohn R and Lee F. Anderson, "New Approaches tothe Material for a Sequential Curriculum on AmericanSociety for Grades Five to 'Twelve." Vols. I.2, Evanston.Illinois: Social Studies Curriculum, Northwestern Univer-sity, 1970: Ratcliffe, Robert H. "A Critical Analysis of theTreatment Given Representative Social Science Ideas inLeading Eleventh-Grade American Textbooks." Evan,anon. Illinois: Unpublished doctoral dissertation. North.western University. 1966.

14. Hake, James M. "Covert Motivations of Good and PoorReaders." Reading Teacher 22, May 1969, pp. 731-738.

15. Karlin. Robert. "What Does Educational ResearchReveal about Reading and the High School Student?"The English Journal, 58, March 1969, pp. 368-395.

16. Lawrence, Denis. "An Experimental Investigation intothe Effects of Counseling Retarded Readers. in NewHorizons in Reading Newark, N. J.: InternationalReading Association. 1976, pp. 434-441.

111 105

106

PART THREE

How To Get There

What changes are basic to improvement of pedagogicaleducation?

Do we move forward by changing individuals or bychanging objective circumstances?

What changes in objective conditions now favor improve-ments in pedagogical education?

When are behavioral techniques of change likely to be ef-fective?

What can a college faculty do?

The need for a coalition to effect new policies and pro-grams of pedagogical education.

11 2

Chapter 12

Memo On the Problem of Getting There

In the preceding chapters we have presentedwhat a professional school of pedagogy would looklike, if in fact it existed; and we have given the out-lines of knowledge for a program of pedagogicaltraining and indicated how that knowledge canfunction in the training program. The remainingtask is to suggest how such a school of pedagogy canbe instituted.

There are two general ways of displacing one setof ideas, practices, and institutional structures byanother. The first aims to make personal and insti-tutional changes by changing individuals: the sec-ond by changing external circumstances. These canbe grouped as follows:

1. Methods of changing institutions by changingindividuals1.1. Conversion1.2. Rational procedures and techniques1.3. Behavior technologies

2. Methods of changing institutions by changingexternal circumstances2.1. Governmental action2.2. Circumstantial coercion

Institutional Change ViaIndividual Change

The underlying supposition of these methods isthat changes in ideas, practices, and institutionscan be induced by changing individuals per se.When enough individuals have been transformed.changes in practices and institutions can result.This view is rooted in the notion of social atomism.each individual being considered as a social atomand society as a collection of such atoms with socialchange occurring when a sufficient number movein the same direction. The good institution. and in-deed the good society. is created by progressivelydeveloping good individuals, however defined.

The first. and most ancient of these methods. isreligious conversion. Some unusual experience.associated with a source of power outside of and

beyond the comprehension of the individual, in-duces a change in the individual's attitudes, beliefs,and hopes. Such experience may occur in the lone.liness of a wilderness, in the heart of a desert, in thepews of a church, or on the crowded streets of a city.Regardless of the location, the individual is somehow transformed by a profound experience to a neworientation and a new way of life.

The power of conversion is not to be lightly dismissed as a mode of change. Witness the currentrash of religious cults. Also. one has only to con-sider the rise of Christianity in ancient times, itsspread throughout the world, its persistence overtwo thousand years, and its profound effect uponall social institutions to recognize the fundamentalsignificance of conversion. Ii has been said thatChristianity rode into the ancient world on the backof a downtrodden social class. This can hardly bedenied, but without the phenomenon of conversionit would have gained neither enough followers norenough support among the upper classes to havesurvived.

Another mode of change stems from the doctrineof the rational individual, the belief that peopleorder their life by reason, that they can be per-suaded to change their ideas. commitments andways of behaving by argument and fact. This is theheart of the parliamentary system. which assumesthat individuals will listen to reason and be per-suaded by the power of logic and information.While the actions of a parliament often rest uponcompromise you scratch my back and I'll scratchyours still the persuasiveness of logic and informa-tion is held to be the dominant force.

This is perhaps the reason why political partici-pation is deemed to be educative and why so muchemphasis has been placed upon skills of thinking aswell as knowledge in educational programs. It is noaccident that in those nations where the parliamen-tary mentality has dominated, the schools have beenmost vehement in insisting upon intellectual disci-pline of the young.

113 107

It is easy to see from this approach that changesin institutions are to be induced by the persuasiveinfluence of logic and fact; that indeed the wholesociety can be improved if the educational systemdisciplines its students in the art of reasoning and inthe procedures of gathering, organizing. and assess-ing information.

A third mode of change is derived from behav-ioral sciences. Building on the concepts and prin-ciples of psychology, sociology, and clinical pro-cedures and techniques for changing individuals, anumber of schemata have been devised for chang-ing institutions. We shall briefly indicate some ofthe main features of three of these schemata.

