Preventing Teacher Failure: Six Keys to Success in Moving Beyond the “Sink or Swim” Mentality

By Strawn, Candace A Fox, Rebecca K; Duck, Lloyd

Abstract: One controversial aspect of No Child Left Behind is the highly qualified provision. The 2001 act required that teachers of core academic subjects be highly qualified by 2006 or school districts would lose federal funding. Virginia districts are still scrambling to hire qualified teachers. Although the federal government has modified the 2006 deadline, two forces compete, the national legislation versus the reality that there are too few well- prepared teachers. Traditional teacher education programs are not producing enough candidates to remedy the shortage; quick licensure pathways are not adequately addressing the problem either. One university’s solution is collaboration with surrounding school districts. The authors provide six tested recommendations to help colleges of education prepare successful, long-term educators, enabling school districts to fill vacancies with qualified teachers. Keywords: alternative licensure, school-university collaboration, teacher education

Many of the studies on what makes a difference in student achievement eventually conclude that the most important school- based factor is the quality of teaching. Not that small class sizes or stimulating and coherent curricula aren’t important. Rather, the success of these and other interventions and investments ultimately depends on how skillfully teachers use them. (Lewis 2004, 419)

Preparing skillful, knowledgeable teachers who meet the needs of diverse learners in today’s classrooms is both a goal and a necessity for public schools. Since the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) passed in December 2001 and the first annual report to Congress on “Meeting the Highly Qualified Teacher Challenge” (Department of Education [DOE] 2002), it is now more important than ever to respond positively to the national call for highly qualified teachers and to provide documentation that student achievement goals are met. By definition, a highly qualified teacher has met all of a state’s licensing requirements. In Virginia, individuals who have not completed all licensure requirements are classified as provisionally licensed teachers, a temporary status that mandates fulfillment of all remaining licensure requirements within three years. According to Darling-Hammond and Youngs (2002), strong evidence reveals that teacher preparation contributes to the effectiveness, success, and retention of teachers.

Within this challenging context of hiring a qualified teacher for each classroom, the teacher shortage continues to be a serious problem for many school districts. Many schools must hire teachers with a provisional, or temporary, licensure status to staff classrooms; emergency licensure became a regular practice in the 1990s. Today, many administrators are still scrambling to hire fully licensed teachers while facing the challenging issues of quality and diversity. Thus, two juxtaposed forces compete, national legislation for highly qualified teachers versus the reality that there are too few teachers.

Because a critical school-based factor predicting student achievement is the quality of teaching and because school districts could not find enough highly qualified teachers to fill all vacancies by the NCLB target date of 2006, colleges and schools of education have a most auspicious task: to prepare enough teachers to meet the needs of our nation’s children. In this challenging climate, some important questions face us. We contend that a targeted and collaborative approach by schools of education and school districts is one answer to solving the nation’s shortages.

This idea aligns with the position of Liston, Whitcomb, and Borko (2006), who discuss some prevalent beginning teachers’ struggles and suggest strong university and school district partnerships to develop new-teacher self-efficacy and teaching expertise. Because beginning teachers face multiple challenges, we concur that such partnerships are key to the success of new teachers, especially provisionally licensed teachers who are teaching while simultaneously taking teacher education courses. We address the following questions: How can colleges of education work with school districts to provide adequate preparation that results in highly qualified teachers? Should states or universities provide fast- track licensure options as an alternative to their state-approved teacher education programs? How can colleges of education and school districts work together to ensure that provisionally licensed teachers become fully certified and remain in classrooms? Stemming from several years of research and collaboration, this article provides six key items for consideration by colleges of education and metropolitan school districts facing similar teacher staffing dilemmas. Addressing these issues helps universities increase the number of licensure completions, support school districts in the area of new-teacher induction, and equip teachers with the knowledge and skills they need to become successful, long-term educators “who know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students” (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards 2006, 3).

