Conceptual Framework

Spring, 2014

Conceptual Framework University of

Arkansas at Monticello School of
Education

1
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT MONTICELLO (UAM)

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Introduction

The University of Arkansas at Monticello (UAM) has a rich educational heritage of teaching and
learning that has provided a “Century of Opportunity” for the residents of southeast Arkansas
and the state since its humble beginnings as The Fourth District Agricultural School in 1909. To
understand the history of teacher education at UAM, the beginnings of the university itself must
be explored. Classes began in 1911 with students in the sixth through twelfth grades attending.
Freshman and sophomore college courses were added in 1923 and the institution was accredited
as a junior college in 1928. Senior college courses were added in 1933 and, the following year,
the first degrees were granted by Arkansas A&M College.

The campus was established on what was once part of a 6,000 acre cotton plantation owned by
Judge and Mrs. William Turner Wells. “Judge Billy” and “Miss Pattie” were prominent figures
in southeast Arkansas and the name of Wells is imbedded in the social and political history of the
state. Judge and Mrs. Wells lived the idyllic life of Southern planters and entertained frequently
in their plantation home that was located on what is now the site of the Fred J. Taylor Library.

In April of 1909, the Arkansas General Assembly passed Act 100 which created four district
agricultural schools. For the southeast district, descendants of Judge and Mrs. Wells offered the
Wells Plantation home site with 200 acres of contiguous land for the new school/experiment
farm. This gift, with a guarantee of $42,000 to be raised by the citizens of Monticello and Drew
County, secured Monticello as the location of the new school. The donated site was enlarged by
the purchase of 300 additional acres. The deed transferring the property to the Board of Trustees
was accomplished on April 2, 1910 which would have been the 75th birthday of the late Judge
Wells. The Fourth District Agricultural School opened its doors for classes on September 14,
1910, with the Wells plantation house serving as the president’s home.

From almost the beginning, teacher education played an important role in the history of the
institution and in the southeast Arkansas region. The first teacher education preparation
program, located in the Fourth District Agricultural School, was a summer normal course for
teachers in 1912. It involved a thorough review of theory, practice, and the most progressive
pedagogical methods of the time. This course was open to individuals who were at least 16 years
of age and who had at least an eighth grade diploma. By 1914, a model primary school had been
established in connection with the normal course. Teachers could then observe and work with
children as they applied their new pedagogical skills. In 1923, the curriculum for the normal
course included agriculture, algebra, arithmetic, English grammar, geography, physiology, civil
government, Arkansas history, U.S. history, reading, and home economics. Primary teachers
engaged in observations of students and the study of lesson planning, phonics, writing, spelling,
games, health, and “right living.”

2
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

The development of a two-year college curriculum for teachers in 1925 and the creation of a
training (laboratory) school in 1927 were significant events in the history and evolution of the
school’s teacher education program. Under the direction of Dr. James H. Hutchinson, Dean of
the College and Head of the Department of Education, the laboratory school served as a location
for teachers to observe and teach under the guidance of master teachers. The laboratory later
became Drew Central School in 1935 and was moved to a new facility on land provided by the
college with an agreement that elementary and secondary student teachers would be allowed to
“practice teach” at the new school. This continued to be the practice until 1958 when additional
school districts began to be utilized.

The institution received full North Central Association accreditation as a senior college in 1940.
The institution took the initial step to major reform in the field of teacher education in 1947 with
the appointment of Dr. H. K. Moore as head of the Division of Education. In 1954, Dr. Moore
initiated a bold step to improve the institution’s teacher education program by seeking national
accreditation by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE).
Although initial accreditation was denied, Dr. Moore used the experience to begin major
program revisions and reforms and to lay the foundation for the next attempt for national
recognition. After several years, the UAM Division of Education was granted NCATE
accreditation in 1966 under the leadership of the next division head, Dr. Cecil Haywood. The
unit has continuously maintained national accreditation by NCATE since that time.

Arkansas A&M merged with the University of Arkansas System in 1971 becoming the
University of Arkansas at Monticello (UAM). In 1986, the University of Arkansas Board of
Trustees authorized UAM to offer graduate programs. Dr. Haywood continued to lead the
division in restructuring the curriculum and developing a collaborative partnership with the local
districts through the Southeast Arkansas School Study Council. The Division of Education
became the UAM Department of Education and Psychology. The new vision of the UAM
teacher preparation program reflected an emphasis on educators who had mastery of the relevant
knowledge and competencies in their teaching areas and could communicate clearly, accurately,
and effectively. Future teachers were expected to display outstanding pedagogical skills that
reflected empathy for persons of other ethnic and cultural backgrounds and to exhibit
professional attitudes.

The Holmes Group (1990) and the reports of John Goodlad (1990) promoted yet another national
movement of school restructuring. The UAM School of Education (SCHOOL OF
EDUCATION) under the leadership of the new dean, Dr. Larry Harris, partnered with City Park
Elementary School principal, Peggy Doss, in the Monticello School District to develop a pilot
Professional Development School (PDS) model in 1995. Student teachers completed a year-long
internship in the PDS under the supervision of a clinical supervisor/cooperating teacher.
Methods courses were taught in the PDS as hands-on experiences dur ing the internship. The
City Park Elementary principal and faculty became adjunct faculty and team teachers with the
School of Education faculty. The program was soon expanded to eight additional school
districts. Changes in the leadership of the School of Education led to many new teacher
preparation initiatives over the ensuing years, but never was the mission and vision of preparing
future educators ever blurred or diminished. The vision has always been self-defined and realistic

3
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

of its purpose. If an institution believes to be what they are not, they fall short of being what
they could be and, in the process, not only deprive society of substantial intellectual services, but
also diminish the vitality of higher learning. (Lynton, Elman,1987)

The Mission and Vision of the Institution

The mission of the University of Arkansas at Monticello shares with all universities the
commitment to search for truth and understanding through scholastic endeavor. The University
seeks to enhance and share knowledge, to preserve and promote the intellectual content of
society, and to educate people for critical thought. The University provides learning experiences
that enable students to synthesize knowledge, communicate effectively, use knowledge and
technology with intelligence and responsibility, and act creatively within their own and other
cultures.

The University strives for excellence in all its endeavors. Educational opportunities encompass
the liberal arts, basic and applied sciences, selected professions, and vocational/technical
preparation. These opportunities are founded in a strong program of general education and are
fulfilled through contemporary disciplinary curricula, certification programs, and vocational/
technical education or workforce training. The University assures opportunities in higher
education for both traditional and non-traditional students and strives to provide an environment
that fosters individual achievement and personal development.

The University of Arkansas at Monticello seeks to fulfill its mission by:

1) Offering quality educational opportunities in the form of master’s, baccalaureate, and
associate degree preparation, as well as certification in a variety of vocational/ technical
programs, or workforce training;
2) Offering a well-rounded program of general education designed to broaden and enrich
students’ awareness of the world around them;
3) Providing contemporary curricula which prepare students for careers in selected fields,
for personal development, and for meeting societal needs;
4) Strengthening students’ capabilit ies as thoughtful contributors to society by encouraging
them to take personal responsibilities and seeking the benefits of life-long learning;
5) Providing support programs which increase the probability of success for those students
needing additional academic preparation to meet college standards;
6) Assisting students in developing interpersonal skills needed by responsible and
productive members of society;
7) Providing viable programs of public service, continuing education in selected areas, and
cooperative programs with other educational institutions;
8) Promoting research programs which strengthen the institution and contribute new
information to the existing body of knowledge and the extension of knowledge to serve
the public;
9) Providing cultural and aesthetic experiences that will serve to enhance appreciation of the
arts;
10) Maintaining regional and national recognition of the institution and its academic and
technical programs by continuing to meet the standards of accrediting bodies, available
but yet to be achieved; and
4
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

11) Preparing students to live and work in a technological and global society.

The Mission of the UAM School of Education

The University of Arkansas at Monticello School of Education is committed to the development
of highly qualified candidates. The School of Education embraces the responsibility to prepare
candidates to live and work in a rapidly changing, diverse world. Candidates are challenged to
achieve the highest level of proficiencies defined in the UAM School of Education’s Conceptual
Framework and as modeled by the UAM School of Education Faculty. The Conceptual
Framework is comprised of five strands: knowledge, pedagogy, diversity, professionalism and
technology. The candidates’ understanding of the Conceptual Framework is progressively
developed as they transition through the various professional education programs. The UAM
School of Education is dedicated to developing highly qualified professional educators through a
partnership with the Southeast Educational Cooperative, area public schools, the university
community, and supportive agencies in Arkansas’s high-need geographical areas.

