|UFDC Home||myUFDC Home | Help|
This item has the following downloads:
1 ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION TEACHER DEVELOPMENT: A STUDY OF NOVICES PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION By KATIE M. TRICARICO A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007
2 2007 Katie M. Tricarico
3 To my Grandma
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my parents for their unwavering support. I also thank Diane for her constant pushes and encouragement, Nancy for helping me talk it out, Dorene for help ing me do no harm, and Rod Webb for the reminder that the answer is in the data. Finally, I tha nk Jennifer and Stephanie for listening to my frustrations and reminding me to take baby steps.
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........8 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........9 LIST OF TERMS.................................................................................................................. .........10 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ............11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................13 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE........................................................................................19 Alternative Certification...................................................................................................... ...19 Planning....................................................................................................................... ...........22 Pedagogical Content Knowledge....................................................................................23 Differentiated Instruction................................................................................................27 Self-regulation................................................................................................................ .31 Limitations in Found Lite rature and Conclusions..................................................................36 3 PROGRAM CONTEXT AND DESCRIPTION....................................................................40 School Context................................................................................................................. .......42 Professional Development......................................................................................................44 4 METHODS........................................................................................................................ .....48 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........48 Theoretical Framework.......................................................................................................... .48 Researchers Personal Background........................................................................................50 Data Collection Methods........................................................................................................51 Pathwise....................................................................................................................... ....52 Reflection on Teaching....................................................................................................52 Observation and Post-Observation Conference Notes....................................................52 Portfolio...................................................................................................................... .....53 Data Management................................................................................................................ ...53 Data Analysis.................................................................................................................. ........54 Collegial Relationships....................................................................................................55 Classroom Management..................................................................................................56 Planning for a Standard...................................................................................................56 Planning for Student Need...............................................................................................57
6 Openness to Considering Feedback.................................................................................57 Self-Regulation as the Over-Arching Theme..................................................................57 Credibility and Trustworthiness.............................................................................................59 5 THE CASE OF ROSE............................................................................................................60 Roses Snapshot................................................................................................................ ......60 Analysis Themes................................................................................................................ .....61 Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning...........................62 Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth..........................63 Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesson Components Strengthens Planning................64 Planning for Student Need: Knowing Students Enables Differentiation........................67 Openness to Consider Feedback in Pl anning: Embracing Feedback Strengthens Planning.......................................................................................................................68 Self-Regulation as an Over-Arching Theme...................................................................69 Roses Ability to Self-Regulate within Each Theme..............................................................70 Collegial Relationships....................................................................................................70 Classroom Management..................................................................................................72 Planning for a Standard...................................................................................................74 Planning for Student Needs.............................................................................................76 Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning..................................................................77 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........79 6 THE CASE OF MARY..........................................................................................................83 Marys Snapshot................................................................................................................ .....83 Analysis Themes................................................................................................................ .....84 Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning...........................84 Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth..........................85 Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesson Components Strengthens Planning................85 Planning for Student Need: Knowing Students Enables Differentiation........................87 Openness to Consider Feedback in Pl anning: Embracing Feedback Strengthens Planning.......................................................................................................................90 Self-Regulation as Over-Arching Theme........................................................................90 Marys Ability to Self-Re gulate within Each Theme.............................................................90 Collegial Relationships....................................................................................................90 Classroom Management..................................................................................................92 Planning for a Standard...................................................................................................92 Planning for Student Need...............................................................................................93 Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning..................................................................94 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .........96 7 THE CASE OF JANE............................................................................................................99 Janes Snapshot................................................................................................................ .......99 Analysis Themes................................................................................................................ ...100 Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning.........................100
7 Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth........................102 Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesson Components Strengthens Planning..............104 Planning for Student Need: Knowing Students Enables Differentiation......................105 Openness to Consider Feedback in Pl anning: Embracing Feedback Strengthens Planning.....................................................................................................................107 Self-Regulation as Over-Arching Theme......................................................................108 Janes Ability to Self-Regulate within Each Theme.............................................................109 Collegial Relationships..................................................................................................109 Classroom Management................................................................................................111 Planning for a Standard.................................................................................................112 Planning for Student Needs...........................................................................................113 Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning................................................................114 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... .......116 8 DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... ..119 Assertions..................................................................................................................... ........119 Concluding Thoughts............................................................................................................130 APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC AND FCAT DATA, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL A AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL B...............................................................................................137 B PATHWISE INSTRUCTION PLAN...................................................................................143 C REFLECTION AFTER TEACHING...................................................................................145 LIST OF REFERENCES.............................................................................................................148 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................154
8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 1-1 Taxonomy of Alternative Appr oaches to Certification.....................................................18 2-1 Essential Elements of Alternat ive Teacher Preparation Programs....................................38 2-2 Phases & Areas of Self-Regulation....................................................................................39 3-1 Data Collection Methods...................................................................................................47 5-1 Roses growth and development in self-regulation skills..................................................81 6-1 Marys growth and development in self-regulation skills.................................................98 7-1 Janes growth and developm ent in self-regulation skills.................................................118 8-1 Study Assertions........................................................................................................... ...132 8-2 Combined growth and development in se lf-regulation skills among Rose, Mary, and Jane........................................................................................................................... .......134 A-1 Elementary School A demographic and FCAT data........................................................137 A-2 Elementary School B demographic and FCAT data........................................................140
9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 5-1 Roses Developmental Themes Continuum.......................................................................80 6-1 Marys Developmental Themes Continuum......................................................................97 7-1 Janes Developmental Themes Continuum.....................................................................117 8-1 Comparison of apprentices strengths in their ability to plan for differentiated instruction.................................................................................................................... ....133 8-2 Modified self-regulation model as a cycle.......................................................................136
10 LIST OF TERMS Alternative Certification: State certification for those teacher candidates who did not graduate from a college or univers ity with a degree in education. Instructional Planning: The planning a teacher does in order to prepare instructional lessons for a classroom. By state requirements, these lessons need to include state standards. Differentiated Instruction: As defined by Tom linson (2001), provides different avenues to acquiring content, to processing or making sense of ideas, and to developing products so that each st udent can learn effectively. Coach: The individual working at each school to provide support to the apprentice teachers. This person is responsible for observing the apprentice teachers, providing feedback and support as needed, and providing apprentices with instruc tion during weekly seminars. In this case this person is specifically working for the University. Mentor teacher: The teacher of record with whom the apprentice works most closely. The apprentice joins the mentors classroom. Apprentice: A person who is enrolled in the Transition to Teaching (TTT) program for Alternative Certification, working towards certification for grade levels 16. The apprentice works in the mentors classroom each day, and the mentor slowly passes responsibility for planning and classroom management to the apprentice teacher. Self-regulation: The skill a teacher uses to pro-actively reflect on and make change to her practice.
11 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Ma ster of Arts in Education ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION TEACHER DEVELOPMENT: A STUDY OF NOVICES PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION By Katie M. Tricarico December 2007 Chair: Diane Yendol-Hoppey Major: Curriculum and Instruction The nation continues the struggle to provide qualified teachers to every classroom. Teachers are entering the classroom through multiple alternative routes and as a result, many new teachers are learning how to teach with limited knowledge of effective teaching methods and practices. The purpose of this study was to understand how apprentice teachers in an Alternative Certification Elementary Apprentic eship Program develop in their planning and implementation of Differentiated Instruction. Th e apprentice teachers followed during this study simultaneously took classes geared towards certifi cation readiness and apprenticed in elementary school classrooms for one full year. The resear ch question driving this study is, How do apprentice teachers in the Altern ative Certification Program in a Florida urban school district develop in their planning and implementation of Differentiated Instruction? The sub-questions in this study include: What are the key elements th at facilitate or inhib it alternatively certified teacher planning for differentiated instruction? A qualitative case study approach using purposeful sampling methods was used to select three elementary apprentice teachers. Lesson plan s, reflections on practice, and observation notes were collected for each apprentice teacher, and anal yzed in search of unif ying themes related to
12 teacher development in lesson planning skills. Five major themes were identified as influencing the planning process, and the stages representi ng each apprentices growth within each theme emerged on a continuum moving from emerging, to developing, to accomplished. The major themes included: collegial relationships, cla ssroom management, plan ning for a standard, planning for student need, and openness to consid ering feedback in lesson planning. In looking across each of these themes, the degree to whic h the apprentice develope d self-regulation highly influenced their ability to plan and implement differentiated instructi on. The findings of this study will benefit teacher educator s, teachers earning alternative ce rtification, their coaches, and their mentor teachers. Knowing the areas in whic h apprentice teachers need to succeed will make it possible for educators and supervisors to stress those areas as they coac h alternatively certified novice teachers. Furthermore, the themes made e xplicit in this study will also allow apprentice teachers to be cognizant of what it takes to develop as a teacher.
