Loading...
Menu

A Definitive White Paper: Systemic Educational Reform (The Recommended Course of

 

A Definitive White Paper: Systemic Educational Reform

The Recommended Course of Action for Practitioners

Of

Teaching and Learning

Dr. Kenneth Fetterman

Proprietary Copyrights, Circa 2004; 2010; 2017

Copyright—2017

(Shakespir e-Edition—All Rights Reserved)

License Notes

Please share this free publication (i.e. White Paper) with … in your….

If you have a desire to learn more about the concepts outlined in this proposal, sample/purchase (two) fundamental manuscripts @

http://www.Shakespir.com/profile/view/kennethfetterman

(Implementation options are provided within the pages that follow)

Table of Contents

Purpose and International Considerations

Problems Addressed

Change Parameters

The Reflection Component

The Instructional Design Component

Conclusions

Products/Services & Distinguishing Attributes

Market Considerations

Implementation Options

Bibliography

About the Scholar

Purpose

This manuscript addresses the need to bring about more effective teacher training and propagate innovative schools in the United States (and abroad). It is intended to serve as a policy statement and position paper which will enable political forces to rally behind a comprehensive strategy that will rectify the shortcomings of our educational system. The constructs described may also be utilized by training and development professionals employed by corporations, governmental agencies, and social service providers to advance educational initiatives in these contexts.

International Considerations

A report published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) authenticates the reality of “massive teacher shortages … in sub-Saharan Africa, the Arab States and South Asia …” that may impede goals “to provide every child” in these regions “with a good quality primary education” …. Even in countries such as China, Brazil and India which will need “fewer teachers” … because of “declining school age populations”, UNESCO recognizes the potential to improve education quality by investing more resources to train teachers and improve working conditions in target regions (UNESCO, Institute for Statistics, 2006, p.3). UNESCO identifies only 33 of the 194 sovereign nations that are recognized by the U.S. State Department. Their report lists 32 countries outside of the U.S. with a current or expected teaching force that exceeds 50,000 teachers (Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needs for 2015, UNESCO, Institute for Statistics, 2006, p. 44). Excluding primary educators in the United States, the UNESCO study reveals a need for more than six million primary teachers in these (32) nations. Imagine the potential numbers of secondary practitioners that must be trained across the globe in the coming decades (as many nations have yet to systematize these levels of formal schooling). Honestly, given the need for teacher training at all levels in the U.S. and remaining 160 or more nations not considered by UNESCO; the potential to sustain political, economic, and social development initiatives in target regions via “our” straightforward — “research-based” professional development tutorials is pragmatic.

Problem

While graduation rates appear to be at an all-time high in many states according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES.ed.gov), some states have realized little (or no) progress in moving students toward this goal. The NCES table (which was prepared in January of 2015 with data from 2012-2013) reveals that high school completion rates varied upward from a low of only 62% in the District of Columbia to a high of 90% in the state of Iowa. Researchers also indicate that many students are graduating high school without the capabilities to succeed in the workplace, or in postsecondary educational programs (without remedial learning). Furthermore, a comprehensive estimate (as cited by R. W. Rumberger in an article published by the American Psychological Association) reveals that nearly 1.1 million students did not graduate with their classmates in 2012. When extrapolated across one or more decades, the economic impacts of their diminished potential upon local communities, social service providers, state agencies, law enforcement entities, and our collective productivity as a Nation are almost inconceivable!

Although the pace of a changing world has accelerated and credits requirements have increased dramatically since WWII, the administrative mechanisms and fundamental methodologies employed by practitioners have changed little in the past seven decades. While experimental models have shown some promise, our public schools continue to function as “knowledge factories” with (one-size-fits-all) instructional programs that are constrained by long-established operational parameters, haphazard professional development mechanisms, and intrusive regulations. The entire educational system remains plagued by a (costly) top down organizational hierarchy that continuously endorses round after round of mandates (i.e. policy initiatives) without the input of tolerant practitioners. The paradigm is being perpetuated by an over-reliance upon textbooks, teacher-centered instructional mechanisms (e.g. lectures, tutorials, etc.) and standardized tests that do not give adequate consideration to the socially dynamic and contextually enriched experiences students encounter outside of school. These shortcomings are being exacerbated by inherent disparities in the attributes of pre-service teacher training programs (among institutions and across disciplines within institutions) and by in-service providers (i.e. consultants) offering campaigns that are thematic and/or site specific. Such opportunities are usually limited in scope and duration with relatively few practitioners being serviced by a small number of vendors. Without systemic change—future attempts to bring about widespread reforms in education are likely to be doomed by successive waves of novel proposals that have no significant impact upon teaching and learning.

