Conceptual Framework

Conceptual Framework STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT CORTLAND OVERVIEW OF THE DESIGN OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Background
The past four years have witnessed significant change in teacher certification in New York State. Sweeping changes have been mandated by several external agencies.

New York State Education Department (NYSED)
"Teaching to Higher Standards: New York's Commitment," published by the New York State Education Department on July 20, 1998, addressed current issues in education and called for a vital transformation of existing teacher education programs in New York State. Highlights of the Commissioner's of Education's Regulation 52.21 include:

Candidate
· 100 hours of field experience related to course work prior to the student teaching experience

· A minimum of two college supervised practica of at least 20 days each

· Candidate experience across a range of developmental levels, with the opportunity to work in high-need schools

· Addition of 6 credits of literacy education for all teacher candidates

· Instruction in safety education and child abuse reporting

· Instruction in school violence prevention

· A third NYSTCE examination, the Content Specialty Test, (CST) required for all initial certificates, in addition to the Liberal Arts and Science Test (LAST) and the Assessment of Teaching Skills-Written (ATS-W)

· Three years to complete a master's degree

· 175 hours of professional development every five years

Program
· Changes in Certificate Titles and Areas

· Promotion of college/school partnerships

· Majority of course work taught by full-time faculty

· Full-time faculty workload not to exceed 12 hours/semester for undergraduate; 9 hours/semester for graduate/ 21 hours per year if combined undergraduate and graduate

· 80% passing rate on the NYSTCE (New York State Teacher Certification Examinations) for all teacher education programs

· Accreditation of all teacher education programs by an outside agency, by December 2004

(See Crosswalk, 52.21 section, Attachment ____.) The State University of New York College at Cortland faculty worked diligently to fulfill the New York State Education Department (NYSED) mandates. In the 1999-2000 academic year, twenty-six undergraduate teacher education programs were revised and submitted for NYSED reregistry. In 2000-2001, the same process was followed for twenty-three graduate programs. All programs were successfully reregistered, along with several new teacher education programs.

State University of New York (SUNY)
In June 2001, the SUNY Board of Trustees adopted the SUNY Chancellor's Action Agenda, "A New Vision in Teacher Education," with which SUNY institutions having teacher education programs must comply. Highlights of the SUNY mandates include:

Candidate
· Assuring that students are thoroughly grounded in the subjects they teach

· Candidate completion of not less than 100 hours of clinical experience before student teaching

· Student teaching in two placements for a minimum of 75 days in classrooms and schools, at least one placement in a high-need school

Program
· Experienced clinical faculty supervising all field experiences

· Promotion of integrated bachelors/masters programs

· Promotion of teacher education program articulations between 2 year and 4 year colleges

· Continuous program assessment through rigorous external review and accreditation

· Standing behind the professional competence of every graduate of SUNY education programs in the State's schools-the SUNY Guarantee

(See Crosswalk, SUNY section, Attachment____.)

Critical to both the NYSED and the SUNY mandates is the accreditation of teacher education programs by an outside agency. In July 2000, State University of New York College at Cortland filed the Intent to Seek NCATE Accreditation.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)

Teacher Education Council (TEC)
The Teacher Education Council (TEC) was established in January 1999 to facilitate cohesive governance of the Teacher Education Unit and to provide a shared vision of teacher education at State University of New York College at Cortland. The body is composed of representatives from all teacher education areas, as well as members from key campus offices impacting teacher education (Admissions, Registrar, Judicial Affairs, Library, Technology, etc.) The TEC membership wrote and approved ByLaws in 2001. Issues raised within the TEC are directed to appropriate standing college committees or to TEC subcommittees, as appropriate. The following TEC subcommittees were established in the ByLaws:
· Policy

· Operations and Personnel

· Unit Assessment

· Global Education

· Curriculum

· Faculty

· Grants and Sponsored Programs

· Conferences, Lectures and Programming

· External Affairs

· Conceptual Framework

· Students and Advisement

The TEC is co-chaired by the Dean of the School of Professional Studies and the Dean of the School of Arts and Sciences. The Dean of the School of Professional Studies serves as the Unit Head. The TEC Advisory Group, composed of 20-25 school administrators, teachers and community members, provides collaboration and advises the Teacher Education Council. TEC Advisory Group members also attend regular meetings of the Teacher Education Council. The NCATE Executive Board is composed of representatives of the unit. This body ensures implementation of TEC decisions and maintains the operating activities of the unit.

