Delta Journal of Education Teaching Experience Days as Field Experience for

Giles et al.
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
50
Delta Journal of Education
ISSN 2160-9179
Published by Delta State University
Teaching Experience Days as Field Experience for
Elementary Teacher Candidates
Rebecca M. Giles, Andrea M. Kent, Paige Vitulli, and Edward L. Shaw, Jr.
University of South Alabama
Abstract
Elementary education majors’ (n = 143) perceptions of Teaching Experience Days (TEDs) were
investigated. TEDs requires a full day of independent teaching along with a pre- and postconference. Awarding of substitute pay for participation can occur under specific conditions.
Researchers collected data using the Teaching Experience Days Questionnaire, which ascertains
perceptions of TEDs regarding teaching strategies, content knowledge, school operations,
behavior management skills, and knowledge of student development. Data in the form of
frequencies and percentages was calculated. The majority (at least 69%) viewed TEDs as
effective in all five areas; highest agreement (82%) was in behavior management and lowest
agreement (69%) was in school operations.
Keywords: teacher preparation, preservice teachers, substitute teachers
Address correspondence regarding this article to Rebecca M. Giles, University of South Alabama, College of
Education, Department of Leadership and Teacher Education UCOM 3100, Mobile, AL 36688-0002 Phone: 251380-2899; Fax: 251-380-2758; Email: [email protected]
 Delta State University, 2014
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
Teaching Experience Days as Field Experience for
Elementary Teacher Candidates
In the last decade, any number of reports indicated that large numbers of teachers choose to
leave the profession early in their careers (Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003; Hare & Heap,
2001; Johnson, 2001; Pipho, 1998). According to the National Center for Education Statistics
(1999), less than 36% of new teachers reported feeling “very well prepared” to implement
curriculum and performance standards in the classroom. Similarly, less than 30% felt prepared
to integrate technology into instruction, and less than 20% felt prepared to meet the needs of
diverse students (NCES, 1999). Darling-Hammond (2007) noted, “Disparities in access to wellqualified teachers are large and growing worse” (p. 323). The shortcomings of a traditional
teacher preparation program contribute to the continuous teacher turnover currently plaguing the
profession (Haberman, 2005; Kent, Feldman, & Hayes, 2009). Recruiting, preparing, and
retaining teachers for academically challenging and diverse situations is a dilemma for every
institution involved in teacher preparation today (Thomson & Smith, 2005). The answer may lie
in determining how to best integrate the empirically based pedagogy of teacher education while
being practically oriented in order to graduate successful teachers committed to staying in the
profession (Korthagen, Loughran, & Russell, 2006).
Field experiences prior to and during courses in pedagogical methods are prevalent
throughout teacher education programs (Applegate & Lasley, 1986) for providing students the
opportunity to bridge theory and practice (Hooks & Randolph, 2004; Jacobs, 2001). Despite
current efforts to stimulate the transfer of a university-obtained knowledge base to a classroom
setting (Korthagen & Kessels, 1999), the separation of theory and practice throughout traditional
teacher preparation programs is one reason for new teachers’ limited abilities. Keiny (1994)
stated, “Teachers’ education should emphasize understanding not merely on the theoretical level,
but as an integration of theory and action” (p. 158). Other criticisms included the length of time
it takes teacher candidates to reach the classroom and the sacrifice of employment opportunity to
complete program requirements (USDE, 2002). Carefully examining the role and structure of
field experiences in teacher preparation programs is necessary in determining how they may best
be reformed to better prepare today’s teacher candidates.
Traditionally, field experiences have not been a priority in many teacher preparation
programs (Wiggins, Follo, & Eberly, 2007). In many programs, field experiences tend to be
sporadic and brief, lacking specificities and reflective opportunities that guide candidates in what
it is they are to be learning, and are not connected to other components of the program (FeimanNemser, 2001; Villegas & Lucas, 2002). Compounding the issue of inadequate field experience
requirements is the difficulty in identifying and placing candidates with teachers who model
instructional practices that focus on meeting the needs of all students through current, researchbased teaching strategies, which is essential if candidates are to observe instruction that reflects
current reform efforts and university-advocated instructional practices (Barnett, Harwood,
Keating, & Saam, 2002).
