1 / 10

Lisa Bauer, Ed.D , Gary Louis, Ed. D., Michele Beery, Ph.D., Terry Miller, Ed.D .

The Wilmington Professional Development School Model: A New Paradigm for Pre-Service Teacher Experiences. Lisa Bauer, Ed.D , Gary Louis, Ed. D., Michele Beery, Ph.D., Terry Miller, Ed.D . Previous Model. Field Hours associated with Methods classes I nherited setup from @ 80s

selima
Download Presentation

Lisa Bauer, Ed.D , Gary Louis, Ed. D., Michele Beery, Ph.D., Terry Miller, Ed.D .

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Wilmington Professional Development School Model: A New Paradigm for Pre-Service Teacher Experiences Lisa Bauer, Ed.D, Gary Louis, Ed. D., Michele Beery, Ph.D., Terry Miller, Ed.D.

  2. Previous Model Field Hours associated with Methods classes Inherited setup from @ 80s Traditional field coordinator Top down, little opportunity for CIP loop

  3. Previous Benefits Students could be sent to field placement with instructions geared to a specific methods course Double-Edged Swords College faculty had fewer responsibilities (less power?) and (some)less time commitment in the field Students had a greater number of districts to observe in more than double the number of districts

  4. Communication Difficulties between College Instructors and Public School Personnel • Placement Coordinator spread pretty thin with uneven personal relationships with administrators and teachers • Almost no contact between methods faculty supervising students and cooperating teachers • CTs often uncomfortable registering concerns and complaints about students Previous Challenges

  5. Levels of mistrust Results • Levels of Mistrust • Placement Coordinator/School administrator • Faculty/Placement Coordinator • Triangles of codependence • Unclear roles led to students falling through the cracks AND schools being reluctant to take students • Students often were placed in a position of having to take too much responsibility for placements • Field Coordinator did not work with students in the field or in the classroom until they were student teachers (Over two coordinators) • Students often were placed in a position of having to take too much responsibility for placements

  6. Why We Changed

  7. New Model Placement responsibilities shared across department Each professor takes a limited number of schools Professors build relationships with individual administrators and CTs Everybody out in the school Tues and Thursday mornings All Practicum students are linked to a Discussion Board Shared Syllabus/more uniform requirementss

  8. New Benefits Expected Observed Closer and more productive relationships with administrators than anticipated • Shared experiences in real time two mornings per week

  9. New Challenges Expected Observed Lack of uniformity between sections leads to student confusion. Professor involvement in field experience Difficulties with new Model • Harder to do content-specific field assignments • Building trust with K-12 Educators • Specific offers to help may actually add to more difficult relationships

  10. Reflection Points How do we build enough trust with our K-12 colleagues to be invited into volunteer in meaningful ways? Developing Reflective Practioners What’s the right number of students to make it work? Faculty as leaders Building professional community online? Structuring of Discussion Boards Keeping discussions reflective Creating group reflection as a habit of mind

More Related