| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.

View
 

Conceptual Framework

Page history last edited by David Shutkin 8 years, 4 months ago

 

JCU Domains and Desired Results

ED556 Assignment

I. Contexts

 

I-1.  Understands the contexts and controversies of professional practices.

Research proposal , Research paper, BlogPosts

I-2.  Demonstrates accuracy, organization, and persistence in achieving intellectual and professional goals.

Research proposal , Research paper

I-4.  Engages in systematic inquiry.

Research proposal , Research paper, BlogPosts

II. Learner Development

 

II-7.  Assists and supports fellow professionals.

Writing Circles, BlogPosts

III. Practice

 

III-8.  Demonstrates knowledge of content and pedagogy.

Research proposal , Research paper, BlogPosts

III-9.  Demonstrates knowledge of students.

Research proposal , Research paper

III-13. Uses knowledge of communication techniques to foster collaboration and supportive interactions.

Writing Circles, BlogPosts

 


 

  1. II.    Conceptual Framework

 

“…we want our graduates to be leaders-in-service.  That has been the goal of Jesuit education since the sixteenth century.  It remains so today.”

P. Kolvenbach, S.J. 1989

Introduction

 

The conceptual framework of the Professional Education unit as defined by NCATE is grounded in the Jesuit Ideal of an Educator. The Jesuit Ideal embraces a religious, personal, social and action-oriented mission. The Ideal is represented by five dimensions of personhood, which together foster intellectual growth, self-discovery, continuous adaptation, commitment to continuous improvement, and a willingness to accept the challenges of leadership. Briefly described below, each dimension characterizes the whole person who engages in knowledge and service to others (Gray, 2004; Havernak, 1992; McCool, 1986).  

 

Five Dimensions of the Jesuit Ideal

 

Formation of the total person. One of the most valuable resources educators can draw on in their educational practice is their own sense of self.  The Jesuit Ideal calls for educators to communicate the importance of seeking truth, meaning, and value with their whole being.  Each educational act progresses not only from content area expertise, but also the whole person as an agent of change. Only as educators have developed their own person can they help to develop the student as person.  

 

Personal influence of the educator. To influence the growth and development of students, the educator seeks to know about their lives both in and out of school. This is the foundation of dialogue that contributes to the development of the total person of the student.  

 

Educational settings as communities of personal influence. In educational practice, educators view the school setting as a community of engagement with others for the betterment of humanity in the school locale and in the society at large. The school setting is seen as an active site of social justicewhere diversity and individual differences are celebrated. 

 

Education as a vocation. The Jesuit Ideal asserts that educators view their role as a vocation, a life of dedicated service towards the growth and development of students. In turn, educators continually work at their own professional growth and development committed to the greater good.  

 

Integration of the disciplines to extend and synthesize knowledge. The Jesuit Ideal honors the integration of the disciplines for deep knowledge and understanding. Educators are cultivated by the combined wealth of human and spiritual experience found in the integration of the arts, sciences, and professional education curricula. 

 

 

 

The Jesuit Ideal in the Professional Education of School Personnel

 

The goal of the Jesuit Ideal is a leader-in-service. The five dimensions of personhood interact to shape the educator as a leader-in-service. The department’s professional education programs for school personnel offer the content knowledge and skills, and afford the dispositions that contribute to the formation and growth of the professional as Person who embodies the Jesuit Ideal. The conceptual framework that grounds and guides the department’s professional education programs is illustrated in Figure 1.

 

 

 

Figure 1.  Conceptual Framework of the Jesuit Ideal

 

The figure illustrates the centrality of the educator as a person who through an effective program of professional education develops the knowledge, skills and dispositions that further develop the educator as a professional person who is a leader-in-service to others.

 

Program Domains of the Jesuit Ideal

 

For curriculum purposes, the Jesuit Ideal of professional education in initial and advanced programs is organized into four domains that represent the conceptual framework and frame learner outcomes. The rationale and evidence base of the program domains are summarized below.