In examining the literature, consistent variables of effective field experience programs
emerged. Regardless of inherent logistical challenges, multiple field experience locations must
 Delta State University, 2014
51
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
be strategically selected to provide candidates numerous and varied opportunities to work with
diverse groups of students. Field experiences must also begin with introductory education
courses and continue throughout a candidate’s teacher methodological coursework, scaffolding
the types of interactions in which candidates engage. Additionally, the voices of all
stakeholders--principals, teachers, university faculty, and candidates--are critical for constant
refinement and improvement. Although the commitment of all members is necessary for a
quality program, the cooperation of the classroom teacher is of particular importance (Clarke,
Triggs & Nielsen, 2014).
The cooperating teacher who guides and supports the candidate throughout the field
experience is crucial to the success of the experience (Graham, 2006). Professional
organizations, such as the Association of Teacher Educators (ATE) and the National Council for
the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), support this notion through the development
of criteria for selecting cooperating teachers to accompany those regulating the selection of field
experience sites. The goal is for candidates to merge their conceptual understanding of teaching
with the functional knowledge of in-service teachers through a process that is about and derived
from practice, with opportunity to reflect on that practice under the guidance of a reflective,
experienced practitioner (Harrison, Dymoke, & Pell, 2006). In best-case scenarios, this process
also extends the cooperating teacher’s knowledge base as she incorporates new strategies and
ideas introduced by the candidate.
Another important factor emerges when the attitudes of the stakeholders are considered.
A great deal of the success of a candidate’s experiences depends on personal attitudes and
beliefs, or dispositions (NCATE, 2002). As these dispositions are shaped, the beliefs and
experiences of the cooperating teacher, along with the relationships between the university
supervisor, cooperating teacher, and candidate, play a vital role in the success of the experience
(Borko & Mayfield, 1995; Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Korthagen, et al., 2006; Zeichner, 2010).
Teaching Experience Days
In 2000, the U.S. Department of Education established the National Awards Program for
Effective Teacher Preparation identifying five key elements among the top four programs. An
effective P-12 partnership where cooperating districts provided feedback about the college’s
teacher preparation program and helped to enhance the quality of field experiences was one of
these elements (Dean, Lauer, & Urquhart, 2005). As leaders in the public schools and colleges
of education join forces, educating future teachers becomes a collaborative effort, each relying
on the insight of the other. The need to prepare candidates for diverse populations of
academically challenging students while providing quality instruction to public school students
that may otherwise experience a “teacher-less” day (due to the limited availability of qualified
substitutes) resulted in the development of Teaching Experience Days. This was a joint effort
between a university and local school districts in south Alabama.
The Beginning
Teaching Experience Days (TEDs) provide candidates with diverse clinical field
experiences in multiple classroom settings with levels of increasing responsibility. The program,
 Delta State University, 2014
52
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
as an added benefit for the district, simultaneously allows local school schools to address their
current lack of qualified substitute teachers. The TEDs program, a response to initiatives being
implemented nation-wide that require increased field experiences, is intended to engage students
in best practices by providing a variety of early, rich, and deep professional experiences for
teacher education candidates. The TEDs program also represents a potential solution for meeting
emerging state certification standards requiring the implementation of a responsive model for
collaborating with local school districts.
Engaging in a Teaching Experience Day
To complete a TED, candidates must plan with a host teacher in the same school where
they are completing their course-related field experience. TEDs, however, do not require that
candidates necessarily work with anyone other than their assigned cooperating teacher. In fact,
TEDs usually occur with the assigned cooperating teacher. Thus, the candidate would be in the
same class with the same students while the teacher is elsewhere (i.e., in the school at a meeting,
taking a sick day, attending professional development off-campus, and participating in other
similar activities). As candidates gain confidence in their teaching abilities, they might teach in
other classes. While not the primary purpose, TEDs may also serve the critical objective of
exposing candidates to a greater variety of classrooms.
The pre-teaching conference constitutes the planning phase. During the pre-teaching
conference, the host teacher should review the following items with the candidate: 1) all lesson
plans the host teacher developed that the candidate will use to teach, 2) instructional materials
and teaching resources related to the planned lessons, and 3) other vital information to help
ensure the success of the candidate’s upcoming teaching experience. The teaching experience
includes the candidate teaching for the entire school day during the host teacher’s absence,
according to arrangements outlined in the pre-teaching conference. As the candidate engages in
the TED, the host teacher, cooperating teacher, instructional specialist (e.g., reading coach or
math coach), building principal, or other suitable on-site professional is responsible for the
supervision.