The Vision of the UAM School of Education

The University of Arkansas at Monticello School of Education aspires to prepare multi-faceted,
highly qualified professional educators who are caring individuals and are committed to
addressing the challenges of educating a diverse population of P-12 students in an evolving
technological world.

5
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Philosophy of the Unit : Multi-Faceted Educators

Arkansas is home to the most precious of gems, the diamond, like the UAM Teacher Education
Program which is home to another kind of precious resource, its candidates…our “Diamonds in
the Rough.” They come to us in their natural states, inexperienced and less polished but with the
promise to become brilliant and prized gems in their profession. Much as diamonds are diverse
in characteristics, our candidates are also diverse in socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, gender,
language, age, and geographic origins. As is true with the rough diamond, our candidates, in
their natural state, are not perfect or polished. We believe that they have talents, skills, and
dreams, and our role to shape and polish each one to produce clarity so they can reflect the light
of learning. How well the diamond is shaped determines its brilliance; therefore, the School of
Education and its partners must be mindful of their task. Those who prepare our candidates must
be brilliant jewelers who can mold future educators into multi-faceted gemstones that reflect the
content knowledge, pedagogical skills, understanding of diversity, technological skills, and
professionalism required of them to also transform their students into multi-faceted brilliant
diamonds.

We are all born diamonds in the rough. We are shaped and polished by our experiences. Love,
patience, encouragement and praise smooth our edges like a fine cloth. What we become is a
combination of everything we learn, feel, and know. People who are encouraged offer the world
the same. Those who are praised are rarely critical of others...The jeweler must keep a steady
hand so the ‘Diamond in the Rough’ becomes the five carat perfect stone.

Excerpt from “Diamonds in the Rough”

Author Bobbi Duffy

6
 Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

The UAM School of Education stakeholders believe that faculty and candidates must value
teaching and learning in a culturally diverse population where P-12 students can learn. We
believe that our philosophy is supported by our core belief that educators must be multi-faceted
and proficient in the five strands of the Conceptual Framework and understand the correlation
and integration of one strand with the other. We also believe that the UAM initial and advanced
candidates must be “brilliant jewelers” who appreciate and value students who are “diamonds in
the rough” and use their professional knowledge and skills to “mold them into multi-faceted
gemstones.”

Knowledge
Initial Candidates

We believe multi-faceted initial teacher candidates:

• possess in-depth content knowledge, as well as knowledge in the arts, sciences

and the foundations of education,
• attain knowledge of learners and how learning occurs, and;
• understand school-community relationships.

Advanced Candidates

We believe multi-faceted advanced candidates and other school personnel:

• have in-depth content knowledge, and;

• are recognized experts in the content they teach.

Pedagogy
Initial Candidates

We believe multi-faceted initial teacher candidates:

• create classroom environments in which students are actively engaged in learning

that promotes academic, social, and emotional learning for a diverse population,

• have diverse, well-planned, and sequenced experiences in P-12 schools,

• have the pedagogical knowledge to teach all students effectively.

• are skilled in the assessment of student learning,

7
 Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

• can use data to assess and adjust instruction.

• design learning experiences based on students’ developmental needs.

Advanced Candidates

We believe advanced multi-faceted educators and other school personnel:

• demonstrate expertise in pedagogical knowledge,

• share their expertise through leadership and mentoring,

• select, develop and implement research-based instructional strategies,

• use data to reflect on their practice and to support student learning,

• promote the use of research and technology to improved instructional strategies,

and;

• create positive learning environments for all students.

Diversity

Initial Candidates

We believe multi-faceted initial teacher candidates:

• have a clear understanding of differences among groups of people and individuals
based on ethnicity, race, socio-economic status, age, gender, exceptionalities,
language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographic area,

• support high quality education as a fundamental right of all children,

• demonstrate fairness by meeting the educational needs of all students in a caring

manner,

• communicate with students and families in a way that demonstrates sensitivity to

cultural and gender differences,

• employ strategies that meet the different learning styles and needs of students,
and;

• create a classroom environment that is rich in empathy, patience, and sensitivity.

8
 Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Advanced Candidates

We believe that multi-faceted advanced educators:

• promote a school culture and climate that embraces the benefits of a diverse
student and community population,

• promote caring and supportive learning environments,

• create a school, district, and community environment that promote empathy,

patience, and sensitivity, and;

• ensure that the school staff and faculty are a reflection of the diversity of the
student population and the community.

Professionalism
Initial Candidates

We believe multi-faceted initial teacher candidates:

• develop the capacity to nourish relationships, build connections within the school-
community, sustain professional learning, and exhibit ethical and moral behavior,

• encourage collegiality, reflective practice and continuous improvement,

• collaborate with members of the professional community to establish a vision,

• communicate with parents on a regular basis and in a positive manner, and;

• acknowledge that parental involvement is a crucial component of student success.

Advanced Candidates

We believe advanced multi-faceted advanced educators:

• reflect professional dispositions expected of the profession,

• are role models for fairness and integrity in working with their colleagues,
students, families, and the community at-large, and;

• lead others in promoting parental involvement for student success.

9
 Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Technology
Initial Candidates

We believe multi-faceted initial teacher candidates:

• integrate technology into instruction to enhance student learning,

• create learning environments in which students use technology to enrich and

support their learning,

• use technology to gather, store and interpret student data, and;

• use technology to enhance student and parent involvement and communication.

Advanced Candidates

We believe multi-faceted educators:

• are role models in the use of instructional technology as a tool to support student
learning,

• collaborate with other professionals to research best practices/strategies in the use

of instructional technology and to be pace-setters in its use, and;

• research and share with colleagues practices that use technology to enhance
student and parent involvement and communication.

Purpose of the Unit

The UAM School of Education partners with the arts/science faculties, the Education Renewal
Zone (ERZ), the Southeast Arkansas Education Service Cooperative, thirteen southeast Arkansas
public schools, and the community at-large for the primary purpose of developing highly
qualified, multi-faceted professional educators as identified by the State of Arkansas and by the
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The School of Education and its partners prepare initial and
advanced candidates who possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to positively impact the
learning of all students and who can integrate that knowledge to meet the diverse needs of
students both socially and academically, to develop learning communities by collaborating with
other P-12 professionals, the community and supportive agencies, and to develop reciprocal
relationships with parents and families.

10
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Goals for the Unit

The goals of the UAM School of Education are guided by the five strands within the Conceptual
Framework.

Knowledge

• Teacher candidates in initial programs of study will develop an extensive content

knowledge base in order to reach and teach all learners in a diverse society.

• Educators and other school personnel in advanced programs of study will develop in-
depth content knowledge and will be recognized as experts in the content they teach.

Pedagogy

• Teacher candidates in initial programs of study will develop pedagogical skills that
result in improved learning and achievement for a diverse population of learners.

• Educators and other school personnel in advanced programs of study will

demonstrate expertise in pedagogical knowledge through leadership and mentoring.

Diversity

• Teacher candidates in initial programs of study will demonstrate an understanding of

diversity and its impact on learners, other constituencies, and the greater society they
serve to improve teaching and learning.

• Educators and other school personnel in advanced programs of study serve as role
models by actively promoting a school climate and culture that values differences
among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socio-economic status,
age, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographic
areas.

Professionalism

• Teacher candidates in initial programs of study will demonstrate professionalism as

they interact with students, parents, colleagues, and others.

• Educators and other school personnel in advanced programs will be role models for
fairness and integrity in working with their colleagues, students, families, and the
community at-large.

11
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Technology

• Teacher candidates in initial programs of study will utilize multiple classroom

technology resources and tools to improve teaching and learning.

• Educators and other school personnel in advanced programs will be aggressive

advocates of the benefits of instructional technology and will make available the
necessary resources to acquire the latest technology tools.

12
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

The stakeholders in the University of Arkansas at Monticello School of Education are keenly
aware of a new mission for teaching which requires all initial teacher candidates, advanced
candidates, and other school personnel to have exceptional knowledge and advanced skills. To
accomplish this mission, the unit must prepare all candidates to be multi-faceted educators who
have the skills to interweave each strand of the Conceptual Framework into their teaching and
leading so that the needs of every student are met. It is the belief of the School of Education and
its partners that learning cannot be isolated into specific threads or strands but be woven into a
fabric of knowledge that is strong and reliable. The unit and its stakeholders believe the
Conceptual Framework reflects this integration of knowledge and exemplifies its commitment to
developing “an effective teacher education program that demonstrates what good teaching
is”(Darling-Hammond, 2008). To accomplish this vision, the faculty and its stakeholders
support practices that place teacher candidates in diverse public school settings to collaborate
with master teachers while they are still learning a) how students learn, b) how to assess their
learning, and c) what effective teaching strategies should be used. As a result, the UAM School
of Education and university faculty, staff, and public school partners prepare teacher candidates
to be the professional educational leaders of tomorrow.