13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The recent federal mandates influenced by th e No Child Left Behind Act (2001) have had an impact on staffing schools throughout the nation. One of the requirements of the act is that a highly qualified teacher must teach each chil d. The United States Depa rtment of Education predicts that by the 2008-09 school year between 1.7 and 2.7 million teachers will be needed to fill vacancies in public schools (Salyer, 2003). Although universities in the United States are producing a large number of education gradua tes, the National Comm ission on Teaching and Americas Future states that nearly one-fourth of new teachers leave the profession within their first three years of teaching (as cited in Curran and Goldrick, 2002). In urban areas, the attrition rate is even greater since about half of the new teachers in urban schools leave the profession within five years (National Commission on T eaching and Americas Future 2002, as cited in Curran and Goldrick, 2002). Furthermore, teach ers working in schools in which the minority enrollment is greater than 50% te nd to leave at rates more than twice those of teachers in schools with fewer minorities (NCES, 1998 as cited in Haycock, 2000). Alternative Certification programs have b een developed to recr uit people possessing bachelors degrees or higher in another area of study to a teaching position. These programs vary by school district, but the shared goal of placing qualified teache rs in classrooms remains the same. Feistritzer and Chester (2000) described a taxonomy of teacher certif ication consisting of nine approaches to certification. The approach es articulated in the Feistritzer and Chester taxonomy are outlined using Classe s A through I (Table 1). In a ddition, a tenth class (Class J) has emerged as school districts o ffer opportunities for paraprofessiona ls to prepare themselves to be teachers of record. Each Class incorporates varying degrees of mentorship as well as placement within different grade levels and subj ect areas. Programs such as these are necessary
14 due to the high number of openings in schools, es pecially in urban settings, where approximately half of new teachers leave within five year s (National Commission on Teaching and Americas Future 2002, as cited in Curran & Goldrick, 2002). Alternatively prepared teacher s often earn their teaching cert ificates by taking certification classes each year while they teach full time. Typi cally, teachers with the least amount of teaching experience are most often found in high-pove rty schools (Carey, 2004), and often beginning teaching in high-poverty schools br ings special challenges, many of which are difficult for an experienced teacher to handle. First, because thes e alternative entry teachers have not previously taken child development, planning, methods, or classroom management classes, they are sometimes unprepared for the rigors of being a te acher. Second, although res earch indicates that teachers teach best the subjects they know best only one-third of teachers in high-poverty schools are certified to teach their subject (Carey, 2004). Thir d, many alternatively certified teachers secure jobs in schools mu ch different from those they a ttended as students, since many teachers are middle-class white women working in often high-needs school. In order to counter these challenges, alternatively cer tified teachers often need additio nal support in order to create, instruct, and evaluate curricula that can ma ximize student learning (Haberman, 1991). These teachers need to develop the ability to successfully plan for student learning as well as use a gamut of teaching strategies and instructional methods (Ber ry, 2001; Haberman, 1991). By engaging in professional developmen t targeted at these areas, they will be better prepared for their classrooms. For those entering the teaching profession, learning to plan lessons appropriate both for students needs and grade level requirements is imperative. According to Ornstein (1997), novice teachers need to practice writing plans, and th en implement those plans into their student
15 teaching placements in order to gain the experien ce needed to bring what is learned in teacher education classes into their lessons. Without this experience, novice teachers will have difficulty bringing what is discussed in class to a live st udent audience. John (1991) agrees that practical experiences are the primary influence on how novice teachers learn to plan. Because the importance of practical experience is a common theme in the existing literature, it is crucial that Alternative Certification teacher s, many of whom do not receive the breadth of methods classes that education majors receive in their universit y programs, are given plen ty of opportunities to plan and implement their lessons so they can ga in personal experiences w ith students to enable them to plan more relevant lessons as they further their practice. Almost all of the elementary students attendi ng the schools of the appr entices participating in this study are Black. Two of the apprentice participants are white women. Because of the different culturally backgrounds of the appren tices and the students th ey serve, culturally responsive teaching strategies are necessary. Ac cording to Ladson-Billings (1995), one of the three criteria for culturally responsive teaching is for all students to experience academic success. One of the ways to ensure learning by all is through Diffe rentiated Instruction. Applying Differentiated Instruction strategies allows a teacher to meet the varied needs of all students by adjusting how students present information they have learned and how the students learn new material (Tomlinson et al., 1995). Planning for Diff erentiated Instruction takes additional work on the teachers pa rt because the teacher needs to create modifications to the original lesson plan that are specifically tailore d for groups of students. Because this method of planning takes time and practice to master, co llaboration is suggested (Lawrence-Brown, 2004). Additionally, lesson planning with individual students needs in mi nd is a critical part of learning to teach students in a high-needs environment.
16 Thus, the purpose of this research is to unde rstand Alternative Cer tification candidates and their development in planning differentiated le ssons. The literature already elucidates the importance of developing the professional skills of alternatively certified teachers, and the importance of implementation opportunities in learni ng to plan for instruction. However, less is understood about the elements that influence th e degree to which Alte rnative Certification novices plan to address student needs through Differentiated Instru ction. Therefore, the research question for this study is: How do apprentice teachers in the Alternative Ce rtification Program in a Florida urban school district develop in thei r planning and implementation of Differentiated Instruction? The sub-questions in this study include: What are the ke y elements that facilitate or inhibit alternatively certified teacher pl anning for Differentiated Instruction? In order to answer this question, data gath ered during observations and conferences with the apprentices was collected, as well as less on plans, portfolio submissions, and personal communications written by the apprentices. The three apprentices selected to participate in this study represented one high-poverty el ementary school in an urban school district in Florida. All apprentices were female. One limitation to th is study was scheduling. There were many times throughout the year when an observation needed to be rescheduled due to conflict. There were times when a rescheduled lesson did not go throu gh the revision process, or it may have been taught out of context in the classroom. Add itionally, because I only taught three workshops on differentiation, and then observed and attended conferences rega rding those three subsequent lessons, a second limitation is the limited number of lesson plans for analysis. There may have been further instances where differentiation was used that were not capture d. Finally, it was often difficult to find evidence of self -regulation within the themes due to the limited reflection-type questions the apprentices answered. Questions designed to probe the apprentices thinking
17 regarding how they decided to make or not make particular changes to their plans would have provided valuable information regarding their development in self-regu lating their teaching.
18 Table 1-1. Taxonomy of Alternative Approaches to Certification (Feistritzer & Chester, 2000) Class Description A This class is designed to at tract talented individuals with at least a bachelors degree in a field other than education. Th ese programs are not restricted to teacher shortages. These programs provide necessa ry mentoring and instruction before, during, and after the school year. B This class follows the same guidelines as class A in terms of recruitment. The only difference is that thes e programs provide specifica lly designed mentoring and formal instruction. In addition, these progr ams are restricted to shortage and/or secondary grade level and/or subject areas. C This class reviews the individuals professional and academic background. Participants receive individualized in-ser vice training and coursework necessary to reach competencies required for certificat ion. State and local school districts have major responsibility for program implementation. D This class follows the same guidelines as class C except an institution of higher education has major responsibil ity for program implementation. E This class includes post-baccalaureate programs which are based at an institution of higher education. F This class includes the preparation of teachers through emergency teacher certification implemented by local school dist ricts. Prospective teacher are issued emergency certificates that allow them to teach. These teachers do not receive the same support as class A or B teachers. Th ese teachers are expected to complete the traditional teacher education c ourses requisite for full certification. G This class allows individuals who have few requirements left to fulfill before becoming certified through the traditionally approved college teacher education program. This can be individuals with a minor in education, certified individuals relocating from another state, certified indi viduals in one content area seeking to become certified in another, and individua ls in other Alternative Certification programs changing to another program. H This class allows individuals with s pecial qualifications to teach certain subjects. For example, Toni Morrison could teach AfricanAmerican Literature without certification. I Some states refuse to offer alternative routes to teaching. J This class encourages individuals inte rested in becoming teachers who do not yet have a bachelors degree to work as para professionals as they become certified to teach. (Not part of Feistrit zer and Chesters Framework).