Change Parameters

Unless mechanisms are put in place to facilitate site-based management in schools, an imposition from outside entities will continue to influence the governance of education and the nature of learning. Educators must be provided with opportunities to interact, observe, question, explore, and reflect; to engage in inquiry-based learning in the company of their peers, and to address concerns about their communities of practice. As described by Collay, Dunlap, Enloe, and Gagnon (1998), learning communities are established when:

Groups intentionally … [assemble] for the purpose of supporting each other in the process of learning…. [Groups may emerge as] formal learning communities in university programs, [among] college faculties, or [in] k-12 schools … [or they may emerge] as informal learning communities in courses for undergraduate or graduate students; in classrooms of secondary, elementary, or preschool students; and among different groups of teachers, students, [and] administrators … gathered together for the purpose of learning. The term can also refer to smaller groups of people in classrooms, schools, courses, or graduate programs…. [or] … just a few people gathered together as grade-level teams, peer review groups, advisory groups, study groups, or site councils. (p. XV)

However, Myers (1996) advises that:

Schools … ought to be conceptualized as cultural communities [of learners] rather than physical places, buildings, organizations, institutions, or clusters of employees…. As cultural communities, they must have a…. shared mission and common belief in core community values … [to guide decisions and activities]. (p.3)

Recognizing that human associations must be based on personal freedom, equality and mutual respect, Fielding (2000) conveys that:

Community is neither constituted nor maintained by organization. It relies on motives which sustain the personal relations of members…. Community is … the reciprocal experience people have as persons in certain kinds of [functional and personal] relationships; it is … not a group of people, nor is it the mere fact of relationship; rather it is the shared, mutuality of experience that is constitutive of it. (pp. 400-401)

Dewey (1916) concluded that:

To have the same ideas about things which others have, to be like-minded with them, and thus to be really members of a social group, is therefore to attach the same meanings to things and to acts which others attach. Otherwise, there is no common understanding, and no community life…. [I]f each views the consequences of his own acts as having a bearing upon what others are doing and takes into account the consequences of their behavior upon himself, then there is a common mind; a common intent in behavior [i.e. a desired end]. There is an understanding set up between different contributors; and this … controls the action of each. (p. 30)

Autonomous communities of practitioners (comprised of individuals with disciplinary or interdisciplinary expertise) are limited in their ability to influence the development of policies that emanate from beyond their primary networks. Therefore, each communal grouping must select at least one associate as their representative to a building level steering committee. In smaller schools, a single grouping may encompass all of the practitioners in a building (e.g. elementary practitioners). As a logical progression of the concept, one or more members from the steering committee(s) in each school building should be nominated to serve on a district-level steering committee. Moving beyond the establishment of Democratic frameworks at the local level, representatives from various school districts ought to be organized into influential regional and/or state bodies that contribute to the development of public policies. As such, representatives from each state in our union could be organized to establish a national forum which perpetuates innovations in teaching and learning.

The Reflection Component

A reflective dynamic is established when practitioners (and practitioner-based communities) seek opinions to confirm or refute their thinking. Reflection in practice requires each member of the community to make personal judgments, to critique alternative points of view, and to consider the implications of their thoughts and actions in regards to established goals, and the values, ethics, and core beliefs of their community. Moon (1999) suggests:

The common-sense view of reflection [a general definition] is that it is a mental process that is couched in a framework of purpose or [some form of] outcome.… [I]t is the framework of intention and any guidance towards fulfillment of that intention that is significant in distinguishing one act of reflection from another. The mental process itself may not differ from one situation to another. (p. 15)

The qualitative outcomes of reflection in practice were clarified by the Colombia Associates in Philosophy (1923). Their thoughts are summarized as follows:

reflection brings to our attention values which we might otherwise overlook…. ®eflection leads us to a better understanding of ourselves, to a defining of our real aims, a clarification of our desires…. By banishing vagueness, revealing new facts, and so on, it makes us see what problems really are most vital, and thus brings us nearer to actual situations…. [It] make[s] our conduct more fully our own, more voluntary and less of a blind obedience to custom [and habit]…. ®eflection can … make us cognizant of ideals different from our own, and this will lead us in some cases to assimilate the values of other positions, thus producing a greater agreement among … [beings] than would otherwise exist…. [It] should bring us to the voluntary adoption of a clearer standard, more intelligible to ourselves and to others, including those who disagree; a standard based upon a consideration of more facts, and one which leads us more directly to deal with real problems confronting us. (pp. 323-325)