The Conceptual Framework of the School of Education is a living document that is reevaluated
and revised based upon new research-based knowledge, the results of unit and program data
analysis, changes in the student culture, and needs and recommendations of the stakeholders.
Since the NCATE Board of Examiner’s re-accreditation visit of 2009, the UAM School of
Education has continually revised its vision statement to reflect current education research, to
align with current professional, state, and institutional standards, to reflect expected candidate
proficiencies and to reflect use of the unit’s assessment system and data. The unit has placed
greater emphasis on the use of classroom technology, on the placement of candidates in
diversified field experiences and on the improvement of programs to better address candidate
needs and to ensure that the curriculum is aligned and coherent. As a result of program data
analysis, additional emphasis has been placed on candidates’ abilities to develop appropriate
assessment tools that measure the impact of their teaching on student learning.

The five strands of the School of Education Conceptual Framework promote the following: the
acquisition of a knowledge base; development of pedagogical skills; promotion of diversity and
social justice; the demonstration of professionalism, and instructional technology skills. The
core belief through all strands is that the diverse population of P-12 students can learn and that
teacher candidates must be able to demonstrate proficiencies in each of the five strands of the
Conceptual Framework. Teacher candidates must be able to integrate their knowledge of these
areas to promote academic success for each student. This philosophy is shared by faculty and
candidates alike and is infused throughout the curriculum and practice of faculty and candidates.

13
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK for MULTI-FACETED EDUCATORS

Conceptual Knowledge Pedagogy Professionalism Diversity Technology

Framework
Strand

Knowledge Knowledge of Knowledge of Knowledge of Knowledge of Knowledge of

Content Pedagogy Professionalism Diversity Technology

Pedagogy The Art of The Art of The Art of The Art of The Art of
Teaching for Teaching Teaching as a Teaching Teaching with
Knowledge Professional Diverse Technology
Populations

Professionalism Understanding Professional Professionalism Professionally Use of

of Development Working with Technology to
Professionalism for Teaching Diverse Promote
Populations Professionalism

Diversity Knowledge of Teaching with Working Understanding Use of

All Aspects of Diverse Collaboratively of Diversity Technology to
Diversity Strategies to with Diverse Teach Diverse
Meet the Needs Populations Populations
of a Diverse
Population

Technology Knowledge of Using Using Using Understanding

Uses of Technology for Technology for Technology to of the Types of
Technology Instruction Professional Teach Diverse Technology and
Development Populations Uses of
Technology

The Conceptual Framework is posted on the School of Education website:

http://www.uamont.edu/Education/PDFs/ConceptualFramework.pdf which is available to
candidates, unit faculty, university faculty, P-12 faculty and the community for review and input.
The School of Education’s Conceptual Framework committee is a standing committee that is
charged with the responsibility to continuously review and revise the framework and seek
stakeholder input. Additional opportunities to review and revise the Conceptual Framework
occur during the School of Education annual stakeholders’ meeting, during meetings with the
Southeast Arkansas Educational Cooperative board comprised of public school superintendents,
and dur ing School of Education Teacher Education Committee meetings.

14
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden (2005) identified a framework for understanding

teaching and learning which highlights three general areas:

o Knowledge of learners and how they learn and their development within social
contexts,

o Knowledge of subject matter and curriculum goals: Education goals and

purposes of skills, content and subject matter, and

o Knowledge of teaching subject matter, of diverse learners, of assessment and of

classroom management.

The School of Education believes that these educational goals are imbedded in the unit’s
Conceptual Framework and influence what teachers need to know and be able to do, and what
teacher education programs are expected to accomplish.

A Framework for Understanding Teaching and Learning

(Darling-Hammond & Baratz-Snowden, 2005)

15
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

The UAM School of Education believes that multi-faceted educators must have a strong
knowledge content base and understand how students learn and develop so that they might
rethink their own teaching processes and their support of others’ teaching processes. They must
understand developmental theory, how it relates to the maturation of cognitive skills, or thinking,
and how it follows a sequential progression. It is essential they understand that a student’s
ability to learn depends on his or her maturational status and interaction with the environment
(Lerner, 2003). Multi-faceted candidates must realize that environmental and contextual factors
affect learning (McCormick, 2007) and understand that that learning is highly social and
influenced by one’s culture (Vygotsky, 1978). The faculty and stakeholders understand that its
graduates must know the subject matter they teach and know how to organize curriculum to meet
students’ needs and the schools’ learning objectives. They must also have an in-depth
understanding of subject matter so that they can help students relate ideas to one another and
help students see how ideas connect across fields and to everyday life. This kind of
understanding then provides a foundation for pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1987),
which enables teachers to make ideas accessible to others. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-
Snowden (2005) emphasized that “teachers must know the subject matter they will teach and
understand how to organize curriculum in light of both students’ needs and the schools’ learning
objectives.” A skillful teacher figures out what students know and believe about a topic and how
learners are likely to "hook into" new ideas (Darling-Hammond, 1998). Therefore, the UAM
School of Education supports a curriculum that provides candidates with a genuine
understanding of teaching that includes knowledge of content-specific pedagogies, knowledge of
how to utilize classroom technology and other teaching tools to help “hook all students” into new
ideas to maximize learning. The curriculum must also prepare candidates to be able to meet the
needs of diverse learners and how to assess students and use the results to improve instruction.

16
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Knowledge
The faculty and the School of Education stakeholders believe teachers must be experts in their
content areas and be able to convey that content in ways that make it accessible to students. We
also support the ideal that “increased knowledge of subject matter and of students is critical in an
age of new standards for student learning promulgated by both national associations and state
governments” (Darling-Hammond, 2001). Teachers need to understand how inquiry in a field is
conducted and what reasoning entails -- such as what counts as "proving" something in
mathematics as compared with proving something in history (Ball & Cohen, 1999). Knowledge
of content is critical so that teachers can provide important connections and foundations for ideas
and skillfully link new knowledge with prior knowledge. By selecting and using examples,
problems, and applications seen in everyday life, teacher candidates can prepare their students
with the necessary connections needed for true learning.

Content knowledge, in and of itself, is complex encompassing interdisciplinary perspectives

(Morey, Bezuk, & Chiero, 1997) and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1987). In
addition to basic content knowledge, candidates must have knowledge of learners and
relationships within the school and community. The acquisition of an extensive knowledge base
serves as a foundation around which all educational experiences are anchored. General
education courses provide a content specific knowledge framework of learning for prospective
candidates. Early childhood and education foundation courses offer essential knowledge and
skills for initial candidate preparation. Graduate level courses provide advanced knowledge and
specialization for advanced candidates at the master’s level. According to Ormrod (2006),
“Learning is defined as a relatively permanent change, due to experience, either in behavior or in
mental representations or associations.” A major aim for the School of Education is that all
candidates will engage in meaningful learning, acquiring the understanding necessary to
construct a sound knowledge base and continue to build upon it.

Horowitz et al. (2005) stated that “A foundation of knowledge about child development is
essential for planning curriculum; designing, sequencing, and pacing activities; diagnosing
student learning needs; organizing the classroom; and teaching social and academic skills” (p.
88). According to the authors, teachers must be aware that one of the most critical elements in
developing challenging and interesting learning tasks is recognizing and understanding where
each student is developmentally. The teacher’s knowledge of learning and child development
provides greater assurance of classroom effectiveness (p. 89). “…[B]eing an effective teacher is
central to whether children will make significant progress in the pathways necessary to healthy
development and to becoming a fully educated person in a democratic society” (p. 92). As
mentioned previously, the School of Education has incorporated knowledge of the learner as a
critical component in its Conceptual Framework.

The School of Education faculty and stakeholders have also recognized the significance of
knowledge of school-community partnerships and collaboration. According to Honig, Kahne
and McLaughlin (2001), “Schools today exist in very different social, economic, and political
contexts than they did a century ago. Communities have changed, families have been
reconfigured, and workplace demands are radically different from what they were when public
schools were founded (Darling-Hammond, 1997; Graham, 1995; Heath & McLaughlin, 1987;

17
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Schorr, 1989). As a result, teaching and learning occurs in fundamentally different social and
economic contexts than in previous decades” (p. 998). Candidates in the School of Education
must be cognizant of these changing conditions and, as the authors noted, knowledgeable of the
fact that “…many factors that shape students’ opportunities to learn and teachers’ opportunities
to teach” are not within the scope of the schools and their control (p. 999). In order to acquire
knowledge of school-community collaboration, including the soliciting and forging of school-
community partnerships, candidates are exposed to available community resources and the
contribution of the school to the community at large. They come to realize as Graham (as cited
in Honig, Kahne, & McLaughlin, 2001) has stated, “The battleship, the school, cannot do this
alone. The rest of the educational flotilla must assist: families, communities, government, higher
education, and the business community.”