Shared Vision
Professional Commitments of the Unit

State University of New York College at Cortland respects teaching as a profession. The contributions of teacher education faculty are highly regarded by the university.

The unit as a whole:

· Values the collective knowledge, skills and unique talents of its teaching community;

· Recognizes the value of collaboration among liberal arts and professional members of the unit;

· Fosters collaboration among members of the unit and educational professionals in the schools;

· Promotes faculty leadership in professional and organizational roles within their profession;

· Encourages lifelong learning; · Encourages the engagement of its faculty and students in social issues.

Individual members of the unit:

· Demonstrate strong commitment to the delivery of high quality instruction in the classroom;

· Base their teaching on best practices and a strong collective knowledge base;

· Practice ongoing research and modeling of effective teaching methodologies.

Crafting of the Conceptual Framework
In 1999, a Conceptual Framework Committee was convened to discuss the drafting of the document. Their work continued throughout the academic year, and the draft was presented to the Teacher Education Council. Discussion by faculty in Arts and Sciences and Professional Studies ensued for two years, until a Conceptual Framework document representing the beliefs of the unit was adopted by the TEC in November 2001, with subsequent editorial and organizational changes made in Spring and Summer 2002. Members of the TEC recognize the fact that the Conceptual Framework is a working document which is expected to evolve as the program develops. Regular review of the Conceptual Framework will be conducted by the TEC and the Conceptual Framework Committee to identify areas of change for discussion.

Logo
In May 2002, the TEC adopted the Cortland apple tree as the logo for the Conceptual Framework. The root system of the tree reflects the three aspects of Liberal Learning: Personal Responsibility, Social Justice and Global Understanding. Together they supply the sturdy foundation that provides nourishment for the top of the tree, Teacher Education. Knowledge Base, Technology, Diversity, Professional and State Standards, Professional Commitments and Assessment form the branches of the tree. All these elements are connected; they function as a whole, allowing the tree to flourish, continuously growing.

TEACHER EDUCATION: MAKING A DIFFERENCE

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT CORTLAND

Theme: Teacher education at SUNY Cortland is built upon the foundation of liberal learning and the development of teachers who have exceptional pedagogical knowledge and skills. The foundation of liberal learning informs the professional education strand in an innovative thematic approach that emphasizes personal responsibility and global understanding that encourages the construction of communities committed to enacting social justice. We prepare our teacher candidates to know the world in ways they do not when they come to us, and to spark or fuel a love of teaching and of learning that is so strong and so appealing that their future students will be drawn into it themselves. Graduates of SUNY Cortland's teacher education program will be prepared to contribute to their communities and to the democratic development of society.

Cortland's Fundamental Commitments:

The fundamental commitments of the teacher education program are both descriptive and prescriptive. They indicate aspects of our program as well as directions for growth and future development. They represent both what we are and what we want to become.

Teacher education is framed by its central commitment to liberal learning. The program demonstrates a depth and breadth of knowledge within the curriculum, linked to co-curricular experiences and instructional practices that are based on a sound theoretical framework providing candidates with the learning necessary to become reflective and effective teachers. The program will help inspire a passion for teaching and a clear appreciation of the responsibility that teachers bear for the development of their students.

Teacher education at SUNY Cortland is committed to producing graduates who understand those responsibilities and challenges, and who are well prepared to guide their students through the educational experience.

Liberal Learning

Active citizenship, a rich and fulfilled life, and good teaching all require a sound foundation in the liberal arts. Understanding the structure of knowledge in the humanities, the arts, the social sciences and the natural sciences enables the development of emerging perspectives on our past and present, as well as possible approaches to contemporary human and ecological problems.