These products of mind are a direct result of observation and introspective acts of consciousness (thinking) that Dewey (1938) describes as “a postponement of immediate action, while it effects internal control of impulse through a union of observation and memory, [with] this union being at the heart of reflection” (p. 64). Jay (1999) identifies several forms of reflective practice. These “forms” include: reflection as a problem-solving technique, reflection as a bridge between theory and practice, reflection as a frame analysis, and reflection as a state of being—as mindfulness (p. 4).

Reflection when conceptualized as a problem-solving technique implies that practitioners intend to take action following an examination (via research and/or inquires) of numerous or competing interpretations of a matter. The process is initiated to establish an accepted standard, or to identify the most reliable solution to a given conflict or problem. Moallem (1998) indicates that “most of the problems that instructional designers [teachers] confront in their practice are unclear, unique and situation-based, and cannot be described with a high degree of completeness or solved with a high degree of certainty” (p. 281). “Depending on our disciplinary backgrounds, organizational roles, past histories, interests, and political/economic perspectives, we frame problematic situations in different ways”…. [that may be] “problematic in several ways at once” (Schon, 1987, pp. 4-6). Reflection that occurs as an extension of a problem-solving experience necessitates that practitioners challenge their assumptions and proceed with cautious, deliberate, and open-ended actions to bring about a resolution to classroom-based or school-wide problems. Osterman (1998) defines such problems as a “discrepancy between intended and actual behavior[s] or between goals and actual outcomes” (p. 3).

Reflection when conceptualized as a bridge between theory and practice involves considering varied sources of information to initiate intentional changes in our professional practice (even when there are no problems to resolve). According to Jay (1999) reflecting on a theory allows teachers to “render abstract ideas more practical, personal, and meaningful…. [to] try on a theory, [to] consider its meaning and consequences in a particular context, and [to] experiment with the application [of theories] in practice” (p. 10/11).

Reflection when conceptualized as a frame analysis can be characterized as a process of discovery that requires using our reasoning faculties to determine (interpret) what is significant about a matter or situation. The process requires that practitioners challenge the philosophical positions (i.e. values, beliefs, and assumptions) underpinning how they perceive various problems and recognize theories that are relevant to their practice. Thus, initiating reflection as a frame analysis serves as a means to overcoming the naïve misconceptions (subconscious bias) that may be influencing “our” practice. “Through complementary acts of naming and framing, the practitioner selects things for attention and organizes them, guided by an appreciation of the situation [i.e. context] that gives it coherence and sets a direction for action” (Schon, 1987, p.4).

Reflection when conceptualized as mindfulness refers to the establishment of reflective experiences as “a ‘way of being’ … approaching artistry in … execution” (Jay, 1999, p.12). Mindfulness entails an emotional state of being where one’s attention is directed to the present, in an ever-changing process of reframing, experimentation, and improvisation (varying, combining, and recombining schema) “to develop and test new forms of understanding and action where familiar categories and ways of thinking fail” (Schon, 1987, p.40). Schon refers to these processes as “reflection in action”; an act of deliberation that “takes the form of a reflective conversation with the situation”…. “a ‘what if’ to be adopted in order to discover … consequences”…. “Each [consequence] has implication binding on later moves…. Each creates new problems to be described and solved”…. “spinning out a web of moves, consequences, implications, appreciations, and further moves” (pp. 56-57).

The notion of verification is an important aspect of mindfulness. Accordingly, “we … [must] reflect on action, thinking back on what we have done [after the fact or by pausing in the midst of action] in order to discover how our knowing-in-action [or spontaneous, and habitual responses] may have contributed to an unexpected outcome” (Schon, 1987, pp. 26-31). Reflecting on-action(s) enables practitioners to identify and address classroom and school related problems, to evaluate the effectiveness of theories in practice, to challenge the philosophical underpinnings that influence how and what they teach, and to modify subsequent approaches to instruction.