Pedagogy
The stakeholders of the UAM School of Education believe that a deep and flexible understanding
of subject matter provides a foundation for learning and is important but not enough to ensure
effective instruction. An effective teacher must also “represent that information in ways that
learners will understand” (Shulman 1987). Therefore, the unit faculty strives to provide our
candidates the “pedagogical content knowledge” (Shulman 1987) and the knowledge of when
and why specific teacher actions are appropriate. In addition, we believe that candidates must be
able to align objectives, instructional approaches, and assessments which are critical aspects of
teaching and necessary to promote student learning (Marzano & Kendall, 2008). We believe
these are critical components of being a multi-faceted professional educator.

The UAM School of Education prepares multi-faceted educators who serve as models for their
students, place the learner at the center of the learning process and facilitate learning as a partner
with the student in the learning experience (Dewey, 1938). Dewey stated that because of
experience and knowledge possessed by educators, the teacher's role is to lead the learning
experience. Furthermore, Vygotsky (1978) supported the theory that children learn from
interacting with adults (teachers) and peers in the learning environment. According to him, the
zone of proximal development is established when children develop through participation in
activities slightly beyond their competence, with the assistance of adults (scaffolding) or more
skilled children in cooperative learning settings. The UAM School of Education stakeholders
support the preparation of teachers candidates who display this wide range of skills and abilities
that lead to creating a learning environment where all students feel comfortable and are sure that
they can succeed both academically and personally (National Board for Professional Teaching
Standards). Therefore, the charge of the UAM School of Education faculty is to redefine
curriculum, instruction, and concept-based learning in order to provide teacher candidates and
other school personnel with practical structures, planning tools, and effective teaching strategies
to meet the diverse needs of the students. Teachers who have learned culturally responsive
pedagogy are more confident and believe they are effective in their instruction of diverse
children (Pang & Sablan, 1998). Therefore, the School of Education believes that mult-faceted
teacher candidates and other school personnel must be exposed to coursework that allows them

18
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

to engage in discussion, collaboration, and application of strategies and appropriate assessments

that apply to students from diverse backgrounds. The work of Darling-Hammond (2002) and
Marzano (2001) serves as models for understanding best practices and research-based principles
for pedagogical techniques for a diverse student population. Knowledge of the learner and
knowledge of pedagogy must be linked when one considers Darling-Hammond's (2000)
statement, "the effects of well-prepared teachers on student achievement can be stronger than the
influences of student background factors such as poverty, language background, and minority
status".

Curriculum, instruction, and assessment need to be both rigorous and relevant. Whitaker (2004)
asked, What really makes the difference between two schools? What matters most in the
classroom? Multi-faceted educators understand the answer to these questions. They know that
the variable is not what, but who. Marzano and Kendall’s (2008) three domains for learning—
objectives, instructional approaches, and assessment — are critical aspects of teaching which
must be aligned to promote student learning.

In the age of performance-based accountability, the UAM School of Education Conceptual

Framework model reflects a belief that learning is more than an accumulation of facts and skills.
Garner (2007) stated, “Learning is created by the learner….Unless students interact creatively
with information to construct meaning, there is little or no change”. Thus, it is the charge of the
School of Education to use strategies that promote our candidates to create their learning so they,
in turn, will model this concept in teaching their students. This will empower all candidates with
tools that will last throughout their lifetimes.

The UAM School of Education stakeholders also believe that in addition to possessing
knowledge of pedagogy, multi-faceted teacher candidates and other school personnel must be
able to maintain a productive learning environment. They must be able to create an orderly
classroom and school climate in which students feel physically and emotionally safe. The
importance of classroom management skills cannot be emphasized too much in teacher
preparation programs. It is an essential element in increasing student engagement, decreasing
disruptive behaviors, and enhancing the use of instructional time (Wang, Hartel, & Walberg,
1993). It is a key factor in improving student achievement. The UAM School of Education
believes that multi-faceted candidates and other school personnel must understand the concepts
of and have the skills to maintain classroom order and effective instruction which are
interdependent in productive learning environments (Jones & Jones, 2001).

The School of Education faculty and its stakeholders believe that multi-faceted teacher
candidates and other school personnel must be instructed in culturally responsive pedagogy that
is “responsive to the learning, emotional, and social needs of ethnically and linguistically diverse
students with and without disabilities” (Kea, Campbell-Whatley, & Richards, 2006). As our
society becomes increasingly diverse, so do the classrooms of our schools. Teacher candidates
and other school personnel must be educated to understand that students learn in many different
ways based upon age, gender, race, ethnicity, socio-economic backgrounds, and other
characteristics that define them as individuals. Therefore, the UAM School of Education strives
to develop courses that integrate the promotion of an awareness of diversity as well as the
19
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

development of skills that support learning for diverse student populations. In addition to course
work, the School of Education supports early and often diverse field experiences in which
classroom discussions become more meaningful and pedagogy can be practiced.

Diversity
The UAM School of Education believes that multi-faceted teacher candidates and other school
personnel must be prepared to promote the success of a diverse population of students. As
professional educators, they must be role models for developing democratic and socially just
views and practices among their students, faculties, and the community at large. Unit faculty,
public school partners, teacher candidates and other school professionals must apply themselves
diligently to issues of diversity and plan and implement appropriate and culturally responsive
curriculum, instruction, assessment and leadership strategies to ensure the learning of all
students. Diversity is a central principle in promoting learning within the framework of a
multicultural/global society such as that of the United States.

Our country has changed considerably since the beginning of the last century and will continue to
become more diverse in the future. According to the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES), between 2005 and 2020, the minority population is expected to increase by 32 percent,
compared to four percent for the white population. By the year 2020, minorities are predicted to
represent 39 percent of the total population (NCES). According to Banks & Banks (2005),
“Racial, ethnic, language, class, and religious diversity is deepening within the United States as a
consequence of worldwide population movements and the magnetic pull of the American
Dream” (p iii). Teachers and other school personnel must be prepared to:

• Plan and implement a culturally diverse curriculum

• View diversity as enrichment
• Understand the diverse contexts in which students develop and learn
• Understand the impact of diversity on students
• Demonstrate and model respect for diversity
• Have high expectations for all students
• Demonstrate effectiveness in working with diverse students

The faculty and stakeholders of the School of Education understand that even though Americans
live in the most racially, ethnically and socially diverse country, too often we live, work, and
play as if our own social, gender, or religious group is the only one about which we need be
concerned. Our goal is to challenge faculty, teacher candidates and other school personnel to
examine prior beliefs and misperceptions existing within their own environment. As educators,
we often behave in certain ways toward certain students because of limited experiences with
other cultures. By participating in positive interactions and diverse field experiences throughout
the School of Education programs, candidates will develop an understanding of diversity that is
prerequisite to valuing diversity. Candidates will come to understand the potential of diversity
that exists not only in the United States, but also in southeast Arkansas.

20
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Teacher candidates and other school professionals must learn to modify instruction to provide all
students the best opportunity to succeed and scaffold their previous knowledge and experiences.
Teacher candidates, who are immersed in a combination of multicultural coursework, field
experiences, and modeling by successful practitioners, will become adequately prepared for
culturally diverse classrooms (Wiggins & Follo,1999). Therefore, the UAM School of Education
assures teacher candidates and other school personnel the opportunity to not only participate in
an integrated curriculum that promotes knowledge and understanding of diversity but also
multiple field experiences and internships in diverse settings. In these settings, they observe and
interact with teachers and administrators who use practices that value diversity and promote
success for all students.

In today’s society, candidates need the knowledge, skills, and dispositions required to function
successfully in various ethnic and cultural communities, as well as extended cultural borders in
order to address the learning needs of all students (Banks, 2003; Banks & Banks, 2005; and
Gollnick & Chinn, 2006). Faculty and support personnel in the UAM School of Education
support programs that promote candidate characteristics that lead to what Villegas and Lucas
(2002) described as the “six salient characteristics to become culturally responsive educators”:
• Sociocultural Consciousness: Understanding that one’s way of thinking,
behaving, and being is influenced by race, ethnicity, social class, and language.
• Affirming Attitude Toward Students From Culturally Diverse Backgrounds:
Impacts their learning, belief in self, and overall academic performance.
• Commitment and Skills to Act As Agents of Change: Enables teachers to confront
barriers/obstacles to change and develop skills for collaboration and dealing with
chaos.
• Constructivist Views Of Learning: Belief that all students are capable of learning,
and teacher must provide scaffolds between what students already know through
their experiences and what they need to learn.
• Learning About Students: Learn past experiences, home and community culture,
and worlds in and out of school.
• Culturally Responsive Teaching Strategies: Build on students’ personal and
cultural strengths, and examine the curriculum from multiple perspectives to
create an inclusive classroom.