The first is the social-influence schema whichstresses the role of an agent or leader who is awareof the innovation) The leader is likely to be a prin-cipal or someone in the administrative echelonswhose role is legitimate. This leader induces others,department heads, and finally teachers, to becomeaware of the innovation and interested in it. Asheads of departments and teachers become in-terested. they then look for evidence for and againstthe innovation. From the evidence. often testimonyof those who have tried it. they decide either to trythe innovation or to reject it. if they try it and it issuccessful. the tendency is to adopt it for furtheruse. In this case. the innovation is introduced andits importance sustained by the influence of legiti-mized individuals until the evidence for and againstthe innovation can be examined, and the innova-tion tried out. should that be the decision after ex-amining the evidence.

The second schema is the linkage approach.?The central feature of this schema is the linkagebetween sources of knowledge and the potentialusers of the knowledge. To do this requires inter-organization and cooperation among institutions aswell as institutional levels. For example. an elemen-tary or high school may designate someone who is toserve as a mediator between the faculty of theschool and an external individual who connects theschool to the source of information. if the school isexperiencing difficulties. the faculty and itsmediator study the school situation and define theproblem. The problem is then passed on to thelinker who reviews it and. when it is in final form.conveys it to the source of information. The sourceof information is some individual or group who isaware of the research pertaining to the problem.The relevant research is digested and the appro.

10$

priate information sent back through the samechannel to the linker and thence to the school itself.The faculty of the school then uses the research in-formation to work out a solution or to introducesuch innovations as seem appropriate.

The linkage approach must necessarily reducethe friction of social interaction not only within thefaculty itself but also between the various levels ofthe linkage system. It will consequently make use ofvarious training devices to develop the personnel inskills of both social interaction and problem identi-fication and definition.

A third schema emphasizes the concerns of indi-viduals who are to be involved in the implementa-tion of the innovation.? In this approach, a clearconception of the innovation is deemed to be one ofthe most important elements in the process ofchange. What is loosely referred to as innovationvery often contains a number of changes, each ofwhich is in itself an innovation. The failure torecognize this fact very often leads to overloading aschool with changes to be made in a given timeframe.

This approach plays up the importance of theconcerns of individuals having to do with information about the innovation, how the change will af-fect them, how the use of their time will bechanged. how their work will relate to that ofothers. and the effect of the change upon children.Attention to these concerns will require. amongother things. techniques of identifying them,sources of information, human relations skills. andthe ability to sense the situation as perceived by different individuals.

This mode of change also emphasizes levels ofuse. ranging all the way from no use at all to thepoint at which users are comfortable with the newpractice and are able to reflect upon it in search ofways to improve it. This schema calls for a systematic plan whereby those who are trying to use thenew set of practices are given appropriate assistanceat every level of use. Without such assistance inno-vations are likely to abort.

These schemata have as their entl-inviewchanges in institutional practices and arrangementsto be achieved by changing individuals. Thesemodes may be, and quite often are. effective in-struments of change within a particular institution.But where there are overlapping or interrelatedsystems such that what one institution does isdependent upon the policies and actions of otherinstitutions. they are of secondary importance.

Colleges of pedagogy are characterized today byoverlapping systems. These colleges typically are ina university system. meshed with colleges of liberalarts and sciences and other colleges at the under-graduate level and with the graduate school at ad-vanced levels. 1'hen, unlike other colleges in theuniversity, they are meshed with State departmentsof education and the public schools. Overarchingthis total complex are State legislatures which todayare increasingly taking over the functions of theboards of higher education and local educationalauthorities, laying down policies. curriculums. andincreasingly assuming the responsibility For financ-ing the schools as well as the universities. Stateeducational agencies. too, are under legislative influvnce, functioning primarily as instruments tocarry out the will of the legislature. Add to all thisthe increasing role of the Federal Government ineducation, and one begins to see how many basesmust be touched in order to make any significantchange in schools of pedagogy.

Changes in External Circumstances

Unlike the preceding schemata, the ones now tobe considered are not concerned, at least not direct-ly. with the problem of transforming the attitudes.ideas. and practices of individuals. Rather they aimto change directly the institutional structures withinwhich individual activities are carried on. The col-lectivity is their target, not individuals. The basicsupposition of these schemata is that if the circumstances under which people behave change, theirbehavior will change and new ideas and attitudeswill thereby be induced. Consequently, the object ofchange is the circumstances affecting a collectivity.be it a total society or a specific group.

The most obvious schema of this genus is politicalrevolt. This is not the place to discuss the anatomyof revolution. Suffice it to say that old institutionsare swept away and new relationships establishednot only among individuals but also between individuals and all the new social. economic. 'andpolitical arrangements. The dynamics of changeare the military and police Force under the direc-tion of an ideology and a determined leadership,

After a revolution. the educational system under-goes extensive reconstruction changes in thebeliefs and practices of personnel, in aims and ob-jectives. and in content of instruction as well as inthe political control of the system.

While revolution is a drastic Form of change, andone certainly not appropriate for the problems ofpedagogical schools, consideration of it calls atten-tion to the significance of the conception of demo.cracy as institutionalized revolution. Not only doesa democratic government respond to the needs of apeople, free to express and to insist upon the impor-tance of their needs, but it also changes institutionsby legislation and court decisions backed up ulti-mately by the military and police force.