The Instructional Design Component

Initiating a dichotomous approach to teaching and learning is essential because even the most successful (competency-based) programs culminate when students can apply the knowledge and skills they acquire. Competency-based (i.e. technical) learning experiences are inherently dependent upon the ability of practitioners to convey knowledge and evaluate the skill sets of their students. Assessing a student’s ability to recall knowledge and/or comprehend information can be accomplished via summative mechanisms (e.g. choosing a bubble on a computer screen/answer sheet). Summative assessments are administered (by an imposition from above) to verify the extent that target competencies have been acquired. Usually, testing is separate from learning with events occurring at periodic intervals (following instruction). Consequently, practitioners can conduct a task or procedural analysis to identify (observable and measureable) psychomotor skill requirements. Skill requirements may be assessed by employing criterion referenced rubrics (i.e. performance-based checklists) to document the level(s) of mastery associated with specific procedures. Although summative assessments may be employed to verify the acquisition of fundamental competencies, more complex capabilities cannot be adequately measured via homogeneous instrumentation. Therefore, as students accumulate knowledge and skills (i.e. competencies) they ought to complete one or more capstone experiences. These experiences may result in the completion of multi-faceted projects, exhibits, displays, independent research, presentation and/or portfolios. Shapiro (2003) suggests that:

he capstone experience provides students with the opportunity to apply [and integrate] multiple, previously developed (or developing) … [competencies] in a novel context defined by the student. Furthermore, because capstone outcomes are linked to course outcomes, … students are able to apply [knowledge and] skills taught in individual courses in a new context, usually after the student has completed the course. (pp. 424-425)

A second scheme may be employed to facilitate more abstract (i.e. non-technical) curriculums. The notion of a learning experience being “non-technical” infers that knowledge and skills can be acquired via multiple pathways (as opposed to the knowledge specific and/or procedural requirements associated with a highly structured training paradigm). Accordingly, non-technical curriculums must be aligned with broad themes or compelling topics to establish a structural framework of qualitative indicators that exemplify the process and/or product requirements (i.e. outcomes) associated with learning. Outcome-based paradigms are characterized by multiple and routine occasions for students to engage in (inter-disciplinary) activities that encourage exploration and discovery via episodes that are responsive to their needs, interests and functional abilities. Dewey (1938) conveys the importance of establishing a “principle of order and organization” for such experiences. He indicates the significance of determining “the kinds of materials, methods, and social relationships that are appropriate” (p. 29). Accordingly, practitioners must employ one or more instructional practices (e.g. debates, design activities, independent research, presentations, trouble shooting experiences, etc.) to facilitate learning that culminates with the outcomes that are desired. In addition to selecting such practices, practitioners ought to develop an organizational matrix to encourage social interactions and coordinate the assimilation of individual learning experiences (e.g. research and/or projects) among structured groupings of students. Furthermore, each sub-group of students should be responsible for integrating their assigned construct(s) into the structural framework (i.e. matrix) that is aligned with a particular topic, problem, or type of subject matter. Since outcome-based curriculums are student-centered, self-assessment and peer evaluation components are essential to maximize the impact of non-technical learning experiences. An outcome (i.e. process or product) can be verified after a single learning experience or it may emerge as the culmination of multiple learning experiences (i.e. a capstone requirement). As Shapiro (2003) indicates:

Identifying and teaching to the outcomes … [that are desired] achieves two very important goals. First, the process of naming outcomes is a concrete activity that engages … [practitioners] in discussions that promote holistic understanding and development of … [the] curriculum. Second, presenting these outcomes to students helps them better understand how all the pieces of … [curriculum] fit together… (p.433)

Although these complimentary paradigms may appear as distinct frameworks, practitioners must be prepared to introduce exploratory and/or independent learning experiences in courses that are essentially technical in nature. Conversely, when the curriculum is predominated by student-centered learning, technical training may be necessary as specific competencies are required (e.g. the procedures for accessing or locating research materials). The developmental level (and needs) of each student will determine the feasibility of employing the paradigms described above. Since all learning experiences culminate with intended/unintended outcomes, practitioners must determine the nature of each outcome that is expected as they commence with the planning process. Will the events that follow be initiated for the purpose of teaching fundamental competencies or facilitating student-centered learning? Having made these preliminary decisions, practitioners must identify the most appropriate means (i.e. best practices) to move students toward the expected end(s). These precursory decisions are essential to the planning process because “apart from [an] effort to control the course which the process takes [i.e. the fundamental art of being a practitioner], there is no distinction … [between] subject matter [i.e. curriculum] and method [instruction]” (Dewey, 1916, p. 166).

