The collaborative efforts of a broad constituency created the conceptual framework, Teacher as Reflective Problem Solver (TARPS) in 1987 and revised in 1992, 2008, and 2009.  Drafts circulated among the PEUC, Deans, candidates, public school partners, and Educational Personnel Preparation Advisory Committee (EPPAC) members.  Participant feedback shaped the vision of the PEU.  The PEUC, candidates, public school personnel, and EPPAC reflect and work together to benefit candidates’ positive impact on the education of all children.  The mission of the PEU is to work in partnership with area schools to prepare highly qualified, reflective teachers who believe in fairness and that all children learn. 

Based on ongoing discussions of desired outcomes, research of the relevant literature, feedback from school administrators and teachers, and practitioners, INTASC and NBPTS standards, and the Framework for 21st Century Learning, the Professional Education Unit believes that teacher candidates should possess the willingness and capacity to:  

1. Develop a philosophy of teaching based on philosophical and theoretical viewpoints about schooling, teaching and learning;
2. Commit to continuous reflective self-examination for personal and professional development;
3. Demonstrate leadership by functioning as a change agent who influences and improves the education of P-12 students, through scholarship, community action, and collaboration in educational settings;
4. Focus on the development of P-12 students’ critical mindedness, problem-solving skills, self-motivation, cooperative social interaction, and commitment to excellent performance;
5. Develop an adequate understanding of the social and psychological conditions of learning including cultural and linguistic differences, exceptionalities and developmental characteristics of P-12 students;
6. Develop, articulate and practice a constructivist, integrated, and multicultural curriculum and pedagogy that promotes and honors individual dignity and rights of P-12 students consonant with the nature of a pluralistic and democratic society;
7. Plan, implement, and assess learning experiences that promote acquisition of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions P-12 students need to become critical participants in a global society;
8. Access current research findings regarding schooling, teaching and learning and use these findings in educational programs;
9. Develop a critical understanding of the central concepts, tools of inquiry and structures of representation and their interdisciplinary connections in pedagogical content knowledge that are central to the discipline(s) she/he teaches including the uses of educational multimedia technology;  
10. Foster relationships between schools, higher education colleagues, parents, governmental agencies, individuals and groups in the larger community to support P-12 students’ learning;
11. Integrate and implement theory and practice in a coherent pedagogy;
12. Consistently reflect on their knowledge base, dispositional orientations, and performance characteristics.

Model of the Teacher Education Program at Shepherd University

The figure below, Teacher As Reflective Problem Solver, illustrates the model chosen to illustrate the theme, TEACHER AS REFLECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVER (TARPS). This theme expresses the character of the Teacher Education Program at Shepherd University.  The model recognizes that to be a reflective problem solver, teacher candidates and practitioners consistently need to reflect on their Knowledge, Dispositions, and Performance.

Knowledge enables one to make informed choices, to participate actively in the shaping of one’s own life, and to influence the social, cultural, political and economic structures of a democratic society.  Based on the belief that education should empower all students and teachers to exercise informed choices in a global society, our purpose is to facilitate the development of liberally educated teachers who demonstrate the willingness and capacity to empower all P-12 students.

The Professional Education Unit is committed to promoting social justice, embracing diversity and inclusion, and enhancing teaching and learning through technology. 

The schooling context is complex; it is characterized by a significant degree of ambiguity that precludes a formulaic approach to teaching. This complexity necessitates that teacher candidates and practitioners develop a philosophy and principles for practice based on reflective problem solving.  Teachers identify and frame problems, generate and consider multiple solutions, choose and implement courses of action, and evaluate results. 

Knowledge Goals

Teachers must refer to a knowledge base that supports their beliefs and actions in order to engage pedagogical problems. The ability to render/discuss/interpret a knowledge base that justifies the predispositions and assumptions that underlie teaching/learning behavior is a key characteristic of the Teacher as Reflective Problem Solver philosophy.  Teacher candidates must possess knowledge of content, context, and learners.  When diagnosing student needs, planning, implementing, and assessing teaching/learning, the candidate/practitioner:

1. Demonstrates an understanding of developmental issues (cognitive, social, emotional, physical);
2. Accesses and uses current research findings;
3. Demonstrates an understanding of the core concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of knowledge of subjects being taught and their interdisciplinary connections;
4. Demonstrates sufficient breadth and depth of content knowledge to meet student needs;
5. Demonstrates an understanding of relationships between theories and practice;
6. Considers the diverse nature of classrooms and society;
7. Considers and uses the Framework for 21st Century technology practices.       