It is often said that beliefs and attitudes cannotbe legislated. In a sense that is truz, but in anothersense it is false. It is true that personal dispositionsare not directly changed by either legislative acts orjudicial decisions. But these acts and decisions dochange the surroundings in which people move,and these new conditions require new forms ofbehavior that ultimately change personal disposi-tions.

The strength of this approach is illustrated by theSupreme Court decision to desegregate the publicschools. Intercultural education had been carriedon in the schools for two decades and agitation Forequal rights and equal educational opportunity hadbeen a going concern for at least a generationbefore the 1954 decision of the U.S Supreme Courtin the Brown-Topeka case. Yet little progress hadbeen made toward equalizing opportunities foreducation before the Supreme Court decision man-dated changes in objective circumstances. Afterthat changes followed more rapidly. although notwithout resistance. As new rules and new conditionsemerged and were sustained and expanded intocommunity after community, ideas. attitudes, andbehavior of individuals increasingly changed to accornmodate the new conditions. Legislation for equalemployment opporunity has had similar effects.

There can be little doubt that changes wrought inthe public schools by State and Federal legislationand court decisions have had. and continue tohave. far greater effects than all the dynamicschemata derived from behavioral sciences.

However, not all of these changes have beendesirable, and the adverse conditions affectingpedagogical schools have remained untouched. Yetwe continue to ignore the problem of how to informState legislators about pedagogical education, howto present to them a clear and vivid picture of whatit should be and what is required if pedagogicalschools are to become effective institutions. Whenwe do speak, we typically speak in divided voices

109

1 1 .-_.. 0

and out of our beliefs and convictions tattier thanOur knowledge. It is not surprising that legislatorsoften give the opinions of lay persons as muchweight as those of professionals.

Circumstances rather than governmental actionsometimes change pedagogical schools. Commonknowledge tells us that whatever occurs in one partof society affects other parts. A case in point is thesevere decline in birth rate. It is influencing societyin general and schools in particular, producing achain reaction in pedagogical institutions. The im-mediate effect is the reduction in the number ofstudents who seek to become teachers. This loss ofstudents threatens the tenure of faculty membersand in consequence schools of pedagogy turn to in-service programs to sustain their faculties. As aresult of all this, a large number of professors whoheretofore conducted all of their work in campusclassrooms are now working in the schools. an out-come of circumstantial coercion.

While there can be school improvementsresulting from these efforts to help teachers. themajor payoff from inservice is more likely to be achange in the beliefs and attitudes of professors ofpedagogy with respect to what professional education should be about, The blind forces of historysometimes induce personal as well as institutionalchanges that have long been impervious to our bestlaid plans and strategies.

These observations have been made as an il-lustration of the effect that a change in circum-stances can have on beliefs and skills. Reduction inthe number of undergraduate pedagogical studentsand the resultant movement of college faculties intothe schools can lay tie groundwork for the clinicalprogram required by a genuine professional schoolof pedagogy. What is needed. as suggested later. isleadership by college administrators, building uponthe experience and opportunities provided by theeducative impact of inservice activities.

Pro and Con of the Modes of Change

The disadvantage of the external method oftransformation lies in the fact that it changes objecrive circumstances without immediately inducingmodifications in the orientation and behavior of in-dividuals. The disposition of individuals, not beingimmediately transformed. are thus in conflict withthe new state of affairs. As a result. the resistance of

individuals is likely to be persistent and destructiveof the outward social changes, This conflict some-times leads to the use of force by those who opposethe changes and retaliation by those who brought itabout. this is a source of violence according tosome theories of objective change.

The individual approach is not altogether satis-factory either. Since it depends upon changes inpersons rather than circumstances. there is always aquestion of how many individuals must be thustransformed before changes in institutional arcrangements can be made. According to one view . amajority must be transformed, or at least. a

number sufficient to threaten the entrenched ideasand practices to the point that compromises can bemade in the interest of a new state of affairs. In anyevent, the course of change is long and tedious andis easily reversed when those whose views and ideashave been transformed are again in their old sur-roundings

It is apparent from this analysis that any changein institutional structures as well as in personal adjustments is likely to be effective only if both 'individual and collective methods are used. There isan apparent contradiction here in the suggestionthat both approaches be followed at once. The col-lective method is not likely to be used unless someindividuals are first committed to it. and the inclividual method is likely to fail unless supported in-stitutionally. The problem is insoluble at anabstract level. but at the level of practice these ap-proaches can be made to work harmoniously in theproduction of institutional and individual changes.In fact. even in a wholesale political revolution, aprogram of propanganda and education is carriedalong side by side with coerced changes in institu-tions themselves. The same thing is true in small-scale changes such as those decreed by courts or bylegislation. In the long run. coerced changes whichare not accompanied by transformation of in-dividuals ultimately lose their momentum and suf-fer reversal.