Conclusions

The ongoing lack of relevancy between established curriculum frameworks and student interests ensures that many students graduating from high school in subsequent decades shall remain unprepared (or underprepared) for the workplace and/or the rigors of college life. “Effective action [i.e. leadership] follows from effective thinking in ways that are far too richly textured and varied to be captured in any list of … effective leadership strategies”…. [Improving and transforming the conditions in our public schools is] “a matter of realigning school programs with the needs and interests of communities, families, students, and school staff” (D. E. Mitchell & S. Tucker, 1992, pp.31,34). If we are to realize the promise of the most recent policy initiative (i.e. The Every Student Succeeds Act), our Nation must abandon the incessant reliance upon authoritative leadership mechanisms (i.e. mandates) as the primary means of formulating, implementing, and ensuring that the decisions of a few are imposed upon many. Out of many we are one (i.e. E-Pluribus-Unum) except when it comes to governing our educational system. When this proclamation becomes the motto for a National framework of interconnected educational entities, we shall witness a systemic reorganization of the decision-making process and these structural changes will bring about changes in how students learn.

The comprehensive body of professional development experiences described in this “White Paper” will solidify professional relationships among cohorts, perpetuate innovations in teaching and learning, and enable practitioners to initiate a dichotomous approach to teaching and learning (which is essential to prepare high school graduates for workplace and post-secondary success). The professional development experiences described in the pages that follow may be utilized in any sequence deemed appropriate. Any unauthorized duplication and/or distribution, including web postings and electronic transfers of the “research-based” tutorials that are acquired by clients—shall be considered a violation of the exclusive copyrights granted to the author. The modular version of my work encompasses two of the three sections contained in a more robust manuscript (i.e. A Practitioners Guide to Teaching and Learning) which emerged after more than a decade of independent research. During these years, I overcame much adversity and many hardships. A willingness to endure was sustained by faith in GOD and a belief that “we cannot reform our educational system without documentation of the fundamental concepts, principles, and methodologies that are essential to teaching and learning”.

 

 

Products and Services

It is expected that the modules will be continuously employed to sustain innovations in teaching and learning. As such, our proprietary resources will enhance the fundamental capabilities of practitioners and sustain reflective communities that are proficient at conducting action research to address problems in their classrooms and schools. The professional learning experiences (i.e. tutorials) will also compel practitioners to apply theoretical constructs, assess their relative use of instructional practices, and evaluate their philosophical perspectives about teaching and learning. The works will ensure that all academic and technical educators are capable of designing competency-based lesson plans (i.e. training experiences) and employing matrices to facilitate outcome-based (i.e. student-centered) learning initiatives that induce higher-order thought processes (i.e. analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information while applying developed or developing competencies). As such, a series of proprietary products have been developed to rectify the problems described. These materials are organized as follows:

Becoming a Reflective Practitioner

The Action Research Module

The Theory/Practice Module

The Philosophy/Mindfulness Module

[* _______________________________________________________________ *]

The Dichotomy of Instructional Design

The Competency-based Instructional Design Module

The Outcome-based Design Module

 

Distinguishing Attributes of Our Products

There are many characteristics which distinguish our products from the “typical” sources of information that are readily available (as described in the market considerations). In addition to the comprehensive and precise nature of each module; the constructs that comprise these tutorials are interrelated. Thus, the dominance of our “Brand” will be affirmed as practitioners realize that a convenient, straightforward source of “research-based” professional development experiences and related services permits them to integrate numerous aspects of their practice. An e-version of the manuscripts described above may be sampled/purchased via Shakespir.com @ http://www.Shakespir.com/profile/view/kennethfetterman

Market Considerations

The Action Research Module

Conducting a GOOGLE search using the term “Action Research” will yield 103,000,000 potential sources of information about the topic. Since there is no fixed procedure (i.e. model) for conducting Action Research; practitioners could spend many months learning about the topic via numerous websites that offer cursory and/or initiative specific information. The clear and concise Action (Oriented) Research Tutorial that has been developed for this initiative will provide practitioners with a fundamental and highly structured alternative to navigating the plethora of inconsistent information that is available on-line.