Background

In the 1990s, faced with the great need for teachers in critical shortage areas, many school districts responded as though the only way to staff classrooms was to take the alternative licensure route. Although questions about applicant quality may haunt them, many administrators continue this trend because they must have teachers in their classrooms. We can trace the roots of this problem to the fact that NCLB provided educational goals but did not help states ascertain how their schools should fill their already overcrowded, understaffed classrooms with highly qualified teachers. Across the country various solutions have been sought. Some states, for example, challenged NCLB in federal court and in their state legislatures. Other states that could not meet NCLB’s standards chose the more drastic solution of not receiving federal funds. Dobbs (2004) noted that “In an early example of this trend, Vermont passed a law in 2003 refusing to implement unfunded federal mandates” (A3). Dobbs also discussed how the superintendent of Utah’s largest school district “has calculated that he will have to spend $182 million over the next 10 years to implement all the provisions of No Child Left Behind” (A3). At the time of publication, the school district “receive[d] about $2.2 million a year in federal Title I funding” (A3).

According to the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE; 2005b), “One of the least popular results of the current law is the confusion generated by variation in required teacher licensure tests and acceptable scores from state to state” (3). Thus, the law leaves it up to each state to define highly qualified and to decide how it will meet the provisions of NCLB. As is apparent, these are not easy times for schools and teacher educators. In addition to challenges associated with NCLB and teacher shortages, Levine (2005) and Hartocollis (2005) recently attacked the respectability and raison d’etre of education leadership programs and schools of education (Murphy [2007] offered insightful perspectives on these charges). Whether states elect to receive federal funding or not, the teacher shortage remains at the forefront of needs for a number of school districts. This problem is worse in heavily populated areas. For example, in Northern Virginia, as recounted by a curriculum supervisor, Fairfax County Public Schools lose 1,500 teachers every year. Loudoun County (just west of Fairfax) attempted to hire 1,000 new teachers for the 2007-8 school year.

In the midst of seeking highly qualified teachers, school districts are also challenged by reporting their students’ adequate yearly progress (APY). In turn, schools of education are held accountable for providing educators who meet the needs of an increasingly diverse PreK-12 student population. For example, in the Washington D.C., metropolitan area, some schools have twenty to thirty languages represented on any given day, with 120 languages listed in the county language codes (Fairfax County Public School Board 2007). Hiring a highly qualified teacher for each classroom while achieving APY in which all students are tested in the same manner, whether they speak English or not, is a tall order. If we are to prepare teachers to help all students achieve high levels of learning, a new paradigm must emerge in which active collaboration and university partnerships become the learning platform and create a cornerstone for classroom research.

George Mason University’s (GMU) Graduate School of Education (GSE), a well-established teacher education and research institution with long-standing partnerships with nearby school divisions, holds firmly to research-based findings in the field that emphasize quality teacher preparation (Darling-Hammond 2000; Darling-Hammond and Youngs 2002). The GSE does not subscribe to the “sink or swim” mentality that permeates much of the current educational climate in which short (sometimes one-week) courses claim to provide adequate skills and preparation for the classroom. Teacher educators in the GSE continue to believe colleges should not cut corners in teacher education. Therefore, all the GSE’s programs emphasize a balance of theory and practice in a series of courses and experiences carefully designed to produce effective and fully licensed teachers. The GSE program also promotes and requires teachers to learn about and engage in action research in the pre- and in-service programs. Educational research (National Commission on Teaching for America’s Future 1996; Lewis 2004) verified that teacher expertise is one of the most important factors in determining student achievement. Goodlad (2004) concurs:

We find raising the scores on mandated tests, ending “social promotions,” offering vouchers, and creating charter schools on the front burners of politically driven school reform. None of these-or even more promising alternatives-will go anywhere without competent, caring, qualified teachers. . . . If teaching our young in schools became a lifelong professional career-adequately rewarded and supported, with decision-making authority commensurate with responsibility-teacher shortages would fade away. (47-48)

Goodlad predicts that our school crisis will not be resolved in the current climate, which includes privatization of schools- primarily through the creation of voucher programs and charter schools-and accountability in the form of high-stakes testing and penalties for public schools not meeting standards (Sadker et al. 2007). Instead, he believes we can resolve our education system’s problems by increasing the retention of quality teachers.