The general education program provides students with knowledge and appreciation of the arts and humanities, the physical and life sciences, and the social and behavioral sciences. Throughout the program, candidates develop their critical thinking skills, their oral and written communication skills, and their technological competencies. The three themes of personal responsibility, social justice, and global understanding follow from our central commitment to liberal education.

Personal Responsibility

Increasing personal responsibility is part of each candidate's professional development as a life-long learner and a member of a learning community. Such development emphasizes positive relationships and communication with students, parents, and others in the community. Personal responsibility includes issues of integrity, ethics, commitment, and moral choice and has social justice and global understanding as its foundation. Candidates are expected to demonstrate personal integrity in their interactions with others.

Candidates undertake courses that center on ethical issues and questions of justice; candidates participate in activities with peers and colleagues that further their understanding. Candidates learn how to educate for character as well as for intellect.

Social Justice

Educating for social justice means our actions as well as our words seek full participation for all people in a global society. SUNY Cortland's commitment to social justice focuses on the ongoing problems of a democratic society, contemporary social problems, rural and urban education, and environmental responsibility.

Candidates demonstrate an awareness of issues of social justice, equality, and democracy facing our society; prepare to teach in a variety of school environments while addressing the physical, emotional, and intellectual needs of a diverse and multicultural student population.

Global Understanding

"When one tugs on a single thing in nature, one finds it attached to the rest of the world." (John Muir) As the human population climbs toward seven billion, now, more than ever, we must recognize the interconnectedness of natural and human systems. As part of a global community, our candidates must understand the potential impact of each personal decision. Inasmuch as there are political, social, economic, cultural, or religious differences that separate us in this global community, we remain inextricably linked. It is inevitable that our candidates will be teaching new immigrants and students from abroad. These students will need strong role models. (See Attachment D for SUNY Cortland's Initiatives re: minority faculty and student recruitment and retention.)

Teacher Education

Knowledge Base, Professional Standards and Commitments

Faculty have generated a number of central principles and practices which provide the theoretical and practical underpinnings of SUNY Cortland's teacher education program. Curriculum development and candidate expectations for the teacher education program are based on: current research and best practice; New York State Regents Learning Standards; New York State Education Department's "Teaching to Higher Standards: New York's Commitment;" and SUNY Chancellor's Action Agenda: "A New Vision in Teacher Education," as well as standards recognized by each discipline. This curriculum assures that candidates have the knowledge, skills and dispositions required by the profession for effective teaching. The outcomes for all SUNY Cortland teacher candidates have been developed within the context of the program's fundamental commitments to liberal learning and teacher education. Successful attainment of these outcomes ensures that SUNY Cortland teacher candidates will make a difference in the classroom.

Outcomes/Expectations of SUNY Cortland Teacher Candidates :

Liberal Learning

Candidates will:

· Demonstrate a solid foundation in the arts and sciences;
(Apple, Bowers, Dewey, A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY's Teacher Preparation Programs, Kohli, NYSED Regents Task Force on Teaching, Shulman)

· Possess in-depth knowledge of the subject area to be taught;
(A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY's Teacher Preparation Programs, NYSED Regents Task Force on Teaching )

· Foster respect for individual's abilities and disabilities and an understanding and appreciation of variations of ethnicity, culture, language, gender age, class and sexual orientation;
(Banks, Delpit, Dyson, Gay, Gilligan, Heath, Kozol, Ladson-Billings, Mercer & Mercer, Nieto, No Child Left Behind Legislation, Noddings, Ogbu, Routman)

· Continue to develop professionally as reflective practitioners who are committed to on-going scholarly inquiry.
(Berliner & Biddle, Borko et al., Bruner, Campbell, Clift, Cochran-Smith & Lytle, Darling-Hammond, Eisner, Gardner, Goodlad, Greene, Kaplan & Edelfelt, Rosenshine, Schon, Sizer, Slavin)

Teacher Education
Candidates will:

· Demonstrate good moral character;
(Lickona, Garbarino, Kohn)

· Understand how students learn and develop;
(No Child Left Behind Legislation, Piaget, Vygotsky, Slavin)

· Manage classrooms structured in a variety of ways to promote a safe learning environment;
(Queen & Mallen)

· Know and apply various disciplinary models to manage student behavior;
(Charles, Dreikurs, Nelson et al.)