Following completion of the TED, the candidate meets with the host teacher for a postteaching conference. The purpose of this conference is to reflect on what was successful, discuss
difficulties encountered, and obtain feedback from a veteran teacher regarding general
observations. Additionally, a completed Teaching Experience Validation Form (see Appendix
A) documents each TED. Both the candidate who completed the TED and the host teacher in
whose classroom the TED occurred sign the validation form before and after the actual day of
teaching.
Opportunity for Compensation
The Teaching Experience Days program, a result of a university and local school district
collaboration, allows teacher candidates to receive substitute teacher pay as they engage in TEDs
when certain conditions exist. It should be clear, however, that TEDs have no required
relationship with substitute teaching in any form, paid or unpaid. Candidates majoring in
elementary education are required to complete a minimum of 10 Teaching Experience Days
 Delta State University, 2014
53
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
during their teacher preparation program (2 days during the first methods course block, 3 days
during the second methods course block, and 5 days during the student teaching semester). It has
always been permissible for candidates to work, either as substitute teachers or in any other
capacity, as long as their employment does not interfere with their participation in and ability to
complete all requirements of the degree program. Nothing in the TEDs program requires them to
be substitute teachers or specifies particular school districts for which they may serve as
substitutes. Candidates employed as substitute teachers may use that experience to satisfy the
TEDs requirement if they meet all other conditions of the TEDs program.
As with any substitute-teaching situation, candidates can qualify for pay as substitute
teachers after meeting the following conditions: 1) they received appropriate training from the
school district, 2) voluntarily avail themselves of the opportunity, and 3) the school district
chooses to employ them for that purpose. TEDs require additional supervision above that of a
substitute teacher, and there is no connection between TEDS and any compensation except as
agreed between the school district and the candidate. Critically, the requirements of the TEDs
program may be satisfied whether or not candidates choose to also work as substitute teachers
and whether or not the district chooses to employ them in that role.
Integration of TEDs and Field Experiences
Engaging in TEDs adds no additional days to the candidates’ field experience schedule,
but it does provide a variation in the type of experience the candidates will engage in for a
portion of time. Consequently, there should be no scheduling conflicts because of a candidate’s
participation in the TEDs program. Further, TEDs provide the potential for addressing issues
relating to best practices, as candidates are able to collaborate with more professionals in their
field and examine how instructional and organizational elements are organized and implemented
in a variety of classrooms. TEDs allow for another layer of site and university supervision as
members of the school community (e.g., principal, academic coaches, or special education
teachers) have additional opportunities to work with teacher candidates.
TEDs provide teacher candidates with a variety of field experiences throughout the junior
and senior year without compromising the power of intense field experience in a single
classroom and opportunity to learn from a pre-determined master teacher. Based on the host
teacher’s lesson plans, candidates engage in instruction for public school students, thereby
enhancing teaching experience for the candidate and continuous learning for the student.
Finally, under certain circumstances, the candidate receives responsive compensation.
Evaluating the Pilot
Researchers investigated the perceived benefit of elementary teacher candidates’
participation in Teaching Experience Days (TEDs) the first semester of implementation using a
quantitative, descriptive research model. Specifically, the research questions were as follows:
1.
To what extent did completion of TEDs contribute to teacher candidates’
knowledge of elementary curriculum content?
 Delta State University, 2014
54
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
2.
To what extent did completion of TEDs contribute to teacher candidates’ abilities
to deliver instruction effectively and knowledge of teaching strategies?
3.
To what extent did the completion of TEDs contribute to teacher candidates’
classroom management abilities?
4.
To what extent did the completion of TEDs contribute to teacher candidates’
familiarity with school-wide operations?
5.
To what extent did the completion of TEDs contribute to teacher candidates’
awareness/understanding of developmental variation among students across grade
levels?