To achieve this goal, we contend that colleges of education and school districts need to work together “in communities of learners” (Cochran-Smith 2004b, 46). Because years of research reveal that “teaching involves much more than accumulating subject matter information and then picking up techniques on the job” (156), schools of education need to help teachers learn how to work with all students to meet the challenge of high standards in all areas.

Many new teachers find this challenge daunting and elect to leave the classroom after one or two years, or in some cases, after only a few months. Darling-Hammond (2003) reported a 66 percent dropout rate for provisionally licensed teachers by their third year in the profession. In addition, the problems new teachers encounter in their first year in the classroom that result in their decision to leave the profession have implications for both teaching practice and policy. According to the Alliance for Excellent Education (2004), the estimated financial cost of teacher turnover is $2.6 billion annually. This money could be more appropriately used to bolster school districts’ new-teacher mentoring and induction programs. According to Darling-Hammond, “So many teachers, especially those who serve our nation’s most vulnerable students, do not ever go through a systematic preparation program” (as ctd. in AACTE 2005a, 1). Although first-year teachers will always face challenges, growing evidence supports the idea that individuals educated in strong teacher preparation programs manage these challenges more successfully than individuals who do not have adequate training (Darling-Hammond 2006). Therefore, higher education institutions and school divisions now face the tremendous challenge not only of recruiting educated individuals to teach but also of finding ways to provide ongoing and meaningful professional development that results in high teacher retention.

Keys to Success

As a result of working with provisionally licensed teachers for more than seven years and teacher candidates for fourteen years, we developed a system based on a highly collaborative school division- university partnership designed to prevent teacher failure and burnout in the early induction years. Based on this research, we propose six keys to success for teacher preparation programs to consider as they face similar demographic changes:

1. Work actively with school districts in your area to ascertain the number of provisionally licensed teachers in each school district, identify their areas of endorsement, and integrate them into appropriate teacher education programs. In our state, for example, we surveyed fourteen school districts in the vicinity our university serves. When we began collecting data in 1999, we found that all the schools hired provisionally licensed teachers. Some of the suburban schools reported that 10 percent of their faculty had temporary licenses, whereas less populated areas reported that 40- 50 percent of their teaching staff were provisional. By spring 2006, the total number of provisionally licensed teachers in the fourteen school districts was more than three thousand. In Virginia, provisional licenses are issued for a maximum of three years and are nonrenewable.

Furthermore, all the school districts reported that the number of provisionally licensed teachers was growing as fast as the area’s population. This information has the potential to provide schools of education with the basis for identifying newly hired teachers’ coursework needs (some may need as many as five threecredit pedagogical courses plus an internship) and to help school districts and higher education institutions respond to these needs in a timely manner before a teacher’s provisional license expires.

Halfway through the secondary education licensure program at GMU, approximately 20 percent of the teacher candidates already hold full- time teaching positions. These provisionally licensed teachers are integrated into regular programs. A hallmark of GMU’s commitment to producing highly qualified teachers is that those who begin as provisionally licensed teachers complete the same preparation as all other licensure candidates in their endorsement areas.

2. Offer more flexible degree and course options geared to meet the needs of the school districts and their teachers. In addition to the traditional, on-campus master’s degree in teacher education, colleges and universities can offer other paths to licensure. Some of the GSE degree options are: a master’s program for preservice and provisionally licensed teachers, a “Career Switcher” state program for professionals who have been employed at least five years in a field other than teaching, undergraduate teaching licenses in areas of high need such as chemistry, and graduate certificate programs. In addition, clusters of courses might be offered during various summer sessions or sequenced over a certain number of weekends to provide course-delivery options outside the traditional higher education schedule, which often collides with weeknight school demands. Teachers’ needs can also be met by providing the courses at various school-based sites around the state and posting online options or hybrid courses in which online and regular course meetings are combined to create an innovative schedule that meets teachers’ needs. Because the Washington metropolitan area has more than one million immigrants (Layton and Keating 2006), the GSE addresses important concerns school administrators articulate and new teachers face-such as English language learners and diversity issues-because they are specific challenges facing our surrounding school districts (Osterling and Fox 2004).