Factors to Be Changed

Turning now to the question of how to induceand sustain changes necessary to inaugurate a gen-uine program of professional preparation of schoolpersonnel, it should be borne in mind that what wesay is offered as an approximation to what is possi-

I It) 1 1 f;

ble in practical circumstances. There are manydetailed problems which can not be foreseen apartfrom actual conditions. There are special problemsof individuals which must be dealt with as thoughthey were isolated even though they may be em-bedded in a set of interrelationships. There aregeneral policies that apply to the broad institu-tional context and which at best can only be modi-fied to approximate the particular needs of the pro-fessional school, The way in which a university isorganized, the financial policies, and the peckingorder of various departments and schools all ofthese and many others will affect the efforts tochange a school of pedagogy.

Any attempt to change the present academicallyoriented program into a clinical program is morelikely to be successful if changes in objective cir-cumstances and the corresponding pt rsonal adjust-ments compatible with the new circumstances areidentified.

Among the external circumstances to be realizedage the following:4

1. The State support of pedagogical schoolsshould be based on program needs ratherthan on the number of full-time students.

2. State recognition and financial support of thepublic schools as a training laboratory.

S. Accreditation system that makes a clinicalprogram at a postbaccalaureate level a

necessary condition.4. A statewide system of rigorous examinations

on clinical and academic knowledge and onthe subject matter of instruction.

5. The pedagogical program. except programsleading to the Doctor of Philosophy degree,must be insulated from the influence of thegraduate school or from graduate require-ments for degrees in universities where nograduate school exists.

Among the internal changes to be made are thefollowing:

1. Command of clinical knowledge and skillsand the ability to train prospective teachers inthese.

2. Relationships with the public schools andtheir faculties must be improved.

S. Changes in beliefs about pedagogical educa-tion.

1 1 7

External Circumstances and How toAchieve Them

It hardly need be said that program financing isan indispensable condition for the development ofeffective pedagogical schools. Without it a clinicalprogram is impossible. for clinical work accompanying courses in academic pedagogy requires atmost a ratio of 10 students per instructor. Further-more, clinical instructors in the public school class-rooms must be members of the college faculty andpaid at the same rate as their college peers. All ofthis will add to the cost of pedagogical education,making it impossible to carry on clinical work with-out a new formula for financial support.

Moreover, the number of schools offering pro-grams in pedagogical education must be radicallyreduced. Many of them have neither the resourcesnor the staff to meet the requirements of existingprograms let alone an effective clinical program. Insome of them, work in pedagogy is offered to at-tract students to maintain the institution. By mov-ing pedagogy to the postbaccalaureate level, workin pedagogy in strictly undergraduate schools willbe eliminated. But this should not reduce their enr-rollments, for these schools can still provide the pre-professional programs for admission to pedagogicalschools.

Nevertheless, many schools which do not nowprovide master's work will try to do so if pedagogy ismade an advanced study. To preclude this is toestablish an accrediting policy that makes athoroughgoing clinical program essential for ac-creditation. In addition, there must be a statewideexamination system comparable to that providedfor professions such as accounting, medicine, andlaw. The examination should be grounded inclinical and academic knowledge and in the subjectmatter of instruction.

Finally, schools of pedagogy must be freed of theentanglements of graduate requirements. Whilethese requirements are more stringent at the doc-toral than at the master's level, they must be cutaway at all levels except for the research degree.Pedagogical competence is neither developed normanifested in meeting graduate requirements.

The foregoing conditions cannot be broughtabout by the procedures and techniques derivedfrom behavioral sciences. They are too limited in

111

scope, and lean too heavily on changes in in.dividuais, to affect the political forces that shapethe external circumstances now constraining peda-gogical schools. Neither can these conditions be instituted by colleges of pedagogy. These colleges arecompetitive with respect to enrollments andprestige and are unlikely to agree on either ohjectives or strategies, In addition, they lack, individually or collectively, the political leverage forshaping legislative opinion and action.

How then can the conditions set forth above berealized? There are at least two approaches. Thefirst. at a State level. entails the formation of acouncil of prestigious citizens to study and makerecommendations to the State legislature. Thecouncil should consist of leaders of various professions. bankers.' housewives. business executives.labor leaders. minority leaders. and perhaps others.It would be charged with the task of working out aplan for a professional school of pedagogy at theuniversity level. The plan would cover such ques-tions as autonomy of the school. financial formulas.and the role of public schools and of the Statedepartment of education. The council should beadequately staffed, and its recommendationsshould be expressed not only in common discoursebut also in model laws for legislative consideration.

How to legitimize the council is a fundamentalquestion. Should it be created and financed by theState government? Should it be an independentbody financed by a philanthropic foundation? Ofcourse. the merits of these alternatives should be ex.plored. But the prior question is how either one is tobe initiated and by whom. All this boils down to thequestion of leadership. Without it nothing will hap.pen and pedagogical schools will continue to beshaped increasingly by State departments of educa-tion acting as the agent of the State legislature.