 Disposition Goals

The candidate’s reflective disposition is fundamental to Teacher as Reflective Problem Solver.  The Professional Education Unit’s commitment to the development of reflective dispositions is strongly indicated by the use of both the terms “willingness” and “capacity” in the statement of Program Goals and Candidate Outcomes. Willingness means the demonstrated commitment to continual professional development and capacity means demonstrating the ability to achieve professional and pedagogical goals. Reflection is an innate human capacity and ability amplified so it becomes a conscious tool for effective teaching/learning.  Candidates demonstrate the capacity to reflect on the day-to-day aspects of teaching/learning; to decide whether a teaching/learning activity achieves the purposes of a sound education; and to judge how this experience relates to the larger issues of democracy, justice, and equity in our diverse society.  The candidate demonstrates the willingness and capacity to:

1. Practice teaching/learning from our model’s thematic structure: Action, Interpretation, and Critical Reflection;
2. Continuously engage in self-analytical and self-reflective processes for professional development;
3. Engage in critical discourse about education issues;
4. Respect the individual dignity and diverse learning orientations of all students;
5. Commit to excellence in academics and practical teaching/learning experiences;
6. Assume personal responsibility for professional development.
7. Engage in lifelong learning.

Performance Goals

Performance goals facilitate the development of the candidate’s capacity to plan, implement, and assess a program of teaching/learning that is effective for all students.  Teacher candidates must be skillful in reflection on learner and teacher performances.  The candidate:

1. Observes, describes, and analyzes self, individual student and group performance in order to design developmentally and individually appropriate and improved teaching/learning experiences;
2. Plans and implements teaching/learning experiences that develop students’ problem solving capacity and critical thinking skills;
3. Plans and implements teaching/learning experiences that are based on a constructivist epistemology;
4. Plans and implements teaching/learning experiences that embrace student diversity;
5. Plans and implements teaching/learning experiences that promote students’ ability to contribute productively in a global society;
6. Plans and implements 21st Century Learning experiences that are based on explicit understanding of the core concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of knowledge that are central to the subjects being taught;
7. Uses a variety of 21st Century Learning assessment strategies (e.g., portfolios, observations, presentations, essays, criterion-referenced tests, learning project results, norm-referenced tests), both formative and summative, to assess the effectiveness of teaching/learning experiences;
8. Uses a variety of 21st Century Learning strategies (e.g., individualization, whole group, project groups, cooperative learning, learning centers, discussion, lecture, technology) to optimize teaching/learning opportunities in the classroom;
9. Uses reflection to modify instruction to meet the needs of students.
10. Uses professional organizations, community, and other resources outside the classroom to enhance student learning.

Reflective dispositions prepare candidates to respond effectively to the range of concerns found in the classroom.  Teachers need to be concurrently reflective across three fields of consideration: Action, Interpretation, and Critical Reflection. The candidates examine their Action and are concerned with the application of pedagogical knowledge to achieve stated educational goals for every child. This action is subject to Interpretation.  The candidates explicate and justify the assumptions and predispositions that underlie their teaching/learning activity.  

During Critical Reflection, candidates assess the adequacy of the educational goals toward which the educational experience leads and incorporates moral and ethical criteria in assessing the outcomes of teaching/learning activities. This model conceptualizes and implements an experience cycle for teacher candidates that involve them in a continuous process of action and reflection. The cycle occurs respective to the aspects of campus coursework and field experiences/teaching as well as between the aspects of campus coursework and field experiences/teaching.

The majority of professional education courses are characterized by a pattern of attendance in campus-based courses followed by performance in a field-based site.  This campus-field-campus pattern ensures that each episode of action is followed by a systematic opportunity to reflect on practical experience and the theoretical frameworks that guide practical activity.  Field experiences are not just opportunities for application, but are occasions for critical reflection on the theory/practice interaction.  