3. Create partnerships with schools in which teacher effectiveness is taught and modeled every day in carefully supervised or co-taught classrooms. As Cochran-Smith (2004b) states, it is important to combine “prospective teachers, experienced teachers, and teacher educators” (46). Because provisionally licensed teachers are already in the classroom, it is relatively easy to incorporate practical teaching techniques and strategies, such as daily lesson planning, cooperative learning groups, peer tutoring, meaningful assessment strategies, and effective classroom management techniques, into licensure coursework. Recognizing that combining “prospective teachers, experienced teachers, and teacher educators” (Cochran-Smith, 46) yields more stimulating dialogues, the GSE offers coursework that places both in-service and preservice teachers in the same classes. We have discovered that presenting topics in dialogic, problemsolving contexts is more meaningful to in- service teachers. Dialogic approaches also model effective learning practices to teachers while promoting the pre- and in-service teachers’ establishment of professional learning communities. Case studies also provide a strong learning pathway. For example, a case- study approach provides the framework for analyzing and understanding classroom management preferences and teaching styles (Duck 1994; 1996). All topics are presented and analyzed in contexts similar to those classroom teachers would typically encounter (Duck 2000). Investigation of issues associated with each teaching style is handled through cooperative learning strategies and problembased learning skills so that participants can directly assess how these issues affect their use of each teaching style. Journaling assignments underscore this casestudy approach by allowing class members to examine their greatest success and concern for each week, thus bringing the daily classroom situations into the university setting for discussion and debriefing (Duck 2000). By promoting the incorporation and development of active, reflection-based decision making and reflection-on-experience (Schon 1987) into the teacher- education coursework, teachers begin to learn how to pause, reframe situations, and contemplate ways of moving a situation forward. This emphasis complements the dialogic approach to learning and helps students make active connections to the case studies in their coursework, thus bringing theory and practice together.

Evidence of the effectiveness of the case-study and dialogic approaches is convincing. Data on 591 students in the GMU secondary teacher education program (gathered from academic years 2000-1 through 2004-5) indicate that students in the introductory foundations course and in a social studies methods class see themselves as empowered and growing in confidence to become effective teachers (Duck 2007). The case-study emphasis (which includes analysis of teaching styles, learning styles, and classroom management approaches through model lessons and scenarios) was rated on a 5-point ascending scale (with 5 as excellent for six items relating to each of the following: instructor’s preparation for class, organization of course material, motivation to learn, intellectual challenge of the course, instructor’s fairness, and how well the course was taught). For introductory foundations students, the mean rating was 4.72 (range of 4.57 to 4.84). These students were pursuing four different endorsement areas: history and social science, mathematics, English, and the sciences. For social studies methods students who generally take this course later in the program, the mean rating was 4.87 (with a range of 4.68 to 4.97). In addition, during summer 2006 we gathered anecdotal data about teaching styles, learning styles, and classroom management from questionnaires completed by introductory foundations students. We received no negative responses from a total of seventeen questionnaires. For example, the following are two typical comments from the questionnaires:

I think I will be a lot more confident. I have learned a lot about myself and what to expect as a teacher. I also learned that there is not one way or type you have to be in order to be a successful and effective teacher.

I feel like I know myself better. I can understand why I like the things I do when it comes to teaching. I feel more confident in pursuing my teaching career and I have gained insight and base knowledge on all the areas of teaching.

(See Duck [2007] for a more detailed analysis of sample course activities and specific support strategies recommended for new teachers.)

In addition to strong, pedagogical course offerings, teachers enrolled in these courses have the opportunity to work with the education professors in the GSE who model the techniques and strategies they teach. According to recent evaluations, 90 percent of the GMU College of Education and Human Development faculty received top rankings among faculty at the university. Through personal opportunities to learn, and reflect on that learning, in this strong context, both teachers and teacher candidates learn and experience new theories and teaching practices that they can, in turn, implement in their K-12 settings.