· Apply a variety of teaching strategies to develop a positive teaching-learning environment where all students are encouraged to achieve their highest potential;
(Banks, Bloom, Dewey, Freire, Gardner, Gee, Gilligan, Goodlad, Joyce & Weil, Kagan, No Child Left Behind Legislation, Rosenshine, Slavin, Vygotsky)

· Integrate curriculum among disciplines, and balance historical and contemporary research, theory, and practice;
(Bloom, Dewey, Eisner, Gardner, Goodlad, Gronlund, Hargreaves, Lave&Wenger, Noddings, Posner, Sizer, Tyler)

· Use multiple and authentic forms of assessment to analyze teaching and student learning and to plan curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of individual students;
(Bloom, Darling-Hammond, Eisner, Gardner, Gronlund, Popham, Wiggins)

· Demonstrate sufficient technology skills and the ability to integrate technology into classroom teaching/learning;
(Bowers, Compaine, Jonassen, Papert)

· Promote parental involvement and collaborate effectively with other staff, the community, higher education, other agencies, and cultural institutions, as well as parents and other care givers, for the benefit of students; and
(Epstein, Heath, A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY's Teacher Preparation Programs , NYSED Regents Task Force on Teaching)

Assessment

Teacher educators at SUNY Cortland view assessment both as a means of monitoring candidate progress and accountability and as a way to promote student learning. Faculty are committed to investigating research-based assessment techniques and using multiple forms of assessment. Throughout the program candidates move toward a comprehensive understanding of assessment, both in their ability to apply assessment measures in the classroom and to perform their own self assessment in professional development.

Candidate Performance

All candidates in the teacher education program must demonstrate knowledge, skills and dispositions to teach effectively. Candidates are assessed continuously throughout the program. Annual reporting of candidate performance in coursework, in student teaching and on New York State Teacher Certification Examinations (NYSTCE), as well as candidate exit surveys, assist the Unit in adjusting and improving the curriculum. Candidates demonstrate mastery of the knowledge, skills and dispositions cited in the Knowledge Base, Professional Standards and Commitments section in the following ways:

Performance Outcome	Indicators
Demonstrate a solid foundation in the arts and sciences	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of SUNY General Education and Cortland General Education programs (Cortland GE-2 -Prejudice and Discrimination, required of all students, specifically addresses issues of social justice and diversity); Benchmark #2: General Education Assessment*; Benchmark #3: Successful passing score on the Liberal Arts and Science Test (LAST), New York State Teacher Certification Examination (NYSTCE); Benchmark #4: Successful passing score on the Content Specialty Test (NYSTCE)
Possess in-depth knowledge of the subject area to be taught	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of coursework in the major; Benchmark #2: minimum 2.5 GPA in the major required for continuation in the teacher education program (3.0 for graduate students). Benchmark #3: As demonstrated during successful student teaching experience*, and Benchmark #4: for graduation
Demonstrate good moral character	Benchmark #1: self-reporting on the judicial screening section of the Application to the Teacher Education Program; Benchmark #2: As demonstrated during the 100 hours of field work; Benchmark #3: As demonstrated during successful student teaching experience; Benchmark #4: Fingerprinting and background check for certification; Benchmark #5: NYSED Code of Ethics for Teachers
Understand how students learn and develop	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of PSY 101-General Psychology I and PSY 231-Child Psychology or PSY 232-Adolescent Psychology or PSY 332-Educational Psychology or PSY 333-Developmental Psychology; Benchmark #2: as demonstrated during the 100 hours of field work, via successful completion of modules and journal; Benchmark #3: as demonstrated during the student teaching experience
Manage classrooms structured in a variety of ways to promote a safe learning environment	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of appropriate methods class; Benchmark #2:As demonstrated during the 100 hours experience;* Benchmark #3: As evidenced in the student teaching experience; successful demonstration and completion of student teaching*
Know and apply various disciplinary models to manage student behavior	Benchmark #1: As successfully demonstrated in appropriate methods class; Benchmark #2: Successful demonstration and completion of student teaching*
Apply a variety of teaching strategies to develop a positive teaching-learning environment where all students are encouraged to achieve their highest potential	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of appropriate methods class, as demonstrated via lesson and unit planning and micro-teaching; Benchmark #2: As demonstrated in lesson planning and micro-teaching;* Benchmark #3: Successful demonstration and completion during student teaching*
Integrate curriculum among disciplines, and balance historical and contemporary research, theory and practice	Successful completion of Foundations of Education course or infusion in appropriate methods course
Use multiple and authentic forms of assessment to analyze teaching and student learning and to plan curriculum and instruction, to meet the needs of individual students	Benchmark #1: as demonstrated in INT 270-Exploring Education, AED 391-Introduction to Adolescence Education, or other introductory teaching course; Benchmark #2: as demonstrated in appropriate discipline-specific methods course in lesson and unit planning and micro-teaching;* Benchmark #3: as demonstrated during the student teaching experience-e.g., lesson planning, unit planning, etc.*
Demonstrate sufficient technology skills and the ability to integrate technology into classroom teaching/learning	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of a computer applications course or computer applications workshops offered by Memorial Library; Benchmark #2: Successful demonstration of SUNY Cortland technology competencies for all teacher candidates;* Benchmark #3: Demonstration of technology infusion in lesson and unit planning in mini-lessons delivered in discipline-specific methods course; Benchmark #4: Demonstration of technology infusion in lesson and unit planning during the student teaching experience*
Foster respect for individual's abilities and disabilities and an understanding and appreciation of variations of ethnicity, culture, language, gender, age, class, and sexual orientation	Benchmark #1: Successful completion of GE-2-Prejudice and Discrimination coursework; Benchmark #2: Successful completion of special education coursework for elementary curricula or adolescence education methods course via evidence in lesson planning and micro-teaching; Benchmark #3: Demonstration of understanding from required journal for the 100 hours via module completion; Benchmark #4: Successful demonstration during the student teaching experience*
Promote parental involvement and collaborate effectively with other staff, the community, higher education, other agencies, and cultural institutions, as well as parents and other caregivers, for the benefit of students	Benchmark #1: Successful demonstration during the 100 hours of field work via module completion and journal;* Benchmark #2: Successful demonstration during the student teaching experience*
Continue to develop professionally as reflective practitioners who are committed to on-going scholarly inquiry	Successful completion of the 175 hours of professional development every five years, required by the New York State Education Department (NYSED); active membership in regional and statewide organizations in the discipline

*Exemplars/Rubrics attached,see Attachment B.

Assessment Checkpoints
Teacher candidates are assesed at the following points in the program:


1) application to the Teacher Education Program	1) GPA, judicial screening (dispositions,) prerequisites
2) completion of 100 hours of field work	2) journal, module completion
3) eligibility to student teach	3) GPA, judicial screening (dispositions,) prerequisites
4) during the student teaching experience	4) supervisor's observations, cooperating teacher's comments, 3-way interviews; midterm and final student teacher evaluations; student teacher self-evaluation
5) completion of the program	5) completed portfolio, completion of course work, GPA

Unit Assessment System

The evidence of the quality of the teacher education program is reflected in high level candidate performance in the areas indicated in the diagram below. The achievement of successful candidate performance outcomes, in turn, is dependent upon the other components of the unit assessment system.

The teacher education unit assessment system is based on an adaptation of the Teacher Education Assessment System (TEAS), designed by Dr. David C. Smith, Dean Emeritus of Education, University of Florida, the Unit Assessment System at SUNY Cortland is comprised of the following components: a) unit resources; b) productivity; c) candidate performance; and d) faculty performance. The above areas were identified as critical to the efficient functioning of the teacher education unit.