19 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Given that this study focused on understanding how apprentice teachers in the Alternative Certification Apprenticeship Progr am of an urban school district in Florida develop in their planning and implementation of Differentiated Inst ruction, this review of the literature provides an overview of four major areas of research th at underpin, situate, and inform this study. The four areas include Alternativ e Certification, planning, Differe ntiated Instruct ion, and selfregulation. Although not exhaustive, this review makes a case for the importance of the study as well as identifies self-regulatory processes that could potentially influence teacher development in the area of instructional planning. Alternative Certification In reviewing the conceptual and empirical altern ative approaches to certification literature, a number of essential elements emerge as central to the growth and retention of quality teachers. These elements, presented in Table 2.1, fall under two overarching themes: Quality Control, which is often viewed as a bureaucratic and gate keeping function, and Professional Development, which focuses on teacher learning within a specific teaching context. In combination, the elements that emerge under these two themes offer insight into the structures that support quality teacher pr eparation and enhance the likel ihood of retaining these newly recruited and highly needed teachers. The elements that are included within the Qu ality Control theme highlight the importance of: 1) the evaluation of new teachers (Brooks, 19 87), 2) the documentation and evaluation of the teacher preparation activities (Haberman, 1991, 2002; Haberman and Rickards, 1990), 3) a viable selection process used to identify successful teaching candidates for specific contexts (Haberman, 1991), and 4) the monitoring of candida te progression towards certification (Huling-
20 Austin, 1990). The second theme that underpins qua lity preparation of al ternatively certified teacher candidates is Professional Development (Huling-Austin, 1990; Darling-Hammond, 1992; McKibbin & Ray, 1994; Bradshaw & Hawk, 1996; Jelmberg, 1996; Miles-Nixon & Holloway, 1997; Berry, 2001). The elements identified as es sential under the umbrella of Professional Development include: 1) a ment ored field experience of subs tantial duration (Berry, 2001; Feistritzer, 1996, 1998; Feistritzer & Chester, 2000; Haberman, 1991; and Huling-Austin, 1990), and 2) the development of contextually sensit ive professional knowledge. Berry (2001) indicates that effective alternative preparation programs appear to last from 9 to 15 months with substantial mentoring support. This mentored fi eld experience necessitates a skilled mentor who can provide one-on-one teacher support targeted at the teachers own classroom, own students, and unique professional challenge s. According to Feiman-Nem ser (1999), good mentoring is a complex activity that is essential for entry into the profession. Quality mentoring requires careful mentor preparation and support within a work c ontext that enables mentors to work with novice teachers. In addition to the element of providing quali ty mentoring within the field experience, efforts must also be made to cultivate the pr ofessional knowledge essential to enhancing teacher performance (Feistritzer & Ch ester, 2000). The professional knowledge element must be contextually sensitive and influence the form at of the induction program (Brooks, 1987). This effort requires opportunities for teaching candidates to: deepen content knowledge (Berry, 2001), enhance their repertoire of in structional methods (Berry, 2001 ; Haberman, 1991), develop strong classroom management skills that are effective for the student population being served (Berry, 2001; Haberman, 1991), prepare teachers to unde rstand, implement, monitor, and develop curricula that is appropriate for their student s (Haberman, 1991), and enhance teacher knowledge
21 of the context, politics, and culture of schools and teaching (H uling-Austin, 1990). As indicated, the alternative preparation of teachers requires a complex interaction between teacher learning and structural support targeted at enhancing teacher performance. Given that these elements are central to alternative entry fo r teaching candidates, a review of the literature by Darling-Hammond, Wise, & Kline (1999) and Marchant (1990) found that alternatively prepared teachers had difficulty wi th a particular subset of these professional activities: curricu lum development, pedagogical knowledge, classroom management, attention to learning styles, and organizational skills. Addi tionally, Cleveland (2003) echoed concern for these factors as he identified organization/diso rganization, support/lack of support, coursework, mentoring, time, and frustration as challeng es alternatively certified teachers face. Adding to this complexity, the measurement of teacher quality is also complicated by multiple orientations toward the knowledge ba se of teaching. For example, Darling-Hammond & Berry (1988) articulated th e presence of two dominant orient ations to teacher preparation. The first is the bureaucratic orientat ion that emphasizes techniques, t ools, and methods as central to teacher learning and effective teaching. The s econd orientation recognizes the professional nature of teaching that requires moving beyond t echniques, tools, and methods to emphasize the complex decision-making that teachers must engage in on behalf of children. Current definitions of teacher competence emerge from the Natio nal Board for Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS), the Interstate New Teacher Asse ssment Support Consortium (INTASC) and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). According to Mitchell, Robinson, Plake, & Knowles (2001), these three se ts of standards explicitly acknowledge that teachers actions or performances depend on ma ny kinds of knowledge and on dispositions to use that knowledge and to work with others to support the learning and success of all students
22 (p.4). As a result, the professional, rather than th e bureaucratic orientation, needs to be evident in the framework for developing the complex profe ssional knowledge necessary for the growth of alternatively certified teachers. In summary, literature on Alternative Certifica tion stresses a need for quality mentoring of the teacher candidate by a str ong teacher of record (Berry, 2001; Feistritzer, 1996, 1998; Feistritzer & Chester, 2000; Haberman, 1991; and Huling-Austin, 1990). Additionally, much attention is focused on the evaluation of new t eachers and what criteria are considered in determining whether a new teacher is successful. Mo st literature agrees that teaching is more than the interactions between th e teacher, the content, and the students. Teaching also includes professional knowledge that integrates content knowledge, curriculum development, pedagogical knowledge, classroom management, and attention to learning styles. This type of knowledge is referred to as pedagogical content knowledge (PCK ) (Grossman, 1990). It is within the area of cultivating PCK that many novice teachers st ruggle (Darling-Hammond, Wise, & Kline, 1999; Marchant, 1990). Unanswered in the literature is how teacher educators can develop this needed professional knowledge in alterna tively certified teachers as they enter and work within the classroom. Additionally, how can te acher educators provide this support just in time, before the issues become serious problems in these new teachers classrooms? Planning One area of teacher development that contributes to developing a professional rather than a bureaucratic orientation to teaching is the central role of the teacher in planning for instruction. The professional orientation relie s on the teacher as a curricular decision-maker and this orientation is needed for the implementation of Di fferentiated Instruction. In learning to plan and develop a classroom curriculum, a teacher need s have not only content knowledge, but also pedagogical content knowledge, and an ability to plan for specific student needs through the use
23 of Differentiated Instruction. The sections that follow illustrate the concepts of pedagogical content knowledge, Differentiated Instruction, an d lesson planning which are each essential to understanding the professi onal knowledge orientati on to learning to teach. Pedagogical Content Knowledge By developing a novices ability to plan for instruction, the novice will become better prepared to make professional decisions base d on complex professional knowledge. The most complex form of professional knowledge is referr ed to as pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and PCK prominently appears in the process of instructional planning. Building on Grossman (1990), Shulman (1986, 1987), and Magnusson et als (1999) work, pedagogical content knowledge is the teachers ability to transf orm content knowledge into pedagogy by planning learning experiences that organi ze and represent the knowledge a nd processes of a content area in light of particular contexts and students The construction of PC K is an intellectually demanding and complex activity that cannot be captured in a curric ulum designed to allow little teacher input. PCK requires the teacher to be a skilled decision maker who integrates and crafts the features of content, contex t, students, self, and pedagogy in unique ways. Developing novice teachers as decision makers who can cultivate pedagogical content knowle dge is essential in teacher preparation. Alternatively prepared begi nning teachers, who are often placed in urban schools, must construct the pedagogical conten t knowledge necessary to design, implement, assess, and adjust instruction to some of the mo st challenged students in some of our hardest to teach contexts. One way to cultivate and access the development of PCK is by attending to the process of instructional planning. Given that few have investigated this notion of how alternatively ce rtified novice teachers develop in their ability to plan for Differentiate d Instruction, I expanded th e search terms used to include traditional teacher prepar ation and professional development efforts. As a result, the