 

Domain 1: Contexts

 

Contexts for educational practice have philosophical, historical, pedagogical and personal ties for everyone involved within them as interactive teaching and learning environments. Philosophy of education helps deepen and sharpen individuals’ understandings about what schools can and should do.  Sociology of education helps candidates analyze the social, economic, and cultural continuities and discontinuities of post-industrial society as they influence the school and community.  History of education reminds us that our conceptions and misconceptions of education have been handed down to us from the past and that education is inextricably linked with American development.  Education coursework, clinical experience and fieldwork sensitize candidates to factors related to class, gender, race, sexual orientation and ethnicity, and religion, and prepare them to (a) recognize societal issues and (b) incorporate equitable curricular and pedagogical frameworks in a society of diversity, difference and democracy. The Jesuit Ideal supports the significance of context in the preparation of educators, both in terms of knowledge of various educational settings and a respect for the diversity that exists within those settings. In addition, the action mission requires a disposition toward the promotion of justice within contexts where social and economic inequality negatively impacts the learning environment of participants. In addition, the action mission requires a disposition that promotes justice in contexts where social and economic inequality negatively impacts the learning environment of participants.

 

Representative Research and Supporting Literature:

 

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press

Green, J. (1999) Deep democracy: Community, diversity and transformation. Lanham: Rowman          &         Littlefield.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Larson, C. L., & Ovando, C. J. (2001). The color of bureaucracy: The politics of equity in multicultural school communities. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Murrell, P. (2001). The community teacher: A framework for effective urban teaching. NY: Teachers College Press.

Ogbu, J. (2003). Black American students in an affluent suburb: A study of academic disengagement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Patel, E. (2007). Acts of faith: The story of an American­ Muslim, the struggle for the soul of a           generation.  Boston: Beacon Press.

Payne, R. K. (2003). A framework for understanding poverty. Highlands, TX: aha Press.

Spring, J. (2002). American education (10th Ed). Boston: McGraw Hill.

 

Domain 2: Learner Development

 

Educators’ knowledge and understanding of student development and learning influence curriculum, instruction and intervention. It is essential, therefore, that educators have a rigorous exposure to leading theories of developmental psychology and cognitive science coupled with the wisdom of professional practice. Understanding the social, psychological and cognitive skills and needs of children and youth prepares educators for the design and implementation of an effective academic curriculum. Knowledge of learner development includes the pioneering work of scholars, such as Erik Erikson, Jean Piaget, and Lev Vygotsky, as well as current theories of 21st century scholars, such as Sarah-Jayne Blakemore and Uta Frith (brain research); Esther Thelen and Linda B. Smith (dynamic systems theory), Kurt Fischer (dynamic skills theory) and Stanislas Dehaene (neuronal recycling hypothesis). Ultimately, educators should seek to rouse students’ minds, involve them in their own learning, and promote inquiry, reasoning, and reflection around challenging problems. The understanding of developmental progression in the teaching-learning process is fundamental to the Jesuit Ideal.  Emphasis is placed on the development of the whole person in a socio-historical context.

 

Representative Research and Supporting Literature:

 

Blakemore, S.J. & Frith, U. (2005). The learning brain: lessons for education. Malden, MA:    Blackwell Publishing.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn. Washington, D.C.:         National Academy Press.

Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain. New York: The Penguin Group.

Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society. (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.

Gardner, H. (1991).  The Unschooled Mind.  New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, J. (1951). The child’s conception of the world.  New York: The Humanities Press.

Tharp, R. & Gallimore, R. (1990). Rousing minds to life. New York: Cambridge University         Press.