The fundamental beliefs and assumpt ions of the UAM School of Education Diversity Strand of
the Conceptual Framework are woven into the Diversity Proficiencies listed in the Diversity
Matrix based on the work of Gollnick & Chinn (2006). The proficiencies delineate specific
knowledge, pedagogical skills, professional dispositions, and appropriate use of technology.
Candidates are expected to acquire these proficiencies, not in isolation, but woven together into a
whole. As a result, the preponderant focus will be to meet the needs of all learners.

21
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Professionalism
The School of Education faculty and stakeholders believe that multi-faceted teacher candidates
and other school personnel must be “reflective educators” who will examine their own beliefs and
contributions, seek to improve their practice, and commit to continuous professional development. They
must develop skills as critical, creative, reflective thinkers who are engaged in activities, which
foster relationships with all stakeholders both in the school setting and community at large.
Reflection affects professional growth and brings individuals to greater self-actualization and success.

We believe that multi-faceted professional educators exhibit positive dispositions that

demonstrate through both verbal and non-verbal behaviors their fairness and belief that all
students can learn. Wasicsko (2007) points out that the dispositions of teachers are key to making
a meaningful impact on students. He added, “It is not so much what the teacher knows or does
rather it is who the person is that make all the difference. It is particular human qualities or
dispositions in combination with, and shining through, their knowledge and skills that allow
some teachers to transform many students’ lives.”

The School of Education also supports the idea that the development of professional attitudes is
the key to success. Henry David Thoreau offered the following quote about success: "Success
usually comes to those who are too busy to be looking for it." Therefore, the School of Education
stakeholders believe that teacher candidates and other school personnel demonstrate
professionalism when they maintain a positive attitude and “busy themselves” in all functions of
life by: taking appropriate risks, interacting productively with diverse individuals, groups, and
organizations, and providing support and leadership according to their personal talents, strengths,
and skills.

The School of Education and the arts and sciences faculties assume a tremendous role when
preparing multi-faceted initial and advanced candidates to recognize that professional educators
must continually learn from teaching and that learning is a life-long activity. Teacher education
faculty must help initial and advanced candidates understand that professionalism includes the
development of the capacity to “inquire sensitively and systematically into the nature of learning
and the effects of teaching” (Darling-Hammond, 1999).

The professional multi-faceted educator is also expected to initiate relationships and

collaboration within the profession, and promote sustained professional development in the
community. Through their involvement in professional organizations, candidates must maintain
a high level of professional learning and develop collegial ties with other lifelong learners. As
they develop their skills as multi-faceted educators, UAM School of Education candidates are
expected to exhibit ethical and moral behavior throughout their enrollment in the initial and
advanced programs.

While candidates are encouraged to act professionally, professionalism alone does not guarantee
meaningful learning. Neither does it guarantee teaching effectiveness. Candidates must be
groomed to build and maintain the teaching profession and to not allow teaching to be reduced to
a technical exercise that has little to do with personality and characteristics of the person
22
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

delivering the instruction. Essential indicators for sustained professionalism include promoting
positive relationships and engagement and effective communication in the teaching profession. A
critical component of communication is the link between the teacher/school and the parents. The
multi-faceted professional educator must develop the skills to gain the trust of parents and
students and to involve them as full partners in the learning process. The U.S. Department of
Education report, What Works (1987), stated that parent involvement was a critical component of
effective educational practice. It is especially important in working with diverse populations.
Sensitive and respectful communication with families of minority children proves to be an
extremely important factor in the success of the child (Cazden,1986; Hilliard, 1989; Irvine, 1989;
Michael, 1981).

Professionalism has relevant significance in education in that it affects the role of the teacher and
his or her pedagogy, which in turn affects the student’s ability to learn effectively. Educator
professionalism contains three essential characteristics, competence, performance, and conduct,
which reflect the educator’s goals, abilities, and standards, and directly impact the effectiveness
of teaching/leading through the development of these qualities.

Competence is fundamental in an educator’s pursuit of excellence. Competence includes

preparation, knowledge of content, knowledge of pedagogy, knowledge of classroom technology
tools, and knowledge of diversity. Preparation prepares the professional for the adversity of the
classroom which may include language and cultural barriers as well as socio-economic
differences. By bridging these barriers, the professional educator will be better prepared for
classroom management and create an effective learning environment. As a result, the
professional educator leads students by his or her example.

Competence is also discovering and assuming a defined pedagogy. A professional educator has
a defined pedagogy and has discovered which pedagogical techniques are most effective.
According to Lunenburg and Ornstein (2000), “Hiring teachers by subject and skill presumes
that curricular priorities have been established, which means that decisions have been made
about how much time will be devoted to each segment of the curriculum” (p. 9). Although this
may take years to fine-tune, a professional is willing to self-evaluate his or her pedagogy as s/he
develops it, revise his or her edification when deemed necessary, and apply one’s ideas to a
practical situation. Furthermore, by acquiring a defined pedagogy, a professional creates more
autonomy for him or herself, allowing for a partial release from the constraints constructed by
the administration, school board, or parents.

Another essential characteristic of being a professional educator is performance. Performance is

the ability to effectively teach the concepts of a curriculum. However, this is performance
defined at its most fundamental level. A professional educator makes sure that students learn
concepts and apply them to their lives. Furthermore, an educator that has a high standard of
performance is reliable and dedicated. This type of educator becomes an active rather than
passive teacher and leader, showing the student a genuine interest in their progress.

Conduct is another essential ingredient for the professional educator. The manner in which an
educator conducts himself or herself is a reflection on one’s classroom, school, community, and

23
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

educational system. Conduct is a representation of how well one takes care of himself or herself,
from aesthetics to language and behavior. Conduct also includes the ability to initiate and
maintain quality communication with all the stakeholders involved in education: students, fellow
teachers, school board, administration, and parents. This communication promotes
understanding and trust.

With the role of “teacher” becoming more autonomous, multi-faceted educators must be
competent in their studies and perform well under the eye of the administration and parents,
while maintaining good conduct to facilitate quality communication. Professional educators must
a strong knowledge of content. They must concern themselves with preparing innovative
techniques, including use of technology, to teach material rather than spending significant
amounts of time studying the material. By knowing curriculum material well, educators have
more confidence in their teachings and place significant thought on the material being taught.
They are able to dwell on how to relate subject matter to the students and their cultures.

Acquisition and demonstration of positive character traits in education is an important indicator

of professionalism. Edwards and Nicoll (2006) work, Expertise, Competence and Reflection in
the Rhetoric of Professional Development, the ability to do something in the context of practice
or in simulations of practice was identified as “ a key signifier of professionalism…Ethos is built
upon doing and knowing how rather than propositional knowledge”. The authors state that the
capacity to interpret and communicate is necessary for competent performance and is signified
through a structured reflection where educators can examine their strengths and weaknesses. The
ability to reflect is a critical skill that the multi-faceted educator must have to be proficient in the
professionalism strand.

Professionalism is regarded by Polk (2006) as one of ten basic characteristics of effective

teachers. “It is the teachers’ responsibility to grow as practitioners, stay current in their field,
and continually evolve as professionals. It is this professional development that is considered
paramount to successful teaching.” Based upon recent research, professional development is
viewed by teachers as one of the top three aspects of the teaching process. As the author noted,
student achievement cannot be elevated unless teachers are properly trained and develop
accordingly. They “…must stay current in their field with ever-changing methods, ideas, and of
course, content knowledge”. Having membership in various teacher organizations, in addition to
associations and communities, provides opportunities for professional development, according to
Polk.

Reg Weaver (2005), past president of the National Education Association (NEA), provided the
following remarks in an address to the NEA Representative Assembly:

…we must preserve professional credibility by insisting upon the professionalism

of all our education colleagues. This is critical to educating America’s children
and students and maintaining the support of our communities-particularly
minority communities. In many ways, the future of our profession and our
Association demands that we require our colleagues to demonstrate continued
growth and commitment to our profession. One unprofessional, unprepared or
unwilling public school educator causes harm to all, leaving our students,
24
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

profession, and Association at risk.

Shacklock (1998) expressed the view that, as everyday practitioners, teachers’ voices must be
heard regarding professionalism. This is based upon his assumption that “Among the strongest
influences which impact on teachers’ conceptions of their work, and their identities as workers,
are ideologies of professionalism. Ideologies of professionalism are important in teaching
because they legitimate work practices and strategies for control in teachers’ work, delimit
possibilities in the workplace and set boundaries for the disclosure of knowledge about the work
of teaching in schools and beyond.” He also noted that teacher professionalism is demonstrated
through caring concern, which goes beyond the norm. Teachers must never settle for a status
quo mindset when it comes to helping not only their students but fellow teachers as well. Multi-
faceted professional educators know that doing one’s best to serve and care about others is the
rule and not the exception. It is “…embedded in the teaching culture and institutional ethos of
the school…,” denoting what it means to be a professional.