Method
Participants
Participants were 143 teacher candidates (134 females and 9 males) in a College of
Education at a university located in the southeastern United States. The Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools classifies the university as a Level VI institution, and it the Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching identifies it as a Doctoral/Research Intensive
University. All participants were in upper-division education courses within a program leading
to Class B teaching certificate in Elementary Education (K-6). Eighty-four participants were
juniors, and fifty-nine were seniors. Eighty percent (115) were 19- to 29-year-olds. The number
of participants in each age range was as follows: 91 between 19-24 years, 24 between 25-29
years, 14 between 30-34 years, 5 between 35-39, 7 between 40-44 years, and 1 between 45-49
and 1 50 years or older. Although most (106) participants were white, ethnicities also
represented were black (32), Asian (2), and Hispanic (1). While consecutive semester field
placements are a requirement of the teacher preparation program piloting TEDs, 141 participants
were in the first semester of their field placement classroom. Distribution of participants among
grade levels is as follows: 16 kindergarten, 31 first grade, 12 second grade, 18 third grade, 30
fourth grade, and 36 fifth grade.
Materials
The Teaching Experience Days Questionnaire (TEDQ) is a two-part, self-report
instrument developed by the researchers to obtain candidates’ perceptions of the effectiveness of
their Teaching Experience Days experience. The first part obtains basic demographic
information (gender, age, classification, and ethnicity) along with details related to the location
(school and grade level) and process followed when completing TEDs. The second part contains
10 items that ascertain participants’ perceptions of the TED program’s effect on knowledge of
curriculum content, teaching strategies, overall school operations, developmental differences of
students, and classroom management abilities. For the purpose of ascertaining reliability, a pair
(1-4, 2-8, 3-6, 5-9, and 7-10) of reversely stated items addresses each of the five areas
investigated. Participants used a fully anchored four-point rating scale, ranging from “Strongly
Agree” to “Strongly Disagree,” for responding to each item. A panel of four elementary teacher
educators determined content validity on the TEDQ. Each area expert assessed the extent to
 Delta State University, 2014
55
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
which the instrument accurately and completely measured the intended constructs. A group of
graduate education majors determined face validity on the TEDQ. Adjustments occurred based
on the feedback from both groups resulting in the final version of the instrument.
Design and Procedure
The research consisted of a one-group comparison posttest only design (Johnson &
Christensen, 2010), where participants were measured upon the dependent variable of
participation in the Teaching Experience Days program. Researchers used the survey method of
data collection because the number of subjects is relatively high, and survey method research
provides a numeric description of trends, attitudes, or opinions of a population by studying a
sample of that population (Creswell, 2003). All participants completed the Teaching Experience
Days Questionnaire (TEDQ) during a regularly scheduled university course the last week of the
semester. While the nature of self-report presents the possibility that participants may have been
tempted to respond as they deemed ‘expected’. This risk was minimal since participants
completed the TEDQ independent of any interaction and all responses remained anonymous.
Limitations include limited generalizability since participants were a convenience sample.
Additionally, the inability to control extraneous variables, such as school placement and host
teacher as well as the timing and quality of the conferences, may have contributed to differences
in perceptions among participants. Another factor possibly influencing perception is the actual
number of TEDs completed. For example, some participants exceeded the required minimum
number of TEDs, with three participants completing as many as five TEDs during the semester.
Using the Statistical Program for the Social Sciences (SPSS), researchers calculated frequencies
and percentages for quantitative data (demographics and item responses) from the TEDQ.
Results
Participants reported that most TEDs occurred in their assigned field experience
classroom, rather than in other classrooms at their assigned school. Specifically, 131 participants
(92%) completed their first TED in their assigned classroom, with 113 (79%) for their second
TED. Forty-three (30%) completed a third TED in their assigned classroom; however, a third
TED was only required of the 54 seniors, which would be (80%). As shown in Table 1, both
pre- and post-conferences most often occurred within one day of the TED for all conferences
(186 out of 329 pre-TED and 133 out of 334 post-TED) completed.
 Delta State University, 2014
56
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
57
Table 1
Timing of TEDs Pre- and Post-Conferences
Pre-Conference Timing
____________________________
TED
N
Same
day
1 day
prior
1
134
5
2
132
3
Post-Conference Timing
____________________________
4+
days
prior
4
N
Same
day
1 day
after
76
2-3
days
prior
51
138
41
54
2-3
days
later
39
8
78
43
4
133
43
51
37
52
8
31
9
4
54
13
26
12
3
4
7
2
1
4
0
7
2
1
2
1
5
2
0
0
2
0
2
0
1
1
0
23
186
109
12
99
133
91
8
TOTAL 327
4+
days
later
3
1
Participants agreed with the positively stated items on the TEDQ, indicating a perceived
positive effect of TEDs participation in the areas of effect on knowledge of curriculum content
(79%), teaching strategies (79%), overall school operations (69%), developmental differences of
students (74%), and classroom management abilities (82%). Table 2 presents results for
positively stated item.