Thelen. E. & Smith, J.B. (1995). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition            and      action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

 

Domain 3: Practice

 

The process of leading, teaching and learning is interactive and dynamic with the educational goal of breadth and depth of knowledge across disciplines and within specific knowledge domains.  Learning opportunities are created within the contexts for learning, and for the specific needs and expectations of the learners.  Inherent within this process is the desire to effect change, to impact learning, and to utilize authentic tasks to demonstrate learning. The learning of academic content generally includes (a) objectives for instruction; (b) activities for reaching the objectives; (c) methods for organizing the activities for teaching; and (d) evaluation procedures to determine whether the objectives have been achieved. Assessment leads instruction and provides the basis for instructional content and strategies, as well as instructional and program change. Effective teaching taps and builds students’ prior knowledge; supports in-depth understandings of subject matter; and integrates the development of meta-cognitive skills into the curriculum in a variety of subject areas. Effective intervention ameliorates learning problems and improves the learning trajectories of individuals at risk. The Jesuit Ideal advocates for the attainment of knowledge, and the development of “the habit of mind” but with the proviso that knowledge must be acted upon. The Jesuit Ideal advocates for the attainment of knowledge, and the development of “the habit of mind” but with the proviso that knowledge must be acted upon in the joint interests of social justice and democracy.

 

Representative Research and Supporting Literature:

 

Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (2005) Preparing Teachers for a Changing World. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Fishman, S.M. & McCarthy, L.  (1998). John Dewey and the challenge of classroom practice. New    York: Teachers College Press.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1998). Researchers and teachers working together to adapt instruction for        diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 126-137.

Henderson, J. & Gornik, R. (2006). Transformative curriculum leadership, 3rd Edition. Upper    Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Newman, F.M. & Associates (1996). Authentic achievement: restructuring schools for intellectual      quality. San Francisco, CA: Joseey-Bass Inc.

Pollock, M. (ed), (2008).  Everyday anti-racism: Getting real about race in school. New York:            The New Press.

Tyler, R . (1949). Basic Principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago

Press.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: mission, action and achievement.       Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

 

Domain 4: Person

 

Over the past several decades the field of education has emerged as a profession characterized by a specialized knowledge base, relative autonomy in the work place, and collegially controlled governance, professional development, and entrance into the occupation. Efforts to prepare professionals for education-related roles draws on research that emphasizes professional knowledge, reflection and proficiency in critical domains, such as leadership, child and adolescent development, curriculum and instruction, and learning and cognition. Professional preparation emphasizes educators’ abilities to collaborate with colleagues and other professional personnel. Increasingly professional curricula gauge educators’ mastery of critical knowledge, skills and dispositions using formative and summative assessments over the course of a program. The Jesuit Ideal requires the educator, as person, to be in a continuous process of self-discovery and adaptation.

 

Representative Research and Supporting Literature:

 

Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The quiet revolution: Rethinking teacher development. Educational

Leadership, 53(6), 4-11.

Holmes, Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers. East Lansing, MI: Holmes Group.

Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 25, 129-151.

National Commission on Educational Excellence. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington DC: US

Government Printing Office.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for

America’s future. Woodbridge, VA.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational

Review, 1-22.

Wise, A., & Liebbrand, J. (1996). Profession-based accreditation, Phi Delta Kappan, 202-206.

 

Learner Outcomes of the Jesuit Ideal

 

The rationale and evidence base of each program domain ground the learner outcomes of a professional course of study (knowledge-skills-dispositions) and align with the professional standards of state and national professional agencies and organizations. Tables 1 and 2 describe the program domains and desired learner outcomes of the department’s initial and advanced programs in the preparation of school personnel.

 

Table 1. Program Domains and Desired Results in the Initial Licensure Teacher Education Program

 

Domain

Learner Outcomes

I. Contexts

I-1. Understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, competing perspectives and the structure of the disciplines taught.

 

I-2.  Recognizes the value of understanding the interests and cultural heritage of each student.

 

I-3.  Plans instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.

 

I-4.  Creates a learning environment of respect and rapport.

II. Learner Development

II-5.  Understands how children/youth develop and learn.

 

II-6.  Provides learning opportunities that acknowledge and support the cognitive and social development of learners.

 

II-7.  Understands how learners differ in their approaches to learning.

 

II-8.  Demonstrates flexibility, responsiveness, and persistence in adapting to diverse learners.

III. Practice

III-9.  Understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies; designs coherent instruction.

 

III-10.  Creates a learning environment that encourages social interaction, active engagement, and self-motivation.

 

III-11.  Uses knowledge of communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction.

 

III-12.  Understands and uses formative and summative assessment approaches and strategies.