Shantz and Prieur (1996) stated emphatically that “Professionalism can be broadly defined as
accepting responsibility for one’s own professional development and growth. Specifically, it
refers to exemplary practice, and being aware of and experimenting with new developments in
the field.” According to the authors, integrity, fairness and honesty must be the hallmark
characteristics of a professional educator, willing to do the job without direct supervision. With
greater accountability being placed on today’s teachers, there must be a concurrent effort to
allow for greater professional autonomy and self-governance.

In light of educational reform measures spanning nearly twenty-five years, Pipho (2000)
remarked that “Maybe it’s time to trust teachers and let them create a new level of
professionalism.” Too many individuals in the world outside of education have made decisions
concerning the profession and have sought solutions which have been perceived as “quick fixes.”

Technology
It is the belief of the UAM School of Education that candidates must be able to interweave
technology into all aspects of teaching and learning and, to effectively use technology in the
classroom, must first have sound knowledge of content, pedagogy, and the differences in how
students learn. Good teaching requires an understanding of how technology relates to pedagogy
and content. According to John Cradler (1995) in his article Implementing Technology in
Education: Recent Findings from Research and Evaluation Studies, “Curricula must drive
technology; technology should not dictate curricula”. As Roblyer (2006) stated, “…technology
is, above all, a channel for helping teachers communicate with students. It can make good
teaching even better, but it cannot make bad teaching good.” She added to, “Technology-using
teachers never can be a force for improved education unless they are first and foremost informed,
knowledgeable shapers of their craft. Before integrating technology into their teaching, educators
must know a great deal, for example, about why there are different views on appropriate
teaching strategies, how societal factors and learning theories have shaped these views, and how
each strategy can address differing needs.”

25
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

With these findings in mind, the UAM School of Education supports the integration of
technological knowledge and skills with general and specific pedagogy knowledge and skills
candidates must develop in order to be highly qualified professional educators who facilitate
learning for all students. The faculty and stakeholders endeavor to move beyond the traditional
educational practices and to be committed to preparing initial and advanced candidates who:

• Develop the technological knowledge and skills needed to perform in modern educational
settings
• Demonstrate the integrated use of technology in clinical practice prior to program
completion

The unit is further committed to:

• Faculty modeling the use of technology in their instruction
• Providing the technological resources for faculty and candidates to practice the
knowledge and skills they have developed
• Using technology as part of an assessment system to ensure that candidates can
demonstrate knowledge of content, knowledge of pedagogy, knowledge of diversity,
knowledge of professionalism, and knowledge of technology

In the UAM School of Education, this is true not only in the way students are being taught, but
also in the ways candidates are being prepared as future professional educators. Courses are
offered in face-to-face, online, hybrid and Compressed Interactive Video (CIV) environments.
Instructors are expected to become proficient in the use of classroom technology in order to
model teaching strategies and to assure effective instruction. Classrooms are equipped with
current technology including whiteboards, document cameras (e.g., ELMOs), computers, and
Internet access. Other technology utilized for instructional purposes and demonstrated for
candidate use include the Wii, Ipods, GPS systems, and mini-video cameras that utilize flash
drive technology. All School of Education classrooms are Smart Rooms with up-to-date
equipment. Faculty members participate in professional development to learn how to use
technology to support learning. BlackBoard is an integral part of all courses for supplemental
instruction and for on-line or hybrid courses. Initial and advanced candidates are required to use
Chalk & Wire to construct electronic portfolios throughout their programs of study.

Use of technology throughout the curriculum requires candidates to acquire skills that will
support their future success as teachers in enhancing student learning. Candidates experience
opportunities to learn specific skills and are encouraged to develop their own interests by
creating presentations, interactive projects, electronic notebooks, and folios, and by completing
research through electronic resources (e.g., databases) and the Internet. The teacher education
programs at UAM provide an environment for candidates to incorporate technology at all levels
of study. They must have an understanding of key concepts and demonstrate them through
various assignments and assessments. All candidates, regardless of future job placement, must
acquire the necessary technology skills to meet the needs of all students.

Technology has changed the way we work and communicate and has necessitated a change in
the approach that faculty, candidates and P-12 educators and students use in the learning process.
26
 Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Traditional educational practices alone no longer allow candidates to be prepared to work

successfully with students in today’s diverse classrooms. The technology strand of the
Conceptual Framework is informed by research conducted as part of the International Society for
Technology in Education (ISTE) National Education Technology Standards (NETS) for
Teachers (2008) and the National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for Students
(2007). As delineated in the standards, candidates must have knowledge and skills in the
following categories: technology operations and concepts; planning and designing learning
environments and experiences; teaching, learning and the curriculum; assessment and evaluation;
productivity and professional practice; and social, ethical, legal and human issues.

Emerging technologies are leading to the development of many new opportunities to guide and
enhance learning. Current research about learning provides important guidelines for uses of
technology that can help students and teachers develop the competencies needed for the twenty-
first century (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000). Clearly, developing these competencies will
have to deal with issues that the predecessors of today’s teachers could not have imagined. Both
they and the students they teach must have knowledge and skills that will prepare them to meet
these new challenges.

As foundational technology skills permeate society, students will be expected to apply the basics
in authentic, integrated ways to solve problems, complete projects, and creatively extend their
abilities. ISTE’s National Educational Technology Standards for Students (2007) provide a
framework to support students as they prepare to work, live, and contribute to the social and
civic fabric of their communities. The standards identify several higher-order thinking skills and
digital citizenship as critical for students to learn effectively for a lifetime and live productively
in our emerging global society.

http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-t-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (Teachers)

http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-s-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (Students)

27
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Integration of Strands
The UAM School of Education supports the preparation of multi-faceted professional educators
who can seamlessly integrate knowledge of content, pedagogical content knowledge, knowledge
of diversity, knowledge of instructional technology, and knowledge of professionalism to engage
all students in the learning process and to promote success for all students. Candidates must be
able to teach diverse learners, to use assessment data to support student learning, to manage
classroom environments and to create a working partnership with parents and the community at
large. Advanced candidates and other school personnel are expected to be instructional leaders
who can integrate their exceptional expertise in all strands to motivate faculty, staff, and the
community to transform all students into multi-faceted brilliant diamonds.

28
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

The ideas, beliefs, and philosophies described within the conceptual framework identify the
essential elements that teachers and other school professionals should know and be able to do as
professional educators. The essential elements of knowledge, pedagogy, professionalism,
diversity, and technology that make up the five strands of the conceptual framework are
grounded in research and are aligned with state and national standards and the Danielson
Framework for Teaching, which is the model adopted by the state of Arkansas.

The conceptual framework for the School of Education like the Danielson framework was
designed to address the needs of the initial licensure, as well as, advanced candidates. The
School of Education strives to ensure that all candidates obtain the essential elements that make
up the five stands of the conceptual framework. Although the five strands are distinct, they are,
of course related to one another. A candidate’s preparation or knowledge will affect instruction
or pedagogy, which is in turn affected by the reflection and the professionalism of the candidate.

The appropriate use of technology and a concern for diversity can be applied across all aspects of
teaching from knowledge to professionalism to pedagogy. The five strands of the conceptual
framework, like the Danielson framework, is comprehensive and reflects the multi-faceted aspects
of teaching.

The School of Education believes that conceptual framework should be the cornerstone of the
curriculum and of candidate assessment. The School of Education aligned the five stands of the
conceptual framework to state and national standards and the Danielson Framework to provide
validity to the concepts. The alignment can be seen in the following charts.