The Theory/Practice Module

Conducting a GOOGLE search using the term “Education Theories into Practice” will yield approximately 31,600,000 potential sources of information that may be examined. There are journal articles (and books) that convey information about theoretical perspectives within specific fields of knowledge (e.g. psychology, child development, web-based learning, etc.) and websites that offer select information which may not be relevant. For example, one particular website lists 53 distinct theoretical perspectives on a single page. A majority of these sources will likely provide practitioners with context specific enlightenment. Given the variety of materials available, practitioners could spend numerous hours (or months/years) searching for information that may be relevant to their practice. When practitioners utilize our Theory/Practice Module they will be provided with a means to circumvent the tedious process of navigating through non-essential information. Our “unique” tutorial contains a synopsis of pertinent theoretical constructs, scenarios to facilitate reflective experiences, and an instrument which will enable practitioners to examine their “relative use” of various instructional practices (i.e. Resources, Teaching Methods, and Assessment Tools). The survey instrument and reflection template within this module will compel practitioners to analyze their practice and devise change strategies to bridge the gap between theory and practice.

The Philosophy/Mindfulness Module

Conducting a GOOGLE search using the term “Philosophy of Education” will yield approximately 92,800,000 potential sources of information about the topic. A majority of the sites inspected (including official university pages) offered practitioners a confusing (and limited) body of context specific philosophical perspectives (e.g. Montessori schools, classical theories, entire postings dedicated to specific theorists, etc.). Regardless of the source(s) examined, practical applications of various theoretical perspectives are not usually found in the materials posted. For example, one source identifies “Fifty Modern Thinkers on Education”. Consequently, historical analogies such as this are of little value to practitioners. Our module provides practitioners with a definitive perspective regarding the nature of effective schooling, a reflective questionnaire to consider their philosophical beliefs about teaching and learning, and recommendations for additional learning.

The Competency-based Planning & Outcome-based Instructional Modules

Conducting a GOOGLE search using the term “Lesson Planning” will yield approximately 7,980,000 potential sources of information about the topic. The (limited number of) web-sites appraised are posting a confusing mix of information and an assortment of subject-specific lesson plans or “rough” and ready planning templates. However, none of the sites (that were examined) included instructional information regarding how specific components of a lesson plan are developed. As such, our multi-phase tutorials with planning templates are professionally superior to all of the postings that were examined. The philosophical framework (i.e. introduction component) of our modules will provide practitioners with a clear and definitive perspective as to when “teacher-centered” methodologies (i.e. planning a training experience), and student-centered approaches to learning may be most appropriate. Consequently, teachers will learn about the significance of both strategies, the theoretical and philosophical tenets that underpin a dichotomous instructional design framework, and the methodologies involved in applying competency-based and outcome-based paradigms.

Implementation Options

Personal Copies: An e-version of the manuscripts described above may be sampled/purchased via Shakespir.com @ http://www.Shakespir.com/profile/view/kennethfetterman

In addition to the link above, information regarding the acquisition of Softbound and/or Hardbound copies of the works (which are published in a modular format) may be requested via the address posted below.

Site-license Option: Please direct all correspondence regarding the acquisition of printed copies of the modules and/or systemic licensing (i.e. site-licensing) to:

 

Dr. Kenneth Fetterman

P.O. Box 22

Millersville, PA 17551

Online Services (with storage and social media): This option is pending! Serious inquires regarding the establishment of strategic partnerships ought to be directed to the address above. The business plan and SWOT analysis are available upon request. The (modular) version of—A Practitioners Guide to Teaching and Learning—does not include the content listings and process oriented templates that enable practitioners to develop curriculum. As such, a Curriculum Development Initiative will be incorporated into the phase II expansion plan when our network capabilities are decisively established.

 

Bibliography

Collay, M., Dunlap, D., Enloe, W. & Gagnon, G.W., Jr. (1998). Learning circles: Creating conditions for professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc.

(Also published as (Eric Document—ED 424 221)

Colombia Associates in Philosophy (1923). An introduction to reflective thinking. Houghton Mifflin Co.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. (The Free Press ed.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Inc.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education (1st Touchstone ed.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Inc.

Fielding, M. (2000). Community, philosophy and educational policy: Against effectiveness ideology and immiseration of contemporary schooling. Journal of Educational Policy, 15(4), 397-415.

Jay, J.K. (1999). Untying the knots: Examining the complexities of reflective practice. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 25p.