IV. Person

IV-13.  Reflects on professional practices.

 

IV-14.  Fosters relationships with colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community.

 

IV-15.  Grows and develops professionally.

 

Table 2. Program Domains and Desired Results in Advanced Professional Education Programs

 

Domain

Desired Results

I. Contexts

I-1.  Understands the contexts and controversies ofprofessional practices.

 

I-2.  Demonstrates accuracy, organization, and persistence in achieving intellectual and professional goals.

 

I-3.  Contributes to the school, district, and the broader professional community.

 

I-4.  Engages in systematic inquiry.

II. Learner Development

II-5.  Seeks out opportunities for professional development and growth.

 

II-6.  Actively participates in professional events and projects.

 

II-7.  Assists and supports fellow professionals.

III. Practice

III-8.  Demonstrates knowledge of content and pedagogy.

 

III-9.  Demonstrates knowledge of clients/students.

 

III-10. Demonstrates knowledge of resources.

 

III-11. Designs coherent, evidence-based interventions.

 

III-12. Establishes favorable conditions for instruction and intervention.

 

III-13. Uses knowledge of communication techniques to foster collaboration and supportive interactions.

IV. Person

IV-14. Takes initiative in assuming leadership roles.

 

IV-15. Initiates activities that contribute to the profession.

 

IV-16. Assumes responsibility in data based decision-making and helps to ensure that decisions are based on the highest professional standards.

 

IV-17. Challenges negative attitudes and practices; is proactive in serving clients/students/colleagues.

 

 

Evidence of the Jesuit Ideal in Professional Education Programs

 

Evidence of the Jesuit Ideal as a conceptual framework in preparing professionals for practice in schools is found in three primary sources: (1) course syllabi; (2) student work; and (3) the assessment system.

 

Course Syllabi

 

All course syllabi in initial and advanced licensure programs contain (a) a brief description of the conceptual framework; (b) alignment of course objectives to desired results and professional standards; (c) a knowledge base and (d) formative and summative assessments representative of course and program content.

 

Student Work

 

Student work is one of the richest sources of evidence of the Jesuit Ideal as a conceptual framework for knowledge and action. It is presented in two forms: (1) the teaching portfolio in initial licensure programs and (2) course-specific performance based assessments (PBA) in both initial and advanced preparation programs. Table 3 summarizes the organization and content of the teaching portfolio. (See appendix * for representative samples.) Table 4 highlights examples of performance-based assessments across course sequences in initial and advanced programs. 

 

[insert tables 3 and 4 about here]

 

Assessment System

 

The unit is making progress on the design of an assessment system that includes formative and summative approaches for observing, describing and evaluating learner progress and outcomes related to the knowledge, skills and dispositions of professional education curricula. Primary sources of assessment information for initial and advanced programs at program entry, mid-point and exit are listed in Table 5.

 

Table 5. Basic Design of Assessment System

 

 

Type

Entry

Mid-Point

Exit

Initial

Formative

Essay

Dispositions II

 

Interview

PSO Feedback

 

 

PSS Summary

 

Dispositions I

STO Feedback

 

 

PBAs

 

 

*Praxis II-Content Exam

 

 

 

*Praxis II-Principles of Learning and Teaching

 

Summative

GPA

GPA

STE

 

 

PRAXIS

 

 

GPA

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced

Formative

 

PBAs

 

 

 

 

Summative

GPA

GPA

PRAXIS

MAT;GRE

 

Comp Exam

 

 

 

GPA

Notes:

PSO: Pre-student Teaching Observation (university supervisor: 3x; cooperating teacher: 3x)

PSS: Pre-student Teaching Summary

PBA: Performance-Based Assessment (course-specific)

STO: Student Teaching Observation (university supervisor: 6x; cooperating teacher: 6x)

STE: Student Teaching Evaluation (mid-term/final)

*Alternative Program candidates only.

 

Evidence of learner progress and outcomes over a 3-year period by program is provided in appendices **-** and demonstrates the instantiation of the conceptual framework in educator preparation to achieve results. 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.