29
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

P-4 Early Childhood Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

NAEYC Standard NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
1. Promoting Child 1. Content Knowledge 4. Content Knowledge Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Development 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
and Learning Content and Pedagogy
1e: Designing Coherent instruction
Instruction
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
2. Building Family 1. Content Knowledge 4. Content Knowledge Planning and Preparation Knowledge
and 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Community Content and Pedagogy
Relationships 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
Instruction
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3. Observing, 1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Documenting and 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Assessing to Support Students Diversity
Young 3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
Children and Families 5. Application of Content 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
6. Assessment 1f: Designing Student Assessments
7. Planning for Instruction Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
8. Instructional Strategies
Respect and Rapport
Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness

30
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

NAEYC Standard NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
4. Using 1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Developmentally 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Effective Approaches Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
to Connect with 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
Children and 5. Application of Content 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
Families 6. Assessment 1f: Designing Student Assessments
7. Planning for Instruction Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
8. Instructional Strategies
Respect and Rapport
Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
5. Using Content 1. Content Knowledge 4. Content Knowledge Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Knowledge to 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Build Meaningful Content and Pedagogy

Curriculum 1e: Designing Coherent instruction

Instruction
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
6. Becoming a 2. Content Pedagogy 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
Professional professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism
7. Field Experiences This is a programmatic standard that describes required settings in which candidates learn and
expands NCATE unit practice the professional knowledge and skills described in NAEYC Standards 1-6. It supports
standard and expands NCATE unit standard

31
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Middle Childhood Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

AMLE Standard NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
1. Young Adolescent 1. Content Knowledge 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Development. 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies
Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
2. Middle Level 1. Content Knowledge 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
Philosophy and School professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
Organization. 4c: Communicating with Families
10. Relationships
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism

32
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

AMLE Standard NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
3. Middle Level 1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Curriculum and 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Assessment. Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
4. Middle Level 1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Teaching Fields. 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
2. Learning Differences
Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness

33
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

AMLE Standard NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
5. Middle Level 1. Content Knowledge 3. Learning Environments Planning and Preparation Knowledge
Instruction and 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Assessment. 5. Application of Content
Content and Pedagogy
1e: Designing Coherent instruction
Instruction
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
6. Family and 2. Content Pedagogy 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
Community professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
Involvement. 10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism
7. Middle Level 2. Content Pedagogy 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
Professional Roles. professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism

34
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014
Initial and Advanced Courses Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
1. Content Knowledge 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies
Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
1. Content Knowledge 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism

35
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
6. Assessment Classroom Environment
2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness

36
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
1. Content Knowledge 3. Learning Environments Planning and Preparation Knowledge
1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
5. Application of Content
Content and Pedagogy
1e: Designing Coherent instruction
Instruction
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
2. Content Pedagogy 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism
2. Content Pedagogy 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
parents and Community
community 4e: Growing and Developing
agencies Professionally
4f: Showing Professionalism

37
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Other School Professionals Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

ELCC Alignment

ELCC Standards NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
ELCC Standard 1 1. Content Knowledge 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
A building-level education 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
leader applies knowledge that Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
promotes 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
the success of every student 4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
by collaboratively facilitating 5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
the development, articulation, 6. Assessment Classroom Environment
implementation, and 2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
stewardship of a shared Respect and Rapport
8. Instructional Strategies
school vision of learning Instruction
through the collection and 3a: Communicating with Students
use of data to identify school 3b: Using Questioning and
goals, assess organizational Discussion Techniques
effectiveness, and implement 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
school plans to achieve
school goals; promotion of 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
continual and sustainable 3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
school improvement; and Responsiveness
evaluation of school progress
and revision of school plans
supported by school-based
stakeholders.

38
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014
ELCC Alignment
ELCC Standards NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
ELCC Standard 2.0: A 1. Content Pedagogy 1. Learner Development Planning and Preparation Knowledge
building-level education 2. Learning Differences 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Pedagogy
leader applies knowledge that Students Diversity
3. Learning Environments
promotes the success of 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Technology
every student by sustaining a 4. Content Knowledge 1e: Designing Coherent instruction
school culture and 5. Application of Content 1f: Designing Student Assessments
instructional program 6. Assessment Classroom Environment
conducive to student learning 2a: Creating an Environment of
7. Planning for Instruction
through collaboration, trust, Respect and Rapport
and a personalized learning 8. Instructional Strategies Instruction
environment with high 3a: Communicating with Students
expectations for students; 3b: Using Questioning and
creating and evaluating a Discussion Techniques
comprehensive, rigorous and 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
coherent curricular and
instructional school program; 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
developing and supervising 3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and
the instructional and Responsiveness
leadership capacity of school
staff; and promoting the most
effective and appropriate
technologies to support
teaching and learning within
a school environment.

39
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014
ELCC Alignment
ELCC Standards NCATE Unit Standard InTASC Standard Danielson Framework for School of Education
(Element) Teaching Conceptual Framework
ELCC Standard 3.0: A 1. Content Knowledge 9. Reflective practice and Professional Responsibilities Professionalism
building-level education professional development 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
leader applies knowledge that 10. Relationships 4c: Communicating with Families
promotes the success of with colleagues, 4d: Participating in a Professional
every student by ensuring the parents and Community
management of the school community 4e: Growing and Developing
organization, operation, and agencies Professionally
resources through monitoring 4f: Showing Professionalism
and evaluating the school
management and operational
systems; efficiently using
human, fiscal, and
technological resources in a
school
environment; promoting and
protecting the welfare and
safety of school students and
staff; developing school
capacity for distributed
leadership; and ensuring that
teacher and organizational
time is focused to support
high-quality instruction and
student learning.

40
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

UAM SCHOOL OF EDUCATION ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

Unit Assessment System

The UAM School of Education unit assessment system is designed for the collection, analysis,
summarization and use of data for unit and initial and advanced program improvements. The
electronically based system is comprehensive and houses data from all unit programs and unit
assessments and surveys that are aligned with national, state and professional standards. The
assessment system was developed through the collaborative efforts of teacher education faculty,
candidates, public school educators, and other stakeholders. The process began in fall 2006 with
the appointment of a Curriculum and Assessment Committee which is a standing committee in
the School of Education. The Unit Assessment System is aligned with the Conceptual
Framework and houses data from assessments that are consistent with the demands for greater
accountability and measure if candidates are proficient in each of the five strands of the
Conceptual Framework, if candidates possess and can apply the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions outlined in standards and, ultimately, the candidates’ impact on student learning.

The School of Education and its stakeholders believe that the assessment system of the
professional education program should be focused on candidate outcomes rather than program
inputs such as the course syllabus. This focus has resulted in the development of and a greater
emphasis on performance assessments to evaluate candidates as they matriculate through the
transition points in the initial and advanced programs. Data on candidate performance from both
internal and external assessment sources are used to evaluate and improve unit and program
effectiveness, as well as the program final outcome—its graduates.

The School of Education assessment process involves the collection, aggregation, and
analysis of data on applicant qualifications, candidate and graduate performance, and unit
operations to evaluate and improve the performance of candidates, the unit, and its programs.
The assessment system is cyclical, in nature, starting and ending with the Conceptual
Framework. The assessment system is electronically based, is maintained in the unit, and is
housed on the UAM SharePoint server to ensure the security of candidate data. UAM School
of Education faculty members have access through the secured SharePoint site to view
aggregated and disaggregated candidate data for initial and advanced programs.

The School of Education faculty and stakeholders believe that an assessment system should
evaluate how well the unit and the initial and advanced programs integrate the strands of the
Conceptual Framework and align the candidate proficiencies with unit and program standards.
The signature assessments, disposition rubrics, Praxis scores, diversity rubrics and the Teacher
Candidate Rating Instrument (initial licensure programs only) yield the data to evaluate
candidate performance as well as program and unit effectiveness. The program and unit data are
aggregated, analyzed, and reviewed by the Curriculum and Assessment Committee, program
faculty, Teacher Education Committee, and other stakeholders to make program and unit
decisions. The continuous review of program and unit data enables the School of Education to
ensure the alignment of programs to the Conceptual Framework, to state and national standards
and to identity possible unit and program improvement needs. The data also provide multiple
41
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

evidence at various transition points to monitor candidate performance and to assure that
candidates are prepared to positively impact student learning. Data is disaggregated for
candidates in the Master of Arts in Teaching alternative route program and the 2+2 partnership
program.

The School of Education recognizes that the reliability and validity of data are critically
important in the planning and assessment of unit and program outcomes. Every effort is made to
ensure the validity and reliability of the performance information gathered for candidates. The
assessment system was developed to ensure that the data are fair, consistent, accurate, and void
of bias through triangulation and cross analysis of data for each candidate and program. Multiple
and varied assessments are administered throughout all programs to minimize bias for diverse
populations. Common rubrics are used by multiple faculty members to ensure the consistency,
precision and reliability of the data. In addition, programs at the initial and advanced levels use
standardized, commercially produced examinations such as PRAXIS exams and the School
Leadership Licensure Assessment (SLLA) as part of its assessment measures. Program faculty
members assist in the development of program signature assessments. Signature assessments and
scoring rubrics are reviewed periodically by faculty committees to ensure understanding,
fairness, validity, and reliability. All assessment tools are developed in alignment with national
standards. The unit also utilizes multiple measures which are administered at various points
throughout the programs of study. The measures include standardized tests, course-imbedded
assessments, field-experience measures, and surveys and rubrics that are completed by faculty,
initial and advanced candidates, university supervisors, graduates, cooperating teachers and
public school administrators.
All university supervisors and cooperating teachers are trained in the use and application of the
Teacher Candidate Rating Instrument (TCRI) which is used to evaluate interns. Each intern is
evaluated multiple times by the university supervisor and the cooperating teacher during the
internship process. Advanced candidates are assessed by a committee of university and public
school faculty and administrators during their oral defense of the Capstone Research Project.
Educational Leadership candidates are scored by university faculty and outside evaluators during
the oral defense of the portfolio. Gathering data from multiple evaluators and cross referencing
the data from one assessment to another allows for triangulation to ensure validity.