An alternative, and perhaps the only alternative.is for two or more pedagogical deans to take the in-itiative and set an example for deans of pedagogy inStates throughout the Nation. They must havethorough command of an extensive scenario ofwhat a professional school of pedagogy can andshould do and what is needed to do it. If they arenot clear about the direction and shape of thegoals, there is little likelihood that they can exciteanyone to follow their lead. They must take themessage to civic clubs, labor unions. women'sorganizations, minority organizations, and in factto all organized groups that have a stake in educa-

112

don, Out of such a campaign to awaken the public,a council of citizens can emerge either as an inde-pendent or a governmental group. as experience ofthe campaign indicates.

If efforts to change external conditions at theState level were augmented by similar work of a na-tional council, the chances of success would begreatly increased. Leadership for the creation ofsuch a council rests with the leadership of theAmerican Association of Colleges for TeacherEducation. Its institutional membership and itsBicentennial Report on the education of the pro-fession make it an ideal agency to advance the causeof pedagogical institutions. Were this organizationto commit itself to the task of creating a council tostudy the status and needs of pedagogi, ii schoolsand to securing foundation funds to ;ort it.thereby making the council an independe body. agroup of nationally prominent citizens could be in-duced to serve. There is widespread public concernabout the schools. but few citizens of nationalstature have ever given a thought to the peda-gogical institutions that produce teachers. TheBicentennial Report lies fallow, ignored by themedia. by State legislatures. and even by theschools of pedagogy. A national council that buildson this Report and establishes communication withthe Education Commission of the States could go along way toward rebuilding pedagogical educationin our time.

Partial Agenda for a College

What can a college do by itself? The answerdepends upon the leadership of the college and thequality of its faculty. In many institutions practical-ly nothing can or will be (lone. In some cases, thecollege has neither the re rces nor the leadershipto move off dead center. In others the commitmentto graduate study is so thoroughly entrenched thatto change to a clinical orientation is simply out ofthe question. Fortunately there are some schoolswith enough resources and faculty flexibility to re-spond to leadership committed to a clinical pro-gram.

These schools can do a number of things: theycan develop a clinical orientation and commit-ment, they can establish some of the components ofa clinical complex for the training of personnel.and they can build a common point of view about

1!5'

the character and !imposes of a professional school.It is to these tasks that the procedures and lechunities for modifying individual outlooks and behaviors Are most appropriate. It is here that facultyworkshops. seminars. and departmental meetingsfor consideration of issues can be most effective.

Policies of promotion in rank and pay can beshaped to reward those who are effective in clinicalwork no less than those who are Successful asresearch workers. In many institutions this changehas already been made but without defining thesort of evidence required for sound judgmentsabout the effCctiveness of instructors in clinicalwork, There is reason to believe that a large propor-tion of the faculty of most institutions is teachingclinical courses such as special methods. studentteaching. and educational psychology with little, ifany. knowledge about research on teaching andteacher effectiveness. Many faculty members,especially those in educational psychology andother "foundation" courses, eschew research andare more interested in hearing about its method-ological flaws than in utilizing its findings in thetraining of school personnel. They unwittinglyassume that personal experience and abstract for-mulations about teaching by so-called theorists aresuperior to the imperfect knowledge gained fromresearch, and continue to think that researchshould produce empirical propositions for whichthere ale no exceptions and no exclusions.

A policy on rank and pay must reward those whoare familiar with research on teaching and otheraspects of pedagogy related to teaching, In addi.Lion. it must require that those who are familiarwith research also show evidence that they use it asthey train prospective teachers and that they require their trainees to master the knowledge at bothverbal and behavioral levels.

1 P)

Slane will ask what evidence can be adduced tojustify judgments about a faculty member's use ofresearch. This is a question that will need to begiven considerable attention, but it seems reason-able to suppose that faculty members can submittheir syllabi. examination questions and sampleanswers, and other means used to assess theirstudents as evidence that they are acquainted withthe relevant research and use it. It cannot be toostrongly urged that a college faculty that playsdown the quality of research in pedagogy andrefuses or fails to use research in the training ofschool personnel is undermining its own legitimacy.

In many instances the relationships between thepublic schools and the schools of pedagogy are at alow ebb, especially with respect to participation ofthe schools in the training of prospective teachers.Attention was called to this fact in Chapter 3. For-tunately, the relationship has seldom deterioratedto the point that restoration of cooperation is im-possible. But if the relationship is to be put on iasound footing, the school of pedagogy must take theinitiative and provide for public school teachersand administrators t... participate in the shaping ofpolicies and programs of training, particularlythose components in which the schools are to par-ticipate. Although schools of pedagogy arerestricted in their ability to compensate teachers fortheir work. the college can nevertheless allow col-lege credit in addition to paltry stipends. The faculty can also work with clinical teachers as they jointlylearn how to train prospective teachers and toevaluate their growth. Surely a faculty with strongleadership can go a long way, even with theirdestitute resources, toward creating a clinical com-plex involving local school authorities, teachers,and the public.