4. Align all the licensure courses and assessments with national standards and accreditation requirements and include performance- based assessments within course and program experiences. It is important for licensure candidates to see the connections between their coursework and the national standards for teacher preparation in their areas of expertise and to understand the application of pre- K-12 student standards. The performancebased exit requirement for master’s degree programs in secondary education, for example, is a standardsbased teaching portfolio that is aligned with both the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium and content- specific standards, along with National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education requirements. Some components of this teaching portfolio include a resume, teaching philosophy and professional development plan, unit plan implementing the standards, and student work sampling aligned with varied assessments and rubrics (Fox 1999). Each of the sections is headed by a written reflection that explains the content of that section and how the relevant standard has been addressed. Not only is this requirement practical in that it asks the teachers to address specific standards and can be used for job interviews but it also provides evidence of how licensure candidates develop during the program. The portfolio provides concrete examples of candidates’ teaching practices, their assessment strategies, and students’ work samples.

Because of GMU’s increased recruitment efforts and additional licensure options, the number of highly qualified teachers prepared in secondary education has tripled since 2001-2. During the 2006-7 academic year, sixty-five students completed our portfolio requirements and received master’s degrees, and sixtysix students completed the licensure requirements and received teaching licenses. Another thirty students finished our Career Switcher program, for a total of 161 highly qualified teachers. Comparable figures for 2001- 2 were twenty-five receiving master’s degrees and twenty-six completing licensure, for a total of fifty-one. In 2001-2, no Career Switcher program was available and an option for provisional licensure upgrade had not been incorporated into the regular secondaryteacher education program.

5. Incorporate into teacher education programs culturally responsive pedagogy based on principles of social justice. From their opening days in the classroom, teachers should experience joint encouragement from their higher education institutions and their school districts to infuse social justice into their curriculum (Banks 2006; Gay 2000; Michelli and Keiser 2005; Rhodes, Ochoa, and Ortiz 2005; Schmidt 2005; Villegas and Lucas 2002). In a recent publication, Cochran-Smith (2004b) captured the importance of helping teachers develop a strong social justice mind-set. She states,

From a social justice perspective, a pupil’s learning also involves developing critical habits of mind, understanding and sorting out multiple perspectives, and learning to participate in and contribute to a democratic society by developing both the skill and the inclination for civic engagement. (159)

Higher education institutions, in partnership with the schools they serve, can support this type of teacher development, melding theory and practice in a context that supports learning and provides a deep understanding of how to help the student population in teachers’ school districts. Meeting the needs of second-language learners and adopting a culturally responsive pedagogy through dialogic delivery helps licensure candidates understand the perspectives and needs of English language learners (Osterling and Fox 2004). Our region needs this foresight and planning because our immigrant population has grown from one in six in 2000 to one in five in 2005 (Layton and Keating 2006). This demographic change is greater in some areas. For example, in districts GMU serves, many schools report that English language learners or students from other countries compose 70 percent or more of their student population. Course products, such as curricula and unit plans with multiple assessment strategies, should be designed for the school populations teachers serve. This practice challenges both the pre- and in- service teachers in licensure courses to draw on their foundational knowledge in planning and implementing curricula that reflect theory and a culturally responsive pedagogy, while addressing the specific needs of local learners. In this way, teachers have the opportunity to complete licensure coursework with a firm understanding of the foundations of education, application of learning theory, and the ability to develop purposeful lesson plans that reflect multiple teaching and assessment techniques and strategies (Darling-Hammond 2000).

6. Encourage teacher retention by emphasizing mentoring and offering degree programs that focus on long-term career goals. Teacher retention issues hold the key to solving current teacher shortages. Beneath the surface of the teacher-shortage dilemma, one finds our problem is not failing to produce enough teachers, but a revolving-door phenomenon in which new teachers abandon the profession in their first five years of service (Ingersoll 2004). Recent data from Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia reveal that 31 percent of the 1,947 new teachers hired for 2004-5 have left their teaching jobs-and that was a dramatic improvement over the 45 percent average rate for the 2000-2001, 2001-2, and 2002-3 school years. For the 2,107 new teachers hired in 2003-4, 23 percent left their teaching jobs (Glaser 2006). Although still a disappointingly high dropout rate, the data from 2003-4 and 2005-6 reflect an improvement over the three previous school years’ rates.