Advanced Programs

The MACI is a comprehensive program grounded in the philosophy of scholarship, advocacy, leadership, and collaboration. The program supports the symbiotic relationship between theoretical and practical knowledge and cultivates educational experiences which recognize teachers as questioning intellectuals who continually explore, examine, and reflect upon the teaching and learning process. Graduates of this program demonstrate expertise in their subject matter, recognize the ever increasing need for understanding and valuing diversity, and promote the betterment of students, schools, and the global community.

The Master of Arts in Curriculum and Instruction program builds upon the Teacher as Reflective Problem Solver model by utilizing the Five Core Propositions of the National Board for Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS): 

Proposition 1:       Teachers are Committed to Students and Their Learning.

Proposition 2:       Teachers Know the Subjects They Teach and How to Teach Those Subjects to Students.

Proposition 3:       Teachers are Responsible for Managing and Monitoring Student Learning.

Proposition 4:       Teachers Think Systematically about their Practice and Learn from Experience.

Proposition 5:       Teachers are Members of Learning Communities.

Summarized Description of Unit’s Assessment System

The Unit Assessment System assesses four domains: qualifications of candidates, candidate proficiencies, competence of graduates, and unit and program operations and quality.  All assessments address the PEU’s conceptual framework, the INTASC standards and SPA specific standards.  MACI assessments address NBPTS standards within the context of the conceptual framework.  The unit uses assessments to measure candidate performance/competence. 

The Conceptual Framework was developed and revised based on the following references:

Knowledge

Development and Educational Psychology

Barrett, J.R., Veblen, K.K., and McCoy, C.W. (1997). Sound ways of knowing: Music in the interdisciplinary classroom.  New York: Wadsworth.

Britton, J. (1993). Language and learning: The importance of speech in children’s development.  (2nd Ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger.

Chosky, L. (1998). The Kodaly method I: Comprehensive music education.  (3rd Ed.) New York: Prentice-Hall.

Darling-Hammond, L., and Cobb, V. L. (1996). "The changing context of teacher education." In The Teacher Educator's Handbook: Building a Knowledge Base for the Preparation of Teachers, ed. Frank B. Murray. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Day, M. D., Ed. (1997). Preparing teachers of art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Gailbraith, L. (1993). "Familiar, interactive, and collaborative pedagogy: Changing practices in preservice art education." Art Education 46 (5):6–11.

Gailbraith, L. Ed. (1995). Preservice art education: Issues and practice.  Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. USA: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic.

Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kutz, E. (1997). Language and literacy: Studying discourse in communities and classrooms. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

May, F. B. (1990). Reading as communication: An interactive approach (3rd Ed.). Toronto: Merrill.

Muth, K. D., (Ed.) (1989). Children’s comprehension of text: Research into practice. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (Ed.) (1980). Language and learning: The debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Pinker, S. (2000). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Perennial

Spiro, R. J., Bruce, B. C., & Brewer, W. F. (1980). Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stipek, D. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice (3rd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tankersley, K. (2005). Literacy strategies for grades 4-12: Reinforcing the threads of reading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Thomas, R. M. (1999). Human development theories: Windows on culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Thomas, R. M. (2001). Recent theories of human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Walling, D. R. 2000. Rethinking How Art Is Taught: A Critical Convergence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. 

Constructivism

Brearley, M., & Hitchfield, E. (1973). A guide to reading Piaget. New York: Schocken Books.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, J. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cole, M (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.

Flavell, J. H. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Fosnot, C. T.  (1989). Enquiring teachers, enquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.) (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Goodman, Y. M. (Ed.) (1986). How children construct literacy: Piagetian perspectives. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Moll, L. C. (1993). Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1993). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Piaget, J. (1965). The child’s conception of number. New York: W . W. Norton.

Piaget, J. (1971). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Viking.

Piaget, J. (1974). To understand is to invent: The future of education.  New York: Viking.

Pulaski, M. A. S. (1971). Understanding Piaget: An introduction to children’s cognitive development. New York: Harper and Row.