Resources

In order to deliver a quality teacher education program, the unit must have sufficient fiscal, faculty and space resources available. An annual review of both fiscal resources and faculty resources is being conducted by the unit to a) maintain compliance with NYSED regulations re: faculty workload,; b) ensure that a sufficient number of course sections are being offered to accommodate candidate needs; c) ensure that sufficient funding for teacher education in comparison to non-teacher education programs is allotted to budgets for Library, Travel and Operating Expenses; d) demonstrate sufficient space availability; and e) guarantee sufficient personal and laboratory computer and Audio/Visual equipment availability.

Productivity

The productivity of the unit is another important area of assessment. A) Faculty: The unit assessment system evaluates annually faculty workload; faculty hiring with the intent to increase diversity; faculty contributions to the institution via external grant funding and scholarly activity. B) Program: The teacher education program is assessed annually by departments and the Teacher Education Council. Data is gathered annually via compliance with department assessment plans, including candidate performance in the major, assessment of the General Education Program, and candidate performance on statewide teacher certification examinations. The results are analyzed for program improvement. In addition, SUNY System Administration requires a five-year Program Review of all departments.

Faculty Performance

Faculty in the program must be qualified in the area in which they teach. Faculty should demonstrate effective teaching and evidence of active contribution to their respective field. Faculty should be effective advisors of teacher candidates. Annual reports of activity, an advisement survey and collection of data regarding candidate complaints are analyzed each year and are kept on file.

Each component of the unit assessment system is compared annually with institutional data in the respective area, to assure equitable distribution of resources, faculty workload and candidate and faculty performance. Results will be used to review programming and to improve candidate performance. (See attachment C for 2001-2002 unit assessment data.)

NB: It should be noted that, as with all teacher education programs in New York State, New York State Education Department reregistry took place in 2000 for all undergraduate teacher education programs, and in 2001 for all graduate teacher education programs. Changes affected all freshmen entering in Fall 2000. This is significant, since, to date, no cohort of teacher candidates has yet graduated from the newly reregistered programs. SUNY Cortland began collecting data in the 2001-2002 academic year with the intent of continuing to collect and review data on an annual basis. A committee will analyze the data and make recommendations for improvements.

Conceptual Framework - References

Apple, M. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Banks, J. A. (1999). The lives and values of researchers: Implications for educating citizens in a multicultural world. Educational Researcher, 27(7), 4-17.

Banks, J. A. & Banks, C.A.M. (eds). (1995). Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education. New York: Macmillan.

Berliner, D. C. & Biddle, J. (1995). The Manufactured Crisis; Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on America's Public Schools. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay.

Borko, H., Michalec, P., Timmons, M., & Siddle, J. (1997). Student teaching portfolios: A tool for promoting reflective practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 48, 345-358.

Bowers, C.A. (1993). Education, Cultural Myths, and the Ecological Crisis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Bowers, C.A. (1995). Educating for an Ecologically Sustainable Culture. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Bruner, J.S. (1997). Celebrating divergence: Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 40, 63-73.

Bruner, J. S. (1971). The Relevance of Education, edited by A. Gill. New York: Norton.

Bruner, J.S. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Campbell, D.M., Cignet, P.B., Melenyzer, B.J., Nettles, D.H. & Wyman, R.M. (1997). How to Develop a Professional Portfolio: A manual for Teachers. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Charles, C.M. (2001). Building Classroom Discipline (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon

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.

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. (1999). The teacher research movement: A decade later. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 15-25.

Compaine, B. M., editor (2001). The Digital Divide: Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1993). Reframing the school reform agenda: Developing capacity for school transformation. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(10), 753-761.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Solving the dilemma of teacher supply, demand and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring and qualified teacher for every child. New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.

Delpit, L. (1998). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-289.

Delpit, L. (1995). Other People's Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York: The New Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan.