GMU’s GSE has addressed the issue of retention by emphasizing mentoring arrangements between preservice and in-service teachers during field experiences and internships. Part of the professional development partnership arrangement involves preparation of special mentor teachers (clinical faculty) with skills to engender professional growth in new teachers. The internship and a culminating course require action research, which occurs under faculty guidance. Once licensure is completed, new teachers are encouraged to enter continuing, advanced teacher development programs, such as the Innovations in Educational Transformation master’s program, which is based on cohorts of teachers working on action research as professional learning communities, or the Advanced Studies in Teaching and Learning (ASTL) master’s degree program. The ASTL program, which is aligned with core propositions of National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, supports teachers’ professional development. By providing advanced expertise in content areas, teacher action research, and pedagogy, the program prepares teachers to pursue National Board Certification and supports their work as teacher leaders in the classroom setting. We encourage fellow schools of education to establish similar advanced professional development options and master’s degree programs that partner with their surrounding school districts to build on teachers’ classroom knowledge and provide extended work in classroom research, thus supporting practicing teachers in ongoing professional development opportunities. This multifaceted approach involving collaboration with school districts has worked well for our region, and we encourage other areas of the country to consider similar innovations. Conclusion

To meet the highly qualified mandate of NCLB, teacher education institutions must be responsive to the audiences they serve. By maintaining the highest standard of teacher preparation and working to serve the school districts and student population in the surrounding areas, schools of education can maintain their high standards and by offering complete licensure programs in concert with school districts’ needs, they can continue to offer licensure and full master’s programs that include more flexible licensure coursework options. Because of what we have learned from addressing the needs of our provisionally licensed teachers by incorporating this group into our regular state-approved teacher education programs, we are providing public school students in the surrounding districts “caring, competent, and committed teachers” (National Commission on Teaching for America’s Future 1996, 43). Solid licensure preparation can rescue new teachers from the sink-or-swim mentality and help them develop a strong foundation for success in the classroom. It can also help school districts in their quest to retain talented teachers as we help them support their new-teacher induction process.

Today’s classrooms are unique-populated with learners from diverse backgrounds and cultures who have many gifts, talents, and interests; some with native command of English, others who are acquiring English as a second language, and still others who have unique learning styles and special needs. Institutions of higher education, charged with the task of preparing teachers who meet the needs of all learners, have a hefty mission to fulfill because NCLB has set the highest educational standard ever in the United States. Students need competent teachers who remain in classrooms more than five years. Cochran-Smith (2004a) asserted:

We face enormous challenges as we rethink teacher recruitment, preparation, and retention. There are many new role and partnership possibilities for the universities, professional organizations, school districts, and communities with the vision to imagine them and the will to implement them. (391)

We contend that schools of education must remain committed to the enormous challenges that are encountered as we begin thinking and rethinking teacher preparation and retention for both provisionally licensed teachers and teacher candidates in regular programs. To ensure our nation’s future, we must take seriously the critical importance of teaching. Our children deserve nothing less.

References

Alliance for Excellent Education. 2004. Tapping the potential: Retaining and developing high-quality new teachers. http:// www.all4ed.org/publications/TappingThePotential/TappingThePotential (accessed July 5, 2007).

American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. 2005a. Academy calls for substantial federal investment in teacher education. Briefs (26)8: 1, 7.

_____. 2005b. Teacher quality among top priorities in reauthorization of Higher Education Act. Briefs (26)8: 3.

Banks, J. A. 2006. Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and theory. 5th ed. Boston: Pearson.

Cochran-Smith, M. 2004a. Stayers, leavers, lovers, and dreamers: Insights about teacher retention. Journal of Teacher Education 55 (5): 387-91.