24 literature for this review of instructional plan ning comes from a search of three databases: WilsonWeb, ERIC, and the Professional Develo pment Collection of EBSCOHost. Search terms included: pre-service teachers, Differentia ted Instruction, diffe rentiation, curriculum development, interns, teachers, coaching, A lternative Cer tification, planning, and lesson planning. These terms were search ed individually and in combin ation. This literature, although not exhaustive and, in some cases, focused on ot her pathways to teachi ng, sets the stage for helping us understand how alternatively certif ied teachers, those gaining certification through means other than a four-year degree granting uni versity teacher education program, develop in their ability to plan for instruction. Given that a lesson plan is a way for a teach er to systematically and purposefully develop a guide for facilitating student learning, teachers need to incor porate learning and instructional theory into their planning process (Panasuk & Todd, 2005). Existing literatu re discusses the need for prospective teachers to practice writing and imp lementing their lesson plans in an authentic classroom setting in order to learn how to write lesson plans (Davenport & Smetana, 2004; Ornstein, 1997). Ornstein (1997) also argues th at learning how to plan solely in teacher education classes is only moderately effective; instead, novice teachers need to observe and talk with veteran teachers about their lessons. On ce novice teachers gain classroom experience, Ornstein (1997) says, they are better able to targ et instruction to student needs and abilities. Given these findings, the opportunity to implem ent planned lessons within an authentic classroom context appears critical to novice t eacher development in th e area of planning for instruction. In his conceptual piece, Ornstein (1997) also describes the parts of a lesson plan and how a novice teacher begins to plan for each section. Orns tein discusses the com ponents of an inclusive
25 lesson plan: objective, attentiongrabber, activities/content, methods, materials, summary, and assessment/homework. He further explains that novice teachers lessons at first focus on what the teacher is doing throughout the lesson, and eventu ally the teachers gaze shifts to a focus on students needs and what students are lear ning. Additionally, Davenport & Smetana (2004) emphasized in their conceptual piece that when teach ers write detailed lesson plans, they are able to develop stronger lessons. They (Davenport & Smetana, 2004) further state that, although many new teachers try to avoid writing detailed lessons, doing so means they are thinking through the lessons, thus creating stronger lessons than they would otherwise. The research on planning also identifies pha ses that emerge as teachers develop. For example, a number of studies describe how novice teachers ability to plan appropriate lessons develops through time and with experien ce (John, 1991; Kim & Sharp, 2000; Thompson & Smith, 2004). John (1991) explains the growth in pl anning exhibited in the specific cases of five preservice, secondary teachers over the course of their internship year. His study centered on several research ques tions geared toward the tho ught practices of these five interns. Further, this study tried to determine what factors influenced the perspectives of novice teachers in writing their lesson plans. John (1991) found eviden ce that the interns moved through specific developmental phases in their plan ning, planning for student need, and available resources before incorporating subject matter. In the first of these stages, pres ervice teachers think about what they want to teach, including the topic, res ources, and activities; they may consult with colleagues in this phase. During the second stage, preservice teachers more formally consider those ideas and organize them into a narrower idea of what can be done in their specific classroom. Finally in the third phase, preservice teachers put their ideas together into the actual classroom plan, which may be then used to guide them during the presentation of the lesson. As
26 they gained practical ex perience, a key influence to their plan ning, the preservice teachers passed through these stages more quickly (John, 1991). One component of instructional planning that research indicates is difficult for novice teachers to develop is purposeful strategy se lection. Kim and Sharp (2000) noted that, although preservice teachers may understand the importance of incorporating specific learning strategies into their lessons, they were unabl e to clearly explain either a part icular strategy or when to use it. Anhalt, Ward, & Vinson (2006) f ound that over time, preservice teachers assign more tasks to the students, rather than filling the lesson with lecture and teacher constructed activities. By taking the work away from themselves and gi ving it to their student s, novice teachers are increasing the active learning time their students receive. In thei r qualitative study of elementary education majors in a mathematics methods class, Anhalt, et al. (2006) illu strated that the types of tasks changed during the course of the semest er as well, with an increase in tasks that encourage student thinking. Thompson and Smith s study (2004), focusing on the development of a new university program for preparing prospe ctive teachers to teach in a high needs, urban setting, found that given time to experience plan ning, preservice teachers felt they were better able to meet both long and short term stude nt needs. The key, however, is time spent implementing those plans in a student classroom. Research on field experiences has historically indicated the power of the teaching context in influencing novice teachers appr oaches to teaching. In line with that research, this study (Kim & Sharp, 2000) determined that th e transfer of instruc tional strategies from the methods class to the prepared lesson plan was limited at best. Similarly, Jones and Vesi lind (1996) found that lesson plans created by middle-grades preser vice teachers changed through their field
27 experiences to reflect their experiences in their field placements rather than due to what they were learning during their uni versity methods classes. Another complication related to planning fo r instruction highlights the difficulty of automatizing novices process for instructional pl anning based on the student learning goal. Although preservice teachers coul d explain the value in planni ng a lesson by starting with the required standard or chosen objective, many s till planned their lessons around their chosen activity, believing they would improve this order with experience (Strangis, Pringle, & Knopf, 2006). As indicated, developing pedagogical conten t knowledge is an in tellectually demanding and complicated process that takes time and fi rst hand experience. Novice teachers must have authentic experiences if they are to create this professional knowledge an d assume a professional orientation to teaching. These authentic experiences provide a living text that influences their instructional planning decision ma king. Without authentic experien ces, they are creating lessons for students without attention to the unique variation in student n eeds within a class and without a deep understanding of each students unique need s. The literature does indicate that these planning experiences allow novices to shift thei r lessons from teacher-centered to studentcentered activities as they strengthen th eir planning ability. Differentiated Instruction As discussed, the instructional planning pr ocess requires teachers to use pedagogical content knowledge to make decisions regarding strategies and content, based on the specific needs of the students in the teachers classroom By differentiating inst ruction, teachers learn how to make these planning decisions in light of particular students and contexts. Differentiated Instruction (DI) is an approach that recognizes the stre ngths and weaknesses of diverse learners and requires the teacher to base instructional accommodations on those strengths and weaknesses
28 (Tomlinson, 2001). Specifically, DI strategies are used by the teacher to adjust the content, process, or product of instruction depending on the needs of the students (Tomlinson, 2001). To date, little empirical research has focuse d on how prospective teachers develop their understanding of planning for instruction and fo r using DI strategies. Additionally, only a handful of studies have explic itly explored how the coaching process can help support teacher development in the areas of instructional planning and Differentiated Instruction. Differentiated Instruction is an approach to teaching that allows st udents the opportunity to gain, process, or present their learning in a manner that addresses their readiness level, interest, or learning style (Tomlinson, 2001). Differentiated Instruction incr eases learning for all students by incorporating active learning, student interest, and student learning style into lessons (Lawrence-Brown, 2004). McTigue and Brown (2005) ag ree that effective instruction takes into account these individual differen ces, and that active, purposef ul learning, as promoted by differentiating, is the best way for students to learn. Davenport and Smetana (2004) also state that teacher candidates must learn to differentiate instruction if th ey are to meet the needs of all students. Teaching in this manner allows all students to learn at their level, including both gifted students and those with learning disabilities. Curriculum for students with severe disabilities should be prioritized so they ar e learning both the goals on their Individualiz ed Education Plans and their appropriate grade-level standards (Lawrence-Brown, 2004). Gi fted students who may need enriched rather than prioritized curriculum also stand to gain from having their needs met. The main difficulties teachers face when trying to accommodate the needs of their gifted students include a lack of subject knowle dge and difficulties modifying the curriculum (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2005).