Dreikurs, R. (1972). Discipline without tears. New York: Hawthorne Books. In Edwards, C.H. (Ed.). Classroom Discipline and Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Dreikurs, R., Grunwald, B.B., & Pepper, F.C. (1982). Maintaining Sanity in the Classroom: Classroom Management Techniques. (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

Dyson, A. H. (1997). What Difference does Difference Make? Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Eisner, E. (1993). Reshaping assessment in education: Some criteria in search of practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25, 219-233.

Epstein, J. et al. (1999). School Family and Community Partnerships: Your Handbook for Action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing Corporation.

Garbarino, J. (1995). Raising Children in a Socially Toxic Environment. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Gay, G. (1994). At the Essence of Learning: Multicultural Education. West Lafayette, IN: Kappa Delta Pi.

Gee, J. P. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Falmer.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Goodlad, J. I. (1990). Teachers for our Nation's Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A Place Called School. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Greene, M. (1986). Reflection and passion in teaching. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 2(1), 68-81.

Gronlund, N. E. (1965). Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. New York: Macmillan.

Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing Teachers, Changing Times: Teacher's Work and Culture in the Postmodern Age. New York: Teachers College Press.

Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with Words: Language, Life, and Work in Communities and Classrooms. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Jonassen, D. (1996). Computers in the Classroom: Mindtools for Critical Thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Joyce, B. & Weil, M. (1972). Models of Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative Learning Resources for Teachers. San Juan, Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers.

Kagan, D. (1995). Teaching as critical problem solving: A critical examination of the analogy and its implications. Review of Educational Research, 58, 482-505.

Kaplan, L. & Edelfelt, R.A. (Eds.). (1996) Teachers for the New Millennium: Aligning Teacher Development, National Goals and High Standards for All Students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Kohli, W. ed. (1995). Critical Conversations in Philosophy of Education. New York: Routledge.

Kohn, A. (1997). How not to teach values. Phi Delta Kappan, 78 (5), 428.

Kohn, A. (1999). The Schools our Children Deserve. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage Inequalities: Children in America's Schools. New York: Crown Publishers.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The Dreamkeepers: Successful Teachers of African-American Children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for Character: How Schools can Teach Respect and Responsibility. New York: Bantam Books.

Lickona, T. (1993). The return of character education. Educational Leadership, 51 (3), 6-11.

Mercer, C.D., & Mercer, A.R. (1998). Teaching Students with Learning Problems. Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Nelson, G.L., Yott, L., & Grenn, H. (1993). Positive Discipline in the Classroom. Rocklin, CA: Prima.

Nieto, S. (2000). Affirming Diversity: The Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.

Noddings, N. (1992a). The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Schools. New York: Teachers College Press.

Noddings, N. (1992b). Gender and the curriculum. In P. Jacobson (ed.) Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: Macmillan.

Ogbu, J. U. (1978). Minority Education and Caste: The American System in Cross-cultural Perspective. New York: Academic Press.

Ogbu, J. U. (1974). The Next Generation: An Ethnography of Education in an Urban Neighborhood. New York: Academic Press.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, J. (1970). Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child. New York: Orion Press.

Popham, J. (1999). Why standardized tests don't measure educational equity. Educational Leadership 56(6), 8-15.

Posner, G. (1997). Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum Development for Teachers. New York: Longman.

Queen, J., Blackwelder, B., & Mallen, L. (1997). Responsible Classroom Management for Teachers and Students. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Regents Task Force on Teaching. Teaching to Higher Standards: New York's Commitment. Albany, NY: The State Education Department. The University of the State of New York.

Rosenshine, B. (1979). Content, time and direct instruction. In P. L. Peterson & Walberg (ed.). Research on Teaching. Berkeley: McCutchen.

Routman, R. (1996). Literacy at the Crossroads. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Schon, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-17.

Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace's Compromise. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative Learning; Theory, Research and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Slavin, R.E. (1997). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

State University of New York System Administration. A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY's Teacher Preparation Programs [On-line]. Available: http://www.sysadm.suny.edu/provost/initiatives/TEactionplan.html

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Education. No Child Left Behind Legislation. [On-line]. Available: http://www.NoChildLeftBehind.gov/

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wiggins, G., & McTigne, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.