_____. 2004b. Walking the road: Race, diversity, and social justice in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Darling-Hammond, L. 2000. Reforming teacher preparation and licensing: Debating the evidence. Teachers College Record 102 (1): 28-56.

_____. 2003. Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership 60 (8): 6-13.

_____. 2006. Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L., and P. Youngs. 2002. Defining “highly qualified teachers”: What does “scientifically-based research” actually tell us? Educational Researcher 31 (9): 13-25.

Department of Education (DOE). 2002. Meeting the highly qualified teachers challenge: The Secretary’s annual report of teacher quality. Washington, DC: Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education.

Dobbs, M. 2004. More states are fighting “No Child Left Behind” law. Washington Post. February 19, A3.

Duck, L. E. 1994. Teaching with charisma. Burke, VA: Chatelaine Press.

_____. 1996. Understanding American education: Its practices, problems, and promise. Burke, VA: Chatelaine Press.

_____. 2000. The on-going professional journey. Educational Leadership 57 (8): 42-45.

_____. 2007. Using sounder foundations to help avoid the “Why New Teachers Cry” phenomenon. The Clearing House 81 (1): 29-36.

Fairfax County Public School Board. 2007. Regulation 2215. http:/ /www.fcps.edu/Directives/R2215.pdf (accessed May 23, 2008).

Fox, R. 1999. This is who I am: The role of the professional development portfolio in foreign and second language pre-service teacher education. PhD diss., George Mason Univ., 1999. Abstract in Dissertation Abstracts International, publ. nr. 9933323, 60-05A (1999): 1516.

Gay, G. 2000. Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Glaser, M. 2006. Unpublished letter from Mark L. Glaser, President, Fairfax County Federation of Teachers, dated January 6. 2006.

Goodlad, J. 2004. Kudzu, rabbits, and school reform. In Schultz 2004, 45-50.

Hartocollis, A. 2005. Who needs education schools? New York Times Special Supplement. July 31.

Ingersoll, R. M. 2004. The teacher shortage: Myth or reality? In Schultz 2004, 182-187.

Layton, L., and D. Keating. 2006. Area immigrants top 1 million: Area levels are higher than elsewhere, census finds. Washington Post. August 15.

Levine, A. 2005. Educating school leaders. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.

Lewis, A. 2004. Unwrapping teaching. Phi Delta Kappan 85 (6): 419.

Liston, D., J. Whitcomb, and H. Borko. 2006. Too little or too much: Teacher preparation and the first years of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education 57 (4): 351-58.

Michelli, N. M., and D. L. Keiser. 2005. Teacher education for democracy and social justice. New York: Routledge.

Murphy, J. T. 2007. Dancing lessons for elephants: Reforming ed school leadership programs. In Annual editions: Education 07/08, ed. F. Schultz, 41-43. Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. 2006. Our core propositions. http://www.nbpts.org (accessed July 1, 2006).

National Commission on Teaching for America’s Future. 1996. What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York: National Commission on Teaching for America’s Future.

Osterling, J. P., and R. K. Fox. 2004. The power of perspectives: Building a cross-cultural community of learners. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 7 (6): 489-505.

Rhodes, R. L., S. H. Ochoa, and S. O. Ortiz. 2005. Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students: A practical guide. New York: Guilford Press.

Schmidt, P. R. 2005. Preparing educators to communicate and connect with families and communities. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.

Schon, D. A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the profession. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schultz, F. 2007. Annual editions: Education 04/05. Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.

Sadker, D., K. Zittleman, P. Earley, T. McCormick, and C. Strawn. 2007. The treatment of gender equity in teacher education. In Handbook for achieving gender equity through education. ed. S. Klein, 131-49. New York: Erlbaum.

Villegas, A. M., and T. Lucas. 2002. Educating culturally responsive teachers: A coherent approach. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Candace A. Strawn, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. Rebecca K. Fox, PhD, is codirector of the Advanced Studies in Teaching and Learning Program and an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. Lloyd Duck, PhD, is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.

Copyright (c) 2008 Heldref Publications

Copyright Heldref Publications Jul/Aug 2008

(c) 2008 Clearing House, The. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.