29 In addition to learning how to plan lessons prospective teachers also learn how to accommodate for student differences in their planning. According to Ladson-Billings (1995), accounting for student differences is a necessary component of planning for student success. This is especially true in schools with a minor ity population, where Ladson-Billings (1995) says teachers should use student culture as a means to increase student interest and achievement. In addition to accommodating for differences in cultur e, preservice teachers also need to learn to plan for differences in student achievement levels. In Preservice teacher preparation in meeting the needs of gifted and other academically diverse students (Tomlinson et al., 1995), the authors discuss the need for novice teachers to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all students. This focus on accommodating student differences requires recognizing the differing needs of students, and then providing assignments and further evaluation according to those needs Tomlinson et al., 1995). One recommendation is to pre-assess students and then group them by need (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2005). The role of mentoring and modeling also is key to novices ability to understand and use Differentiated Instruction Preservice teachers should be exposed to real models of DI, either in person or video and be offered guidance while learning how to plan differentiated lessons (Davenport & Smetana, 2004; Edwards, Carr, & Si egel, 2006; Tomlinson et al., 1995). Brimijoin and Aloufs study (2003) focused on professional development for mentor teachers and the effects of that development on their preservice teachers. In part, this study used surveys, completed by mentor teachers, about the training they received in workshops during the school year and summer as well as their mentoring re sponsibilities throughout th e school year. Surveys were also completed by both mentor teachers an d preservice teachers con cerning their own work and skill level in differentiating student instru ction. This study found that differentiation in
30 professional development would be beneficial and further training pr ovided to mentor teachers in DI and how to model the approach would also help them coach their preservice teachers effectively. Both Edwards et al. (2006) and To mlinson et al. (1995) ex press that the key to modeling is the power of pres ervice teachers observation of veteran teachers using the differentiation strategies in thei r classrooms. Tomlinson et al. (1995) found that current support for novice teachers in implementing DI is not sufficient; they need more guidance in implementing these strategies within the existing classroom structure. Edwards, Carr, and Siegel (2006) also note room for improvement in the ar ea of preparing preservi ce teachers in teacher education programs to plan for meeti ng the needs of diverse learners. Several of the studies also discussed time, pace of change, and lack of resources as constraints faced by veteran, mentor, and preser vice teachers in both planning and implementing DI strategies in the classroom. For example, Edwards, Carr, and Siegel (2006) found that successfully implementing Differentiated Instructi on in a classroom is something that takes time for both new and veteran teachers to accomp lish. Lawrence-Brown (2004) suggests adding differentiation slowly over time, rather than trying to differentiate everything all at once. Teachers entering the profession need to also be aware of circumstances outside of their control that may hinder implementation of DI, such as lack of funding, planni ng time, and supervisory support (Renick, 1996). However, collaboration with other teachers (Lawrence-Brown, 2004) may make the work easier and further promot e student learning. Add itionally, Renick (1996) found that several hindrances, such as lack of funding, planning time, and supervisory support, can prevent teachers from executing these strategies to the extent to which they would like. John (1991) states that preservice teachers experience th e planning phases at their own rates; as they gain experience in planning and teaching, they go through the phases more quickly. Also
31 changing over time is the idea of a classroom be ing a mutual environment, where the students needs play a role in planning, rather than the teacher being in control of all aspects of the classroom (Jones & Vesilind, 1996). In short, although differentiation is a critical part of planni ng lessons to promote learning for all students, it is not a task that novice teachers can tackle without support from their mentors and seeing the strategies modeled, either in person or by means of video. Literature does not discuss either how teachers learn how to differe ntiate or what they think as they plan differentiated lessons for their students. Self-regulation Life-long learning has become the professional language in education that refers to the concept of self-regulated learning. Schloemer a nd Brennan (2006) suggest that self-regulated learners are the type of professionals that many organizations seek because of their ability to adapt to a changing environment (p.81). Van Eekelen, Boshuizen, and Vermunt (2005) define self-regulated learning as the degree that one is cognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally an active participant in his or her own learning process. The concept of self-regulation has recently emerged within the teacher lear ning literature and this concep t offers insight into the way teachers learn within th e context of teaching. Self-regulation by learners finds its roots in Vygoskys theory of verbal self-regulation (Vygotsky, as cited in Randi, 2004), and can be applied in this study since the apprentice teachers are learning how to teach within a spec ific classroom context. Vygotskys theory (as cited in Randi, 2004) includes th e notion of the zone of proximal development, which is the distance between what a learner knows and can do on his or her own, and what a learner can do with help. In order for the learne r to be able to accomplish the more difficult task without help, scaffolding (Bruner, as cited in Manning & Payne, 1993) may occur. Scaffolding is the
32 assistance given to a learner, which is slowly rem oved as the learner gains the ability to complete a task on his or her own. In terms of teacher e ducation, scaffolding throug h means of dialogue is often used to help novice teachers learn how to se lf-regulate (Pintrich, 2000) the idea being that frequent dialogue between a learner and teacher w ill help the learner use self-talk as a means to develop self-regulation skills (Manning & Payne, 1993). The idea of self-regulation in te acher education springs from th e view that a teacher should view herself and be viewed as a learner (Man ning & Payne, 1993). As such, literature that involves self-regulation can be applied to t hose learning to be a teacher. There are many definitions for self-regulation, several of which in clude the idea that self-regulation occurs when a teacher is conscious of his or her own thoughts and decisions as they are happening, and then reflects on those thoughts and takes action (Greene & Azevedo, 2007; Manning & Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004;). According to Manning and Payne (1993) pro-activity is a key characteristic of a self-regulated teacher; pro-activity being the ability of a teacher to do more than simply realize a situation is occurring in the cl assroom. A pro-active teacher take s that realization and instantly thinks about how to handle the s ituation, thinking about [his or her] decisions on how best to put out fires or even to leave them burni ng (Manning and Payne, 1993). Additionally, a selfregulated learner can be described as someone who is, active, efficiently managing their own learning through monitoring and strategy us e (as cited in Greene & Azevedo, 2007). Vygotskys theory (as cited in Randi, 2004) also describes development as a very individualized process, where two people engaged in the same experience interpret and learn from that experience differently. Manning and Payne (1993) state that individual development cannot be easily measured and quantified, but inst ead is more like quali tative shifts as the unique past experiences and previo us knowledge of individuals inte ract with the present learning
33 event. This interaction varies from individual to individual and explains why preservice teachers experience the same learning experience in a multitu de of ways. Because each apprentice is an individual, with very different prior experiences and knowledge bases, each developed within each theme at a very different rate. Development of self-regulation skills is similarly a very individualized process. According to Corno (2001), self-regulation is de fined as the efforts th at a learner puts forth to both control and monitor his or her motivation, concentration, and affect to protect his or her goals. Self-regulation learning is when, the teacher independen tly and consciously directs the process of attaining learner goa ls. The degree to which a teacher is able to do so makes the teacher more or less a self-regulated lear ner (Van Eekelen, Boshuizen, & Vermunt, 2005). According to Kolb (1984), experiential learning places the learner in an active role as they experience, reflect, conceptualize, experiment situations. Learning through experience is important to self-regulation. Zimmerman and Schunk (2001) define self-regulat ed learning as the degree that one is meta-cognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process. In this case, active refers to the degr ee to which a teacher is e ngaged in self-generating thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that are oriented toward the learning goals. The degree to which a teacher is able to engage in these activ ities determines the extent to which the teacher engages in self-regulation. In a summary of em pirical literature relate d to self-regulation, Van Eekelen, Boshuizen, and Vermunt (2005), drawin g on the work of Candy (1991), Eraut et al. (1998), and Kwakman (1999) suggest the uncon scious character of work-related learning processes (p.450). Their review suggests that: 1) most adu lt learners are not aware of themselves in the learner role, 2) serendipity plays an important role in learning, 3) much
34 learning arises from and seeks to resolve a sp ecific problem situation, 4) very few learning endeavors are entirely self-regulated, but inst ead depend on individual motives and interests shaped by interaction with other people, and 5) that se lf-regulated learning at the workplace is complex and unpredictable, unf olding as it goes along. The theory of Self-regulation has been app lied to developing prospective and practicing teachers. For example, Manning & Payne (1993) iden tified five tenets that could assist teachers in self-regulation: 1) teachers should be proac tive in their approach to classroom management and instruction (Manning & Payne, as cited in Randi, 2004); 2) teacher s should be aware of which instructional strategies they choose; 3) preservice teachers should gradually be given more responsibility in maintaining the classroom; 4) teacher education progr ams should emphasize dialogue so that teachers will ul timately internalize conversations about principles of teaching and learning into self-thoughts th at direct their teaching practices (Manning & Payne, as cited in Randi, 2004); 5) self-talk should become a reminder fo r teachers to take certain actions they have already internalized. Common amongst the many ideas within self-regulation is that reflection is a key component to becoming a self-regulated learner (Perry & Drummond, 2002; Manning & Payne, 1993; Van Eekelen et. al 2005). Additionall y, Paris and Paris (as cited in Randi, 2004) state that a reflective community of teachers who ar e critically studying their own habits of selfregulation will help delve more deeply into their thoughts and behaviors as teachers. Several proposed models of self-regulati on can be found in the existing literature (Manning & Payne, 1993; Pintric h, 2000; Winne & Hadwin, 1998). Pi ntrichs (2000) model (see table 2.3) includes four phases of self-regulation (forethought/pla nning/ activation, monitoring, control, and reaction/reflectio n) and four areas of regula tion (cognition, motivation/affect, behavior, and context). Therefore, an adult learner will learn to re gulate each of the four areas
35 while passing through each of the four phases. For example, a teacher-a s-learner can cognitively identify a learning goal (forethought), perhaps to learn how to use CHAMPS as a classroom management program. Once the learner thinks about what she already knows about this program (monitoring), a plan of action is created and implemented (control), and CHAMPS is attempted in the classroom. Once the plan is in motion, the learner then reacts to and reflects on the process, and can then restart the cycle. Since self-regulation is such an individualized process (Manning & Payne, 1993), each apprentice moved thr ough those phases at very different rates. In looking across the self-regulati on literature, there seem to be four factors that influence the degree to which one engages in self-regula ted learning. These factors are cognitive, motivational, behavioral, and contextual in nature The first three factors focus on the nature of the individual. However, the fourth factor sugge sts the influence of the demand to learn or the demands on learning presented by the specific context. Ball a nd Cohen (1999) also emphasize the importance of context in teacher learning as they noted that, Teachers cannot accomplish the work of teaching unless they know how to lear n in the contexts of their work (p.1832). Additionally, when synthesizing the work of Pintrich (2000) and Vancouver (2000), three phases emerge within the proce ss of self regulation: task id entification and planning which focuses on the creation of goals, monitoring and c ontrol of learning strate gies which emphasizes identifying means to attain the goals, and a reac tion or reflection stage wh ich requires identifying means to assess the current state. Recognizi ng the importance of the phases and factors influencing self-regulation, an understanding of th e type of cognitive architecture the teacher needs to engage in self-regulati on is important. In this case, teach er cognitive architecture refers to the attempt to model not only behavior, but also structural properties of the teachers thinking.