113

Summation

lf, as pedagogical educators, we can get over ourhangup with graduate study: if we can end our loveaffair with ideologies and put them in properperspective; if we can think of teaching as a nobleprofession and exalt teachers and the schools ratherthan treat them as objects of wholesale criticism; ifwe can provide practitioners with workable pro.cedures. techniques, and materials rather than withgrandiose formulas for the correction of all educa-tional ills; if we can end our preoccupation withhow we are perceived in the academic communityand turn our attention to how we perceiveourselves; if we can shed our masochistic attitudesand think positively about the schools, their person-nel, and what a proper and adequate program ofeducation for such personnel should be: if we canrespect our own sources of empirical knowledge: ifwe can muster our courage to take the plight ofpedagogical schools to the public with a firm con-viction of what we must have to provide high qua-lity personnelyes, if we can do these things. thereis hope that genuine professional schools of peda-gogy can become a reality.

Chapter 121. Carlson, R. 0. Adoption of Educational Innovations.

Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration. University of Oregon. Eugene, 1965,

2. Havelock. R. G. Hann/rig for Innovation through Das-tentnatton and Utih:ation of Knowledge Center for Research on Utilisation of Scientific Knowledge, Ann Arbor,Michigan. 1971.

3. Hall, Gene E. "The Study of Individual Teacher and Pro.lessor Concerns about Innovations.- Journal of Teacher

114

Education. Vol. XXVII. No. 1. pp. 22.23. 1976; Hall,Gene. and others. -Levels of Use of the Innovation: AFramework for Analyzing Innovation Adoption.-Journal

1975-

4.

Education. V01. XXVI. No. 1, pp- 52.56.

4. See Phi Delta Kappan, October 1980. For discussion ofthese circumstances.

120

Name Index

A Cottrell. D.P.. 88 Gump. P., 98Crile, G.W., 18 Guthrie, J.T., 105

Abraham, E.C., 99 Cromer, W., 105Allen, D.W., 88 11

Anderson, C., 105 D

Anderson, D.W., 105 Ilake.J.M., 105Anderson, L. F., 105 Darwin, C., 70 Hall, G.E., 8. 114Anderson. WC., 105 Davis, A., 98 Ilallahan. D.P., 105Axtelle. G.. 78 Dempsey, N., 50.57 Ilallgren, B., 97

Denemark, G.W.. 8 Halsted, W.J., 18B Dewey, J., 66, 70, 73. Hart, B.M., 105

75, 78.96 Havelock, B.G., 114Bagley, W.C., 36 Dishaw. M.M., 98, 99 Ilawes, R.M.. 99Beckerman. .r.. 68.98 Downing, J.. 105 Heath, R.W., 50. 57Belgard, M., 98 Doyle. P.H., 98 Ilellmuth, J., 99Bellack, A.A.. 98 Doyle. W.. 50. 57. 88 Herbart.J.F.. 95.96Benne, K.I)., 78 Duffy.J., 8, 57 Hess, R., 98Berelson. B.. 68. 78 Duke, D.L., 99 Hidde,J.L., 105Bcrkow, R., 57 Dunkin, M., 98.99 Hiller, J.H.. 97Berliner. D.C.. 47, 88, Hoffman, A., 9988.98, 99 E Howsam, R.B., 8

Bezdek, W.E., 98 Huber, J., 88Biddle, B., 98, 99 Edwards, R., 12 Hudgins. B.B., 97Birnbaum, M.. 78 Elliot, C.W., 37 Hull, C.. 7ZBlair, T.R.. 105 Engel, G.L., 76Bloom, B.S., 98 Evendert, E.S., 8 JBlyler, MM.. 30 Evertson, C.M., 98, 99Bobrow, S.A., 105 Jackson, P.W.. 68Borg, J.. 97 1' Jones, H.L., 8Borg, W.R., 88.97, 98 Joyce, B., 88Bower, G.H., 105 Farber, J.. 105Boyar, NJ., 88 Fenstermacher, C.D., KBrassell, W.. 99 quoted, 52.53; 57Brink, W.G., 30 Filby, N.H., 98.99 Kaess, W., 97Brophy, J.E.. 98.99 Fisher, C.W., 98, 99 Kagan, J.. 98Budoff, M., 98 Fisher. G.. 97 Kaltenbach. W. 88Burns, P.C., 105 Flexner. A., 2 Kaplan, L., 30

Fortune, J.C., 88 Karlin, R.. 105C Fox, S.. 88 Kaskowitz, D., 98

Friebel, A., 88 Kauffman,J.M., 105Cahen.L.S.. 98, 99 Keen, W., 18Caliver, A., 8 G Kelley, M.L., 88Carlson, R.O., 114 Kendall, AJ., 98Carter, T., 99 Gage, N.L.. 50; quoted. Kilpatrick. W.H., 96,Charters, WM., 8 51; 57.88, 98 99Clernmerts, R.L., 97 Gartner. A., 15 Kleucker.J.C., 88Cohen. M.R., 68 Gibson, E., 105 Kounin, J., 98, 99-Coleman, J.S., 90 Glaser, K., 97, 98, 99 Kulhavy, R.W., 105Colosimo, J., 99 Glass. G., 50Colvin, R.W., 98 Gliessman, D., 88 LConant, J. B.. 8 Goldberg, S.R., 105Cooley. W., 98 Good, T., 68, 98 LaDuc, D., 88Cooper, J.M., 88 Goodman, K.S., 105 Land. M.L.. 88Copeland, W.D., 88 Gordon, 1.J., 98 Langer. P., 88Corrigan, D.C.. 8 Gottlieb. J., 98 Lawrence, D., 105