Program faculty continuously review the curriculum to ensure that candidates are
provided opportunities to learn, practice, and demonstrate their knowledge in each of the five
strands of the Conceptual Framework and that the curriculum is aligned with standards and
assessments. In addition, faculty constructed state approved curriculum/standards matrices as
part of state program review. These matrices indicate where in the curriculum candidates have
opportunities to learn and practice what is specified in the standards. Fairness also means that
candidates understand what the assessments are and the knowledge and skills that will be
evaluated. Review of attachments in Section IV of the state and SPA reports (NAEYC, AMLE,
PE, CEC, MAT, M.Ed., ELCC) illustrates that assessments are clearly stated and candidates are
given clear directions. In addition, candidates are provided information on how the rubrics are
used to score the assessments and how the rubrics and assessments are used to measure candidate
performance.

42
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Assessments should measure what they purport to measure to be considered accurate. To ensure accuracy,
the unit has aligned assessments with the standards and learning proficiencies For example, the TCRI is
aligned directly with the state model for teacher performance, the Danielson Framework. To further ensure
accuracy of assessments, program faculty systematically reviewed alignment and appropriateness of
assessments as part of preparing state and SPA reports. In addition, assessments are reviewed each
semester during the Teacher Education Committee meetings to determine if they are well-aligned with
standards,
appropriate for the standard being assessed; if revisions are indicated, they noted in the Annual
Stakeholders Report. Through documentation of the relationship between assessment results and
candidate performance on related assessments, Praxis II licensure examinations, grades, and
program completion the School of Education is in an ever increasingly better position to make
data-based evaluations of the accuracy of assessments through triangulation of the data.

Assessment instructions and scoring guides are reviewed by program faculty to identify and
eliminate problems with assessments such as missing or vague instructions, poorly worded
questions, and poorly reproduced copies that make reading difficult. Results of these reviews
may be observed in state and SPA reports (NAEYC, AMLE, PE, CEC, MAT, M.Ed., ELCC). A
complete review of these assessments reveal that program faculty have been successful in
developing assessments that are free of racial and ethnic stereotypes, poorly conceived language
and task situations, and other forms of cultural insensitivity that might interfere with candidate
performance and unintentionally favor some candidates over others.

Assessment Assessment of Assessment of Assessment of Assessment of Assessment of

Knowledge Pedagogy Professionalism Diversity Technology
• Signature • Signature • Signature • Signature • Signature
Assessments Assessments Assessments Assessments Assessments
• TCRI • TCRI • TCRI • TCRI • TCRI
• Disposition • Disposition • Disposition • Disposition • InTASC
Rubric Rubric Rubric Rubric Assessments
• Diversity • Diversity • Diversity • Diversity • Portfolio
Rubric Rubric Rubric Rubric • Interviews
• InTASC • InTASC • InTASC • InTASC
Assessments Assessments Assessments Assessments
• Portfolio • Portfolio • Portfolio • Portfolio
• Interviews • Interviews • Interviews • Interviews

43
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Bibliography

Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L, (1999) Instruction, capacity, and improvement. CPRE Research
Report Series RR-43.

Banks, J. A. (2003). Teaching strategies for ethnic studies (7th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (2005). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives
(5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Publishers.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain,
mind, experience, and school. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning,
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press.

Cazden, C. (1986). “ Classroom Discourse.” In Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd ed.,

edited by M.C. Wittrock. New York: Macmillan.

Cradler, J. (1995). Implementing technology in education: Recent findings from research and
evaluation studies. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from
http://www.wested.org/techpolicy/recapproach.html

Danielson, Charlotte. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for Teaching.

Association for Supe rvision and Curriculum Development. Alexandria, VA.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education,

May 2000.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Strengthening the teaching profession. Educational Leadership.

Volume 55 Number 5. pp. 6 – 11.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (Eds.). (1999). Teaching as the learning profession:
Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). Standard setting in teaching: Changes in licensing,

certification, and assessment. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on
teaching (4th ed., pp. 751-776). Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Edutopia: What Works in Public Education. The George Lucas
Foundation. San Francisco, CA.

Darling-Hammond, L., & J. Bransford (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing

44
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

world (pp. 88-125). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

45
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (2005). A good teacher in every classroom:

Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. San Fransisco, CA: John
Wiley & Son.

Dewey, J. (2008). The later works of John Dewey, volume 12, 1925-1953: 1938, logic: The
theory of inquiry (Collected works of John Dewey.). Carbondale, IL: SIU Press.

Edwards, R. & Nicoll, K. (2006). Expertise, competence and reflection in the rhetoric of
professional development. British Educational Research Journal, v32 n1 (pp.115-131).

Garner, B. K. (2007). Getting to “Got it!: Helping struggling students learn how to learn.
Alexandr ia, VA: Association for Supe rvision and Curriculum Development.

Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2006). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (7th ed.).
Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.

Hilliard, A.G. (January 1989). “Teachers and Cultural Style in a Pluralistic Society.: NEA
Today, 65 – 69.

Honig, M. I., Kahne, J., & McLaughlin, M. W. (2001). School-community connections:

Strengthening opportunity to learn and opportunity to teach. In V. Richardson (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 751-776). Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.

Horowitz, F. D., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Comer, J., Rosebrock, K., Austin,
K. (2005). Educating teachers for developmentally appropriate practice.

Irvine, J.J. (1989). Black students and school failure. New York: Greenwood Press.

Jones V., & Jones, L. (2001). Comprehensive classroom management (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.

Kea C., Campbell-Whatley G., & Richards H. (2006). Becoming culturally responsive educators:
Rethinking teacher education pedagogy. National Center for Culturally Responsive
Educational Systems. U.S. Department of Special Education Programs. Washington, D.C.

Lerner, J. (2003). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Lunenburg, F. & Ornstein, A. (2000). Educational administration: Concepts and pratices

(3rded). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Lynton, E. A., Elman, S. E., (1987). New Priorities for the University. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
46
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2008). Designing and assessing educational objectives:
Applying the new taxonomy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works:
Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McCormick, S. (2007). Instructing students who have literacy problems.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Michael, S. (1981). “Sharing Time: Children’s Narrative Styles and Differential Access to
Literacy.” Language in Society 10: 423 – 442.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A

framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Morey, A. I., Bezuk, N., & Chiero, R. (1997). Preservice teacher preparation in the United
States. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(1), 4-24.

National Center for Education Statistics. Status trends in the education of racial and ethnic
minorities. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends /ind_1_1.asp

Ormrod, J.E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education. Inc.

Pang, V.O., & Sablan, V.A. (1998). Teacher efficacy: How do teachers feel about their abilities to
teach African American students? In M.E. Dilworth (Eds.), Being responsive to cultural
differences – how teachers learn (p.l39–58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Pedro, J. (2006). Taking reflection into the real world of teaching. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(3),
129-133.

Pipho, C. (Feb. 2000). A new reform model for teachers and teaching. Phi Delta Kappan,
81(6), 421-422.

Polk, J. A. (Mar/Apr 2006). Traits of effective teachers. Arts Education Policy Review,
107(4), 23-29.

Roblyer, M. D. (2006). Integrating educational technology into teaching (4th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Shacklock, G. (1998). Professionalism and intensification in teaching: A case study of

‘care’ in teachers’ work. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 26(3),
177-189.
47
Conceptual Framework
Spring, 2014

Shantz, D., & Prieur, P. D. (1996). Teacher professionalism and school leadership: An
antithesis? Education, 116(3), 393.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.

Villegas, A.M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Educating culturally responsive teachers. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Wang, M., Hartel, G., & Walberg, H. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning.
Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249 – 294.

Wasicsko, M.M. (2007). The perceptual approach to teacher dispositions: The effective teacher
as an effective person. In M.E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education
(pp. 55 – 91). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Weaver, R. (Sept. 2005). Calling on America. NEA Today, 24(1), 7.

Whitaker, T. (2004). What great teachers do differently: 14 things that matter most.
Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc.

Wiggins, R. A., & Follo, E. J. (1999). Development of knowledge, attitudes, and

commitment to teach diverse student populations. Journal of Teacher Education,
50(2), March- April 1999.

48