36 This study seeks to better understa nd the teachers cognitive arch itecture related to planning for Differentiated Instruction. Self-re gulation appears to be a concep t that could inform this study. The theory of self-regulation as it applies to teachers-as-learners e xplains the notion that teachers pro-actively make decisions to reflect their classroom goals, both for themselves as learners and for their students. Se lf-regulation is a cri tical component in help ing teachers teach to the context of their own classrooms; being a refl ective and self-regulating practitioner allows the teacher to genuinely know their students and what they need to do to increase learning for all. Questions remain as to how novice, alternativel y certified teachers l earn to self-regulate, especially as alternatively certi fied novice teachers come from a different work context where they may already be skilled at self-regulating their work. Limitations in Found Lite rature and Conclusions One limitation of several studies is their limited number of data sources. With only one data source, it is likely that results of those st udies were inadequate. A dditionally, only one of the studies (Tomlinson et al., 1995) focused solely on preservice teachers and DI, leaving a great deal of room for continued research on this to pic. However, two of the studies (Brimijoin & Alouf, 2003; Edwards, Carr, & Siegel, 2006) di d study the effects of developing teacher education programs to allow for learning and pr actice of DI strategies. One shortcoming of Anhalt et al. (2006) is that the teacher candidate s did not teach the lessons they planned; they wrote the lessons for a methods class but did not implement them in a classroom setting. Limited research exists on the subject of lesson planning and how novice teachers develop skills in planning appropriate le ssons for their students. There was no research found concerning Alternatively Certified Teachers an d their learning and implementation of DI strategies, which is an important topic of research considering the number of teachers who will be entering the profession through this type of program in the near future. Further work needs to be done in the
37 combined areas of Differentiated In struction and Alternative Certific ation, especially in the area specific to how alternatively certified teachers le arn to plan in order to accommodate the needs of all of their students. Due to the specific context in which th e novice teachers in this study are working, research related to high poverty, high minority populat ion schools and alternative teacher certification programs is also warrant ed. Also missing from the literature is work regarding self-regulation and preservice or novice teachers. Because of these limitations in the literature, further studies in these areas are warranted. The literature reviewed in th is chapter provides the concep tual background for exploring how alternatively certifie d apprentices develop in their planni ng abilities, and as part of that development understand whether and how these t eachers begin to use self-regulation as a means to improve their instructional planning. In the fo llowing chapter, the context of this study is explained, along with a description of the partic ipants. Following Chapter 3, Chapter 4 describes the research methods. Chapters 57 illustrate the cases of the th ree participants. Finally, Chapter 8 includes a discussion of the study, its limita tions, and needs for further research.
38 Table 2-1. Essential Elements of Alte rnative Teacher Preparation Programs Two Facets of Induction Essential Elements Teacher evaluation Program documentation & evaluation Selection process Quality Control Monitor progress towards certification Mentored field experience Contextually sensitive professional knowledge Content knowledge Instructional methods Classroom management Curriculum Professional Development School culture & politics
39Table 2-2. Phases & Areas of Self-Regula tion. From Pintrich, P.R. (2000) The role of goal orientat ion in self-regulated learn ing. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp.452-502). New York: Academic Press. Areas for Regulation 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 1. Forethought, Planning, Activation -target goal setting -prior content knowledge activation -metacognitive knowledge activation goal orientation adoption efficacy judgments -ease of learning judgments -perceptions of task difficulty -task value activation -interest interaction [Time and effort planning] [Planning for selfobservations of behaviors] [Perceptions of task] [Perceptions of context] 2. Monitoring -metacognitive awareness and monitoring of cognition -awareness and monitoring of motivation and affect -Awareness and monitoring of effort, time use, need for help -monitoring changing task and context conditions 3. Control -selection and adaptation of cognitive strategies for learning and thinking -selection and adaptation of strategies for managing affect and motivation -increase/decrease effort -persist; give up -help-seeking behavior -change or renegotiate task -change or leave context 4. Reaction & Reflectio n -cognitive judgments -attributions -affective reactions -attributions -choice behavior -evaluation of context
40 CHAPTER 3 PROGRAM CONTEXT AND DESCRIPTION Teachers entering Floridas Alternative Cer tification Program (ACP) can choose to be part of the Transition to Teaching (TTT) progr am. This program covers the cost of all certification classes as well as a teaching stipend with the commitment from the program participants to teach in a Title I school for th ree years after earning pr ofessional certification. A Title I school is one which has at least 50% of its students are living in low income households (http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ ESEA/Title_I/swpguid1.html). Four counties in Florida participated in this program, with an additi onal eight counties participating through district grants. A grant participant is awarded federal T itle I funding over a five-y ear period to recruit, train, and retain non-College of Education, second career candidates to teach in high-needs areas. The Florida urban district in this study was a gran t participant during th e 2006-2007 school year. The particular program was a University-bas ed apprenticeship program, where candidates holding a bachelors degree or higher are paid to work as classroom paraprofessionals while they take classes toward certifica tion. During 2006-2007, fifteen apprenti ce teachers were selected to participate in this program at two Title I elementary schools. Participants entered the program after completing the application process, which includes an interview with a committee. Af ter acceptance into the program, apprentices are placed with a mentor teacher who is currently working in the cl assroom. In addition to this mentor, a coach is employed through the University who works at the school three days per week. This coach observes lessons, helps with planning, and provide s as needed support to each apprentice-mentor team. During the year-long placement, apprentices are in their assigned classrooms four days each week. On each Thursday, they attend classe s provided by the University. These classes are generally taught by the coach, at no immediate cost to the appr entices. These classes include
41 teaching methods, classroom management, best practices, and lesson pl anning across curricular areas. Apprentices are given practice-based assign ments to complete in order to help them demonstrate exemplary teaching practices, for ex ample lesson plans and projects which can be applied in their classrooms. Many of theses practice-based assignments become evidence for their electronic portfolio which is a summative evaluation tool that provides evidence of the novices work in each of the Florid a Educator Accomplished Practices. Throughout the first semester of the year, apprentices begi n by observing their mentor and other teachers in the building. At times they also co-teach with their coach. As the semester progresses, they slowly assume more responsibil ities, such as leading a reading group or word wall practice. After a few months, depending on the capability of the apprentice, they begin assuming more responsibility inst ructing the class, first for one lesson at a time, then gaining more and more time as lead teacher. In March, apprentices generally take over the majority of the preparation for the day, always with the mentor s support as needed. In the event that some apprentices are not yet ready for this step, they continue teaching comp onents of the day as determined by their mentor teacher and coach. The Apprenticeship experience concludes at the end of the school year. At this time, apprentices are required to presen t a portfolio of artifacts that demonstrate their growth during the year, as well as their unders tanding of the Florida Educat or Accomplished Practices. The portfolios are presented to a committee consistin g of the apprentice coach the university coach, and several other members of school and district staff. This committee determines whether each apprentice shows beginning, developing, or accomplis hed practice. By this point, apprentices are responsible for taking and passing ea ch of the required state certification exams in order to be
42 hired as a permanent employee. If they do not m eet this requirement, th eir position can only be considered temporary until they pass each test. As stated previously, appren tices do not pay tuition for thei r methods classes as long as they meet the final requirement that they must teach in a high-needs school (at least 40% of students are on free or reduced cost lunch) for the next three years. If th ey move to a non-highneeds school, they are required to repay the cost of their courses. After the three years to which they agreed, they may then transfer wherever th ey like. The goal of the program, however, is for at least 90% of those teachers to remain employe d in a high-needs school at the end of the threeyear period. School Context In the case of the apprentices in this study, each worked in a high-needs school, where approximately 95% of the students receive free or reduced cost lunch. High-needs schools such as these have very high teacher turnover rates, and the goal of this apprenticeship program is to encourage teachers to remain in the urban schools over the course of their professional career. Any new teacher faces challenges they may not f eel prepared for, but alternatively certified teachers in schools such as these face even greater challenges. Thus, it is in the best interest of teacher educators to prepare these participants for the ch allenges they will face. The two schools involved in the apprenticeshi p program are part of a center affiliated with the University which works with high-need s schools throughout Florida to increase student learning. The Center provides these schools w ith professional development opportunities for teachers and principals, creating a professional learning community relationship between school and University faculty (J. Davenport & L. Smet ana, 2004). Elementary School A and Elementary School B are both located in urban Florida neighborhoods.