121. 115

Lee, J. R., 105Leinhardt, G., 98Levin,..i.R. 105Lindsey. M., 88

M

Malthus. T.R.. 71Mannheim, K., 78Marhave, R., 98, 99McCollum, R., 88.McCondless, 8.. 99McCullough, C.M., 105McDill, E.L., 99McDill, M.S., 99McDonald, F.I., 88,

105Mead, Gil., 81, 88Medley, D.M., quoted,

51; 57; quoted, 83; 88,98, 99

Melton, A., 99Meredith, G., 88Metcalf, LE., 68Monroe, W.S., 15, 49,

57Moore, G.E., 73, 78Moore. J. E., 98, 99Morris, M., 88Morrison, KC., 74, 78,96, 99

Moss, H.A., 98

N

Nagel, E.., 68Nash, R.J.. 8Nelson, M.A., 99Nielson, M.A., 50, 57

0

Orlosky, D.E., 97Osier, W., 56

P

Page, E B.. 99Pangborn,J.M.. 15Perry, F.L., 88Persons, S., 99Peterson, P.L., 68, 88, 99Pietrofesa,J.J.. 99Pinto, D.V., 99Pugh, R.C., 88

116

R

Ratcliffe, R.11., 105Raup, R.B., 78Ream, M.A., 8Rentel, V.M., 88Reynolds, W.W., Jr.. 99Rice.J.M., 49, 55Risley, T.R., 105Roe, B.D , 105Rollins, H., 99Rosenberg, L, 98Rosenshine, B., 68, 98Rosner, B., 8Ruddell, R., 105Ruediger, W.C.. 99Rtigg, E.U., $Rupley, W.H., 105Kyle, G., 88

S

Samuels, S.J.. 105Schalock, D., 47Sell, R.G., 88Serafica, LC., 105Shavelson, R., 50, 57. 98Shcpala. S., 105Sigcl,J.E.. 105Singer. H., 105Skinner, B. F'., 72. 80Smith. A., 64Smith, B.O., 8, 47, 78,

97Smith, L R., 88Soar, R.S., 98, 105Solomon, D.. 98Splete, H.H., 99Sprehe. IT., 99Stallings, J.A., 98Steiner. G.A., 68. 78Stephens, J.M-. 50, 57Stiles, L.S...30Stone, D.R., 88Stoodt, B.D., 105.Sumner, W.G., 23

T

Thompson, M., 99Thorndike, E.L.. 72, 80,

90Tinker, M.A., 105Tolman. E.C., 72Torrance, E.P., 98

Tucker, K., 99Tykociner, IT., 32.33,

38

U

Umson, J.0., 68

V

Vernon, M.D., 105

W

Walberg, H.J.. 6$, 88, 99Wallen, N.E., 98Walsh, W.M., 99Ward, ILE., 88Washburn, C., 6, 82Weil. M., 88Westbury. 1.D.. 98White, S.H., 99Wilson, J., 88Wilson, John. 68, 78

z

Zaffiro, E.M., 98Zidonis, F.. $$'tiller, T., 95

Subject Index

Academic pedagogical knowledge, definition of, 64;distinguished from clinical, 64.65; sources of, 65;utility of, 75.77

Academic pedagogical studies, justified as theoreti-cal, 70; types of. 69-70

Academic preparation of teachers, criticism of,31.32: elective courses in, 37: functions of know-ledge in, 33: in teaching field, 34-3 7; complemen-tary studies in. 32.37

Admission, contingent on training facilities, 39;need for ritual in, 39.40; purpose of policy in, 40;to doctoral programs. 20; to pedagogical school,19, 39.40

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Edu-cation. Bicentennial Commission on Education forthe Profession of Teaching, 3, 12. 112; report onteacher education, 2.3

American Council on Education, report of Commis-sion on Teacher Education, 1

Ball State University. 2

Brown-Topeka case, as example of externalapproach to educational change, 109

Change. College of Education, agenda of. 112-113:different methods, advantages of, 110:externalmethods of. 109-110; institutional factors, in needof. 110-111: rational method of, 107; technologicalmodes of, 108.109

Clinical complex, definition of, 24; governance of,24

Clinical facilities, community as laboratory, 23:criticisms of. 22; early types of, 22; for doctoralprograms, 21; role of public schools in, 21.22;training laboratory, 24

Clinical instruction, categories of, 83.85; teachersfor, 27-28; curriculum and methods courses, pro-posal for, 4244; in basic courses. 40-42; know-ledge as source of objectives in, 83; pre-inductionperiod, 28.29; role of college faculty in, 22; roleof teachers in, 22