Schwebel, M., & Raph, J. (Eds.) (1973). Piaget in the classroom. New York: Basic Books.

von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning.  London: Falmer.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Edited and translated by E. Hanfmann, & G. Vakar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

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

Wadsworth, B. J. (1996). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development: Foundations of constructivism (5th Ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.) (1985). Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Secondary Education

Boyer, E. L. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper and Row.

Brown, E. R., & Saltman, K. J. (Eds.) (2005). The critical middle school reader. New York: Routledge.

Duplass, J. A. (2006). Middle and high school teaching: Methods, standards, and best practices. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Lightfoot, S. L. (1983). The good high school: Portraits of character and culture. New York: Basic Books.

Sizer, T. R. (1992). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Social Foundations

Apple, M. W. (1986). Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in education. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Apple, M. W., & Christian-Smith, L. K. (Eds.) (1991). The politics of the textbook. New York: Routledge.

Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (2007). Teaching to change the world. (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Dispositions

Critical Pedagogy

Darder, A. (1991). Culture and power in the classroom: A critical foundation for bicultural education. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

de los Reyes, E., & Gozemba, P. A. (2002). Pockets of hope: How students and teachers change the world. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

Dei, G. J. S., Karumanchery, L. L., & Karumanchery-Luik, N. (2004). Playing the race card: Exposing white power and privilege. New York: Peter Lang.

Freire, P. (1970). Cultural action for freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.

Freire, P. (1974). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury.

Freire, P. (1998). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.

Freire, P., & Faundez, A.  (1989). Learning to question: A pedagogy of liberation. New York: Continuum.

Giroux, H. A.  (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Goodman, J. (1992). Elementary schooling for critical democracy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

hooks, b. (2000). Where we stand: Class matters. New York: Routledge.

Kanpol, B. (1999). Critical pedagogy: An introduction (2nd Ed.). Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

Knoblauch, C. H., & Brannon, L. (1993). Critical teaching and the idea of literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Shor, I., & Freire, P.  (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Sockett, H. (2009). Dispositions as virtues: The complexity of the construct.  Journal of Teacher Education. 60(3), pp. 291-303.

Torres. C. A. (1998). Democracy, education, and multiculturalism: Dilemmas of citizenship in a global world. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

van Ausdale, D. V., & Feagin, J. R. (2001). The first R: How children learn race and racism. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield.

Gender Issues

Orenstein, P. (1994). Schoolgirls: Young women, self-esteem, and the confidence gap. New York: Anchor.

Stein, N., & Sjostrom, L. (1994). Flirting or hurting: A teacher’s guide on student-to-student sexual harassment in schools (grades 6 through 12). Washington, DC: NEA.

Multicultural Education

Banks, J. A., & McGee Banks, C. A. (Eds.) (2010). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (7th Ed.).  Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

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

Goodman, W. (Ed.) (2001). Living and teaching in an unjust world: New perspectives on multicultural education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Gorski, P. C. (2005). Multicultural education and the internet: Intersections and integrations (2nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (1998). Turning on learning: Five approaches for multicultural teaching plans for race, class, gender, and disability (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Hill, J. D., & Flynn, K. M. (2006). Classroom instruction that works with English Language Learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Irvine, J. J., & Armento, B. J. (2001). Culturally responsive teaching: Lesson planning for elementary and middle grades. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Zaslavsky, C. (1996). The multicultural math classroom: Bringing in the world. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Reflection

Clift, R. T., Houston, W. R., & Pugach, M. C. (Eds.) (1990) Encouraging reflective practice in education: An analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.

Grimmett, P. P., & Erickson, G. L. (Eds.) (1988). Reflection in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. (2 copies)

Seyler, D. U. (1998). Patterns of reflection: A reader (3rd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Social Justice

Ayers, W. (2004). Teaching toward freedom: Moral commitment and ethical action in the classroom. Boston: Beacon.

Ayers, W., Hunt, J. A., & Quinn, T. (Eds.) (1998). Teaching for social justice: A democracy and education reader. New York: The New Press.

Barton, A. C. (2003). Teaching science for social justice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York: Harper Perennial.

Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America.  New York: Crown.

Maeroff, G. I. (1998). Altered destinies: Making life better for schoolchildren in need. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.

Noya, G. R. C., Geismar, K., Nicoleau, G. (Eds.) (1995). Shifting histories: Transforming education for social change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.