43 Elementary School A is a magnet school, its theme being Foreign Language, Art, and Music Enrichment. Eighty-two percent of the 508 students are on free or reduced lunch. Ninetyseven percent of the students are black, two pe rcent are mixed, and one percent is white In 2007, Elementary School A received a school grade of C, a statewide measure of student gains on the FCAT. During the 2006-2007 school year, 318 students were enrolled at Elementary School B. Ninety-six percent of those students were el igible for free or reduced lunch. The student population included ninety-six percent black, two percent mixed, and one percent white. The demographic and Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) score information for Elementary School A and Elementary School B are illustra ted in a chart located in Appendix A. Demographic data includes en rollment numbers for each grade, racial breakdown, and percentage of students receiving free or reduced cost l unch. FCAT score data includes both 2006 and 2007 math and reading scores of third, fourth, and fift h grade students, as well as 2006 and 2007 fourth grade writing scor es and 2006 and 2007 fifth grade science scores. A chart showing Florida School Accountability ratings from 2002 until 2007 is also included, which denotes whether the school made Adequate Yearly Progress in reading, math, and, starting in 2007, science. Important to notice for both school s is the high percentage of students receiving free or reduced lunch, paired with the percentage of students in grades 3, 4, and 5 receiving scores of 4 or better on the FCAT. Additiona lly, neither Elementary School A or B showed enough improvement in their scores to make Ad equate Yearly Progress according to federal guidelines. This is important to note because it illustrates the need for strong teachers who are capable of helping students make learning gains, especially in schools such as these where students are struggling on FCAT.
44 Professional Development Professional development focused on differen tiating instruction, and specific methods and strategies became a part of the coursework. Differentiation was chosen as the focus for these workshops because differentiation increases lear ning for all students by changing the curriculum to adapt to student needs (Lawrence-Brown, 2004). In order for teachers to help all students find success, they need to know how to differen tiate their lessons (Davenport & Smetana, 2004). Additionally, this process was designed to help prospective teach ers develop in their capacity to self-regulate their instructiona l planning by working with myse lf and their coach to learn strategies for promoting reflection and self-talk. First, apprentices were responsible for wr iting and revising three lesson plans that incorporated Differentiated Instru ction strategies, and then teaching these lessons to students in their field placements. Lesson plans were writ ten using the Pathwise template, which is explained in further detail in the Pathwise sect ion below. A typical coaching cycle (Neubert & Stover, 1994) was used in this study, where the n ovice teacher discussed, in this case via email, the topic and expectations of the lesson, and th en had an observation and follow-up conference where the novice teacher and observer analyzed th e lesson. In the case of all three observations, the observation focus was the apprentices use of Differentiated Instruction. During the postobservation conference, differen tiation was the focus, but other topics, such as classroom management and lesson flow were discussed. This coaching cycle repeated three times throughout the year, and allowed th e apprentices to integrate lear ned experiences into lessons. Ornstein (1997) identified that novice teachers need to be able to practice teaching the planned lessons, otherwise principles of writing a good le sson plan will not be actively addressed Also, John (1991) argues that practical experiences are a primary influence on how novice teachers learn to plan for the next le sson. See Table 3-1 for a summary of data collection methods.
45 The Differentiated Instruction strategies incl uded differentiating lesson content or student product by interest or student readiness level. Le sson plans were submitted to the researcher via email prior to the lesson observation. The resear cher then read and made detailed questions, comments and suggestions regarding the lesson, whic h were emailed back to the apprentice. The apprentice could then make revisions as need ed before the lesson observation. Following the lesson observation, the apprentice and observer engaged in a postobservation conference, where the highlights of the lesson were discussed. Areas where the appr entice showed mastery, as well as areas needing further attention were covered, and the apprentice had the opportunity to ask or answer any questions from the lesson. Following the post-conference, the apprentice then submitted a reflection of the lesson, answering speci fic questions related to both the lesson plan and taught lesson. The format of this professional developmen t included lecture, group work, independent study, and video. See Table 3-1 for a chart listin g the methods and data collected during each professional development workshop. Each sessi on lasted approximately 3 hours. The first session took place in October of the apprenticeship year. The apprentices had been in their field placements for nearly two months, and most ha d at least a beginning understanding of their students. The first workshop introduced the main concepts of differentia tion, including types of grouping and possible places within the lesson that could be differentiated. This workshop was conducted by the researcher alone, and wa s lecture based. Prior to any discussion on differentiating, apprentices brainstormed both challe nges they face in helping meet the needs of all students, and the challenges some students might face during class. Three video clips of teachers using differentiated strategies were sh own during the session. Each clip was followed by a discussion of the teaching that was witnessed. Video was a selected medium for instruction
46 because it is very important for novice teacher s to see models of te achers correctly using effective strategies in their classrooms (Joan Davenport & Linda Smetana, 2004; Edwards, Carr, & Siegel, 2006), and video is practi cal for logistical reasons, as we ll as the ability to pause film and discuss. Apprentices discussed both bene fits and barriers they saw to differentiating instruction for all learners. They were then gi ven the assignment to differentiate a lesson based on readiness level, and were encouraged to us e a pre-assessment in order to determine those groups. The second session took place in January, when apprentices were beginning to assume more leadership of the classroom. The ideas presen ted at the first session were reviewed, and the apprentices were asked to create a lesson to be implemented during the next month, for Black History Month. A lesson template was provide d which included appropriate grade level standards and instructions for the completion of the lesson. For this lesson, apprentices were asked to create a lesson that di fferentiated by interest or learni ng style, or both. They spent one hour working with a grade level partner to create the lesson, and then fini shed the lesson on their own and submitted the lesson to the researcher. The final session took place in March, and was presented by both the researcher and another graduate student. During this lesson, cu lturally responsive teaching strategies were introduced as a parallel to Differentiated Inst ruction. The focus of the lesson was to help apprentices find ways to get to know their stude nts, which is a prerequisite to effective differentiation. The final lesson plan assignment was to create a lesson for any subject that differentiated by any method. The apprentices could email questions to the researcher if they needed assistance, but once the lessons were submitted, no suggestions were provided to the apprentices.
47 Table 3-1. Data Collection Methods Date Activities Data Collected 11/06/06 Professional Development Workshop: discussion of differing student needs video clips of teachers using differentiation with discussion assignment: create a lesson differentiated by learning style field notes from discussions rough drafts of first lesson plans 11/09/06 First lesson plans submitted, with lesson differentiated by readiness Comments made by researcher, and then returned to apprentices for revision. first draft of lesson plan feedback from researcher revised lesson plan 11/28/06, 12/06/06 Observation, conference with apprentice conducting planned differentiated lesson observation field notes conference notes with both researcher and apprentice comments 1/18/07 Professional Development Workshop: review of last session discussion of differentiation by learning style or interest grade level teams worked together to create a lesson for Black History Month using provided objectives field notes from group work 2/18/07 Second lesson plans submitted, with lesson differentiated by interest, learning style, or both Comments made by researcher, and then returned to apprentices for revision. first draft of lesson plan feedback from researcher revised lesson plan 3/27/07, 3/28/07 Observation, conference with apprentice conducting planned differentiated lesson field notes from observation conference notes with both researcher and apprentice comments 3/08/07 Professional Development Workshop: culturally responsive teaching strategies to learn how to get to know students field notes regarding culturally responsive strategies 5/13/07 Final lesson plans submitted. This lesson could be differentiated in any manner chosen by the apprentice. Lesson plan 5/15/07 Observation, conference field notes from observation conference notes with both researcher and apprentice comments 6/21/07 Portfolio presentation transcript of presentation
48 CHAPTER 4 METHODS Introduction The purpose of this study was to understand how apprentice teachers in the Alternative Certification Program in this urban school distri ct develop in their pla nning and implementation of Differentiated Instruction. Because existing l iterature in this area is limited, and because Alternative Certification is becoming a mainstream approach to teacher certification, understanding the factors that in fluence how these novice teachers le arn how to plan lessons to reach all of their students is beneficial. Once we are better able to unders tand this development, we will be able to use this knowledge to help future Alternative Certification candidates learn how to plan lessons to accommodate all of the learners within their classrooms. Theoretical Framework This study is of qualitative design, epistemol ogically grounded in constructivism. Using this epistemology requires that th e researcher become involved in the research to help construct the subjective reality that is under investigation (Hatch, 2002). In a constructivist study, the researcher uses naturalistic methods which require th at a great deal of time be spent in the natural setting of the participants in order to discover how they expe rience their surroundings (Hatch, 2002). Case study methods were used (Hatch, 2002), which included participant observation, data reduction, analysis of documents, and inte rpretation of data (C rotty, 1998). Because the purpose of the apprenticeship was fo r those novice teachers to gain skills to help them become effective teachers, the partic ipants learned about planning by way of workshops, teaching experiences, and observations. Additionally, the researcher became a participant observer by engaging as both the workshop instructor and obs ervation coach. For this reason, a constructivist design was appropriate. The qualitative approach was selected because the study sought to better
49 understand the process and factors influencing how individuals lear n to plan (Patton, 2002). To date, limited research is avai lable that connects novices expe riences learning to plan with Differentiated Instruction. The cases in this study were chosen ba sed on purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002) that specifically identified apprentices based on cer tain characteristics that showed maximum variation. Although there are common patterns esta blished between the cases they represented a span of instructional planning abilities. Sp ecifically, when looking at the apprentices to determine which of the eight would be studied, so me apprentices appeared more advanced than others. In order to capture the range of novi ce teachers learned to plan, a sophisticated apprentice, an apprentice who showed improve ment through the year, and an apprentice who was still learning fundamental skil ls at the end of the year were selected. This selection was based on consensus between the University coach who worked weekly with the apprentices, the university program advisor who had observed each of the apprentices teach, and the research who had both observed the apprentices and inst ructed them in workshops. By studying these three cases, the study would illuminate the range of needs and abilities related to planning of those seeking Alternative Certification within this program. Throughout this study, the researcher took a cue from philosopher Martin Buber and strived to create an I-Thou relationship (a s cited in Patton, 2002), where there is a relationship, mutuality, and genuine dialogue (Patton, 2002) between the researcher and subjects. In a practical sense, the researcher planned and conduc ted several workshops, took field notes, corresponded by email and phone with apprenti ces, and participated in both observations and conferences with the apprentice teachers. There was consistent dialogue between the researcher and apprentices throughout the school year.