Clinical knowledge, academic knowledge, distin-guished from, 64-65:definition of, 64; forms of,90-94: skills, distinguished from, 66; uses of, 65.67

123

Colleges of education, approaches to changes in,110.113; as non-professional, 11.12; compared toearly medical schools, 17 -18; criticisms of, 11;development of. 12-14; graduate schools, influenceon, 13-14; restraining influences on, 17

Commonwealth Teacher Training Study, 1

Communication, as category of training. 85

Community. as laboratory, 23; nature of. 23-24

Competency-based movement, 3-4

Conant report on teacher education, 1-2, 4

Concepts, as chpressed by definitions. 60-61;explication cf as theory, 73,74; pedagogicalinstruction, lack of referents in, 61

Decisions, nature of, 76; types of, 76

Diagnosis, as area of training, 84

Doctoral programs, proposed changes in, 4546

Education Commission of the States, 112

Elementary Teacher Education Models Project, 3

Evaluation, as training category, 85; in doctoralprogram. 46: of trainees, 44

Factual knowledge, 64

Follow-up of graduates, 20, 45

General Education, criticism of, 31-32

Generic knowledge, conditional form of, 93.94;content specific, distinguished from, 90-91, 104:definitional form of, 91.93; defective forms of,94-95

Ideology, as theory, 72.73; criticisms of. 72;definition of, 72; usefulness of. 73

Illinois Normal University. 12

Johns Hopkins University, 13, 18, 56

Laboratory work, accompanied by seminar. 44;credit hours in, 40: in campus courses. 40-44; intraining laboratory, 44-45

117

Management, as category of training.115

National Education Association, rti.4.,rt of NationalCommission on Teacher Education and ProfessionalStandards, 2

National Institute of Education, 4

National Society for the Study of Education, Year-book on teacher education, 3

Normal Schools, development into colleges, 13;professional character of, 12-13

Pedagogical education, admission to, 19; basicprogram, focus of, 40; clinical work in, 44-45; com-pared to early medical education, 17; doctoral pro-grams in, proposed, 20; inservice, emphasis oncriticized, 5; outline of basic program, 40-45; pro-gram development, steps in, 89;90; restraints upon,3.4, 13-14; schema for, 19.20

Pedagogical knowledge, academic and clinical,64-65; causal. 51.52; compared to early medicalknowledge, 17; criticisms of, 50.55; content-specific, 101-104; definitional, 59.61; empiricalprinciples in, 61.62; factual, 64; forms of, 59;generic, 90.94; generic, distinguished from specific,90-91; nostrums and fictions as substitutes for,55.56; rules, uses of questioned, 55; sources of,49.50; single variable, uses of, 55

Planning, as domain of training, 85

Policy, as a set of rules, 76; relation to academicpedagogical knowledge, 75-77

Prepedagogical curriculum, 37

Preprofessional education, complementary compo-nent, 32.34; electives in, 37; elements of. 19; ele-mentary teachers, program in, 36; secondaryteachers, program in, 34-35

Principles, as approximations, 62; definition of, 61;prescriptions, different from, 61; prescriptive poten-tional of, 62; uses of definitions in, 61.62

Professional school. characteristics of, 11

Professional wisdom, 49 -50; 55

Research knowledge, use of by pedagogical facul-ties, 54; by practitioners, 53-54

118

Schema, for pedagogical education, 19

Skill, definition of, 66; distinguished from know-ledge, 94; development of observation, 84

Specific knowledge, definition of, 90-91; dimen-sions of, 101.102; examples of, 102-104

Stanford University, 11, 86

Teacher Corps, 5-year cycle, 4; developer of pre-induction period, 28; emphasis on community asa laboratory, 23.24

Teachers, academic preparation of, 31.32; as problemsolvers, 7; as researchers, 20

Teaching, as natural form of behavior, 7980; asshowing, 79; direct. 96; didactic and heuristic formsof, 82; elements of, 80-82; evolution of, 80;Herbart's pattern of, 95; heuristics, its knowledgebase, 96.97; heuristics, Kilpatrick's pattern of, 96;Morrison's pattern of didactic, 95

Theory, as descriptive principles, 74; as explanation,70-72; as explication of concepts, 73.74; as ideol-ogy, 72.73; as intervening variables, 72; as prescrip-tive principles, 74; meanings of, 70; probablemeaning of in pedagogy, 74.75

Training, based on research, 86; domains of, 83-85;materials of, 86.87; objectives of derived fromknowledge. 83; uses of technology in, 86-87

Training laboratory, definition of, 24; inductionof trainee, 44-45; governance of, 24; staffing of,26-28

Tulane University, 11

United States Office of Education, National Survey,1, 2

University of Chicago, 11

University of Georgia, 188; medical collegeannouncement, 17

University of Texas, 12

University of Wisconsin, 12

Value knowledge, as concepts, 63; nature of, 62-64

12:1

U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1980 319.589/6611