(Eric Document—ED 431 732)

Mitchell, D. E. & Tucker, S. (1992). Leadership as a Way of Thinking. Educational Leadership, v.49 (2), 30-35. (Feb. 1992)

Moallem, M. (1998). Reflection as a means of developing expertise in problem solving, decision making, and complex thinking of designers. St Louis, MO: Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 10p. (Eric Document—ED 423 850)

Moon, J.A. (1999). Reflection in learning & professional development (1st ed.). London: Kogan Page Limited.

Myers, C.B. (1996). Beyond the PDS: Schools as professional learning communities: A proposal based on an analysis of PDS efforts of the 1990’s. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association, 12p. (Eric Document—ED 400 227)

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/tables/ACGR_2010-11_to_2012-13.asp Source: EDFacts/Consolidated State Performance Report, school years 2010-11, 2011-2012, and 2012-2013. [+ http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/consolidated/index.html+]. (Prepared 2015).

Osterman, K.F. (1998). Using constructivism and reflective practice to bridge the theory/practice gap. San Diego, CA: American Educational Research Association, 10p.

(Eric Document—ED 425 518)

Rumberger, R. Poverty and High School Dropouts, American Psychological Association, [+ http://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/indicator/2013/05/poverty-dropouts.aspx+]

(Retrieved 8-2-2016).

Schon, D.A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Shapiro, D.F. (2003). Facilitating holistic curriculum development. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(4), 423-434.

UNESCO, Institute for Statistics (2006). Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needs for 2015.

SM

About Kenneth Fetterman—Ed.D.

Dr. Kenneth Fetterman has developed the most comprehensive and feasible (research-based) professional development strategy available. He has taught at the junior and senior high school levels, established vocational/technical education curriculums in a juvenile justice facility, and served as an instructor of Mechanical Engineering Technologies (i.e. Mechanical and Computer Aided Design/Drafting) at several community colleges. In addition to these experiences, the author of several works which are relevant to educational reform, teacher education and educational administration has served as an instructor (i.e. Field-based Teacher Educator) and faculty consultant at Temple University in Philadelphia Pennsylvania. His work(s) are a must read for anyone that is passionate about initiating systemic educational reform in the United States and abroad.

Contact information and implementation options (posted above).

Visit/Follow Blog Posts by Kenneth Fetterman (About 21^st^ Century Schools) @

http://www.kennethfetterman.wordpress.com

 

Sample/Purchase the complete set of works (as two e-books) @ http://www.Shakespir.com/profile/view/kennethfetterman

 

(Back to the Table of Contents)

 

 


A Definitive White Paper: Systemic Educational Reform (The Recommended Course of

This manuscript addresses the need to bring about more effective teacher training and propagate innovative schools in the United States (and abroad). It is intended to serve as a policy statement and position paper which will enable political forces to rally behind a comprehensive strategy that will rectify the shortcomings of our educational system. The constructs described may also be utilized by training and development professionals employed by corporations, governmental agencies, and social service providers to advance educational initiatives in these contexts. A report published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) authenticates the reality of "massive teacher shortages ... in sub-Saharan Africa, the Arab States and South Asia ..." that may impede goals "to provide every child" in these regions "with a good quality primary education" .... Even in countries such as China, Brazil and India which will need "fewer teachers" ... because of "declining school age populations", UNESCO recognizes the potential to improve education quality by investing more resources to train teachers and improve working conditions in target regions (UNESCO, Institute for Statistics, 2006, p.3). UNESCO identifies only 33 of the 194 sovereign nations that are recognized by the U.S. State Department. Their report lists 32 countries outside the U.S. with a current or expected teaching force that exceeds 50,000 teachers (Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needs for 2015, UNESCO, Institute for Statistics, 2006, p. 44). Excluding primary educators in the United States, the UNESCO study reveals a need for more than six million primary teachers in these (32) nations. Imagine the potential numbers of secondary practitioners that must be trained across the globe in the coming decades (as many nations have yet to systematize these levels of formal schooling). Honestly, given the need for teacher training at all levels in the U.S. and remaining 160 or more nations not considered by UNESCO; the potential to sustain political, economic, and social development initiatives in target regions via our straightforward, "research-based" professional development tutorials is pragmatic.

  • ISBN: 9781370897520
  • Author: Kenneth Fetterman
  • Published: 2017-01-18 02:20:10
  • Words: 5235
A Definitive White Paper: Systemic Educational Reform (The Recommended Course of A Definitive White Paper: Systemic Educational Reform (The Recommended Course of