Table 2
TEDQ Positive Statement Responses
Item
Strongly
Strongly
Agree Disagree
Agree
Disagree
1. TEDS increased my knowledge of general elementary
curriculum content.
35
78
23
5
3. I developed better teaching strategies as a result of
TEDS.
29
84
25
2
5. I was more familiar with the overall school operations
(i.e., facilities, support personnel, and standard procedures)
due to TEDS.
32
67
40
3
7. TEDS increased my understanding of the wide-range of
developmental variation among elementary students.
35
71
31
5
34
83
24
1
8. TEDS improved my behavior management skills.
 Delta State University, 2014
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
58
Likewise, participants disagreed with the negatively stated items on the TEDQ, indicating
a perceived positive effect of TEDs participation in all five areas-- curriculum content (67%),
teaching strategies (66%), overall school operations (73%), developmental differences of
students (54%), and classroom management abilities (64%). Table 3 presents results for
negatively stated items.
Table 3 TEDQ
Negative Statement Responses
Item
4. TEDS had no effect on my content knowledge.
Strongly
Strongly
Agree Disagree
Agree
Disagree
6
39
74
22
3
44
80
15
9. TEDS has no effect on my familiarity with the school
environment.
4
34
81
23
10. My understanding of student development across
grade levels was unaffected by TEDS.
7
57
64
13
2. My ability to effectively manage student behavior
was not positively affected by TEDS.
14
30
67
24
6. My teaching strategies were not affected by TEDS.
Discussion
Findings suggest that candidates generally perceived TEDs as effective. Overall, the
majority (at least 69%) viewed TEDs as effective in the five areas explored; the highest
percentage of agreement (82%) was in behavior management, and the lowest percentage of
agreement (69%) was in school operations. It is noteworthy that candidates perceived TEDs as
beneficial in improving knowledge and skills related to behavior management since this is often
an area of difficulty for preservice and novice teachers. Ultimately, the data indicated that this
sample of undergraduates viewed TEDs as enriching their preparation for their teaching careers
by providing another dimension to established field experiences. Additional research that
examines the perception of cooperating teachers and school administrators regarding the
effectiveness of TEDs needs to occur.
The availability of well-qualified teachers can be critical in determining students’
academic success (Ferguson, 1991; Darling-Hammond, Holtman, Gatlin, & Heilig, 2005). Thus,
preparing teachers who view themselves as competent and capable of meeting the needs of
today’s challenging student population is essential in order to reach the goal of improving
student achievement. Korthagen, Loughran, and Russell (2006) identify deep, rich field
experiences as the best possible means of providing this preparation. For this and other reasons,
many universities are exploring non-traditional approaches to embedding a variety of rich
classroom experiences within their teacher preparation programs. Teaching Experience Days
 Delta State University, 2014
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
represents a collaborative effort between one university and local school districts to provide
supplemental field experiences that appears to better prepare future teachers for the complexity
inherent in educating twenty-first century students.
References
Applegate, J. H., & Lasley, T. (1986). Early field experience: A synthesis of role-perspective
studies. Dayton, OH: Kent State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 310
065)
Barnett, M., Harwood, W., Keating, T., & Saam, J. (2002). Using emerging technologies to help
bridge the gap between university theory and classroom practice: Challenges and
successes. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 299-313.
Borko, H., & Mayfield, D. (1995). The roles of the mentor teacher and university supervisor in
learning to teach. Teacher and Teacher Education, 11(5), 501-518.
Clarke, A., Triggs, V., & Nielsen, W. (2014). Cooperating teacher participation in teacher
education: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 84(2), 163202.doi:10.3102/0034654313499618
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to
equity will determine our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for
education: The right way to meet the “Highly Qualified Teacher” challenge. Education
Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33). Retrieved October 1, 2014, from
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/261/387.
Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D., Gatlin, S. J., & Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher
preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America, and teacher
effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42). Retrieved October 1, 2014,
from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/147/273.
Dean, C., Lauer, P., & Urquhart, V. (2005). Outstanding teacher education programs: What do
they have that others don’t? Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 284-289.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a curriculum to strengthen
and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
Ferguson, R. F. (1991). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money
matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 28(2), 465-498.
Graham, B. (2006). Conditions for successful field experiences: Perceptions of cooperating
teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 1118-1129.
Haberman, M. (2005). Raising teachers’ salaries: The funds are there. Education, 125(3), 327343.
Hare D., & J. L. Heap (2001). Effective teacher recruitment and retention strategies in the
Midwest: Who is making use of them? Naperville, IL: North Central Regional
Educational Lab. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED477648)
Harrison, J., Dymoke, S., & Pell, T. (2006). Mentoring beginning teachers in secondary schools:
An analysis of practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 155-1067.
Hooks, L. M., & Randolph, L. (2004). Excellence in teacher preparation: Partners for success.
Childhood Education, 80(5), 231-237.
Jacobs, G. M. (2001). Providing the scaffold: A model for early childhood/primary teacher
preparation. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 125-130.
 Delta State University, 2014
59
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
Johnson, H. R. (2001). Administrators and mentors: Keys in the success of beginning teachers.
Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(1), 44-49.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2010). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative,
and Mixed Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Keiny, S. (1994). Constructivism and teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 10(2), 157-167.
Kent, A. M., Feldman, P., & Hayes, R. L. (2009). Mentoring and inducting new teachers into the
profession: An innovative approach. International Journal of Applied Educational
Studies, 5(1), 73-95.
Korthagen, F. A., & Kessels, J. P. A. M. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the
pedagogy of teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(4), 4-17.
Korthagen, F., Loughran, J., & Russell, T. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher
education programs and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 1020-1041.
National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (2002). NCATE. Professional
standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges and departments of education.
National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education, Washington, DC.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (1999). Teacher quality: A report on the
preparation and qualifications of public school teachers. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education.
Pipho, C. (1998). A “real” teacher shortage. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(3), 181-182.
Thomson, S., & Smith, D. L. (2005). Creating highly qualified teachers for urban schools
Professional Educator, 27(1-2), 73-88.
United States Department of Education. (USDE). (2002). Meeting the highly qualified teachers
challenge: The Secretary’s Annual Report on teacher quality. Washington, DC: Author.
Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the
curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20-32.
Wiggins, R. A., Follo, E. J., & Eberly, M. B. (2007). The impact of a field immersion program
on pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward teaching in culturally diverse classrooms.
Teaching and Teacher Education 23(5), 653-663.
Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connection between campus courses and field experiences in
college and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2),
89-99.
 Delta State University, 2014
60
Giles, Kent, Vituli, & Shaw
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2014
Appendix
Teaching Experience Day Validation Form
College of Education • University of South Alabama
_______________________________________________________________ ___________________
Student Name
Student JAG #
___________________________________ _____________________________________________
Date of Teaching Experience
Course (prefix/number/title) Associated with TED
_____________________________
Name of Teacher
_____________________ __________________________
Subject or Grade Level School
Pre-Teaching Conference
The purpose of the pre-teaching conference is to allow the USA candidate to review with the classroom teacher the
lesson plan that will be implemented in satisfaction of the TEDs requirement. For each subject and class taught, the
following specific elements will be included in the pre-teaching conference:




Purpose of the lesson

Anticipated student learning outcomes
Candidate’s objectives for this TED

Evaluation criteria for student learning
Materials to be used

Teaching strategies to be employed
Relationship of TED experience to University coursework
I herewith certify that I met with candidate identified above and reviewed the instructional plan to be implemented
to meet the requirements of the Teaching Experience Days program.
_________________________________________________ _____________
(Student Signature)
(Date)
_________________________________________________ _____________
(Teacher Signature)
(Date)
Post-Teaching Conference
The purpose of the post-teaching conference is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Teaching Experience Day. The
following specific elements will be included in the post-teaching conference:
professional development
-12 student behaviors and interactions during the lesson
I herewith certify that I have met with the candidate identified above and conducted the post-teaching conference
assessing the Teaching Experience Days requirement.
_________________________________________________ _____________
(Student Signature)
(Date)
_________________________________________________ _____________
(Teacher Signature)
(Date)
 Delta State University, 2014
61