50 Researchers Personal Background As the researcher, my personal experiences br ought me to this study after several years in education. I attended the Universi ty of South Florida, where I ear ned my bachelors degree in elementary education, with a minor in psyc hology, in December of 2000. I was hired for and taught a class of fifth grade, at-r isk students for the remainder for th e school year. At that time, I moved to Richmond, Virginia, and taught for the next two years at Goochland Middle School, a rural school approximately halfway between Char lottesville and Richmond, Virginia. During my first year, I taught history and math to several classes of sixth graders. For the second year, I taught history and science to sixth graders, incl uding a class of gifted students, for whom I designed the science curriculum and taught withou t the aid of textbooks for most of the year. During this year, I began worki ng towards certification to teach gifted students. I also was a mentor to several boys who had been retained at least twice and were at -risk of dropping out at the end of the year, as eighth graders. After the year ended, I returned to Tampa, Florida, to the school where I worked after graduation. During my two-year absence, the neighborhood went through a transition and the school had grown. I taught math and science to a fourth grade class which contained four students with complex behavioral issues. I soon d ecided that fourth grad e was not my specialty, so I transferred to a new magnet school, MacFar lane Park School, the following fall. The principal I had worked for during both teachi ng experiences in Tampa was opening this school, and since I admired her greatly, I decided to con tinue working for her as a fifth grade language arts and social studies teacher. I stayed at this school for two years, completing my gifted certification during this time. I also participated in a grant for th e History Alive! Program, which piloted the textbook series in my school. After teachi ng five and a half years, I decided to take a leave of absence and return to graduate school.
51 One advantage that my experience brings to this research is that I taught a variety of subject matter to a variety of age groups. Because I have my gifted certification, I am also experienced in meeting the needs of these learners and strive to develop lessons that incorporate their needs as well as the needs of students at lower levels. However, I am not experienced with teaching younger students, and I have not developed skills needed to teach children how to read. Additionally, I have not worked in a school with a free or redu ced lunch rate as high as the schools studied within this research. I also have not been responsible for purchasing the amount of materials these apprentices will probably need to purchase for their classrooms. Although I am able to relate to their work as a fellow teacher I cannot personally relate to the problems they may face as they learn to teach within these contexts. However, because I have worked in many different school contexts for severa l years, I am able to offer assistance to the apprentices as they learn to become teachers. Data Collection Methods The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the Un iversity approved the use of meeting notes and other documents including lesson plans, intervie ws, and observations for the duration of this study, as well as other work completed at the Univ ersity. In order to protect the privacy of the individuals studied during this research, pseudonyms were given to the apprentices and schools, and the specific programs involved are not referenced by name. Mult iple sources of data were used to gain insight into the a pprentices ability to plan Differe ntiated Instruction. These sources include: Pathwise lesson plans, comments made and subsequent lesson revisions, observation summaries, conference summaries, lesson reflec tions completed by the apprentice, portfolio submissions, and personal correspondence betwee n the apprentices and both myself and the coach. See Table 3-1 for an expl anation of which type of da ta was collected during each professional development workshop.
52 Pathwise For each lesson, apprentices completed a plan using the Pathwise format. Pathwise is an assessment tool created by Educational Testing Service (ETS) and adapted by the University. The Pathwise focuses on four main teachi ng components: content knowledge, the learning environment, teaching for student learning, a nd professionalism. During a typical Pathwise cycle, novice teachers would complete a classroom profile, lesson plan, pre-observation interview, and reflection. The observer would complete an observation summary. For this research, only the lesson plan and reflection co mponents were used (See Appendices B and C, respectively). Research suggests th at writing a detailed lesson pla n, such as with the Pathwise instrument, helps teachers learn how to develop stronger lessons for their students (Davenport & Smetana, 2004). Reflection on Teaching Following the first and third lessons, the apprentices completed the Pathwise reflection questionnaire, which provided details regardi ng their own experiences during the lessons (See Appendix C). These reflection questions were sligh tly altered from those th ey answer after other observed lessons; the only addition being that of th e words, Differentiated Instruction in order to help focus their answers on the differentiation they provided to their students. These questions included items such as, How has your thin king about planning changed based on this experience with Differentiated Instruction? This is a regular part of the Pathwise planning that the apprentices complete for each formally planned lesson. Observation and Post-Observation Conference Notes During the lesson observation, the researcher took notes regarding the delivery of instruction and the observed occurrences of Diff erentiated Instruction strategies. These notes included things the researcher saw th at were in line with effective teaching strategies, as well as
53 appropriate classroom management technique s. Additionally, the re searcher documented questions that arose during the le sson and ideas that could be implemented to improve either the lesson or its delivery. During the one-on-one pos t-observation conference, the researcher and apprentice reviewed the observati on notes. The researcher added to the note sheet any further comments from their discussion, and then gave the apprentice a copy. Portfolio After completing the yearlong field experien ce, apprentices were required to submit a portfolio documenting their knowledge and deve lopment in each of the Florida Accomplished Practices. Data related to the Accomplished Practice Planning for In struction was also considered a data source for this study. Portfolio s were presented to a committee, the members of which included the university coach, Universi ty supervising facult y, researcher, and the supervisor of Alternative Certification for the school district. Additi onally at the portfolio presentation, the apprentices had the opportunity to explain the ite ms they included within their portfolios and to elaborate on their stance regarding planning and assessment. These oral presentations were recorded and ke pt for data collection purposes. Data Management Once lesson plans were turned in, the plans were reviewed and co mments were given to each apprentice via email. Lessons were then put aside until the day of the observation, when they were reviewed prior to the observation. Then, comments ma de were discussed during the post-observation conference. Additionally, when a new lesson plan was turned in, the previous ones were reviewed to look for trends regarding difficulties each apprentice might be having. All of the data was put aside until the school year came to an end, and data was reviewed at one time. Portfolio interviews were not transcribed, bu t field notes were taken. The interviews were saved to be used for later tria ngulation of findings. This was done because the apprentices turned
54 in a hard copy of their portfolios, with refl ections of those submi ssions, so the relevant information already existed as a hard copy. All items submitted for review by the appren tices were entered into Hyper Research. Data excerpts from these sources will be noted using the ten-digit reference number assigned by Hyper Research, along with the assigned name fo r each apprentice and the source type [example: (Rose, reflection one, 19749,19855)]. Personal comm unication items received, such as emails, will be noted as such, and the name of the sender and date will be included [example: (coach, personal communication, October 13, 2006)]. Data Analysis Analysis included attention to description, an alysis, and interpreta tion as described by Wolcott (1994). The first step of analysis focu sed on constructing a narra tive description of the nature of the apprentices development in the ar ea of instructional planning over the course of the year. These narratives organized the appr entices development overtime and provided the researcher with the opportunity to engage in early analysis as the narratives were prepared. This early analysis consisted of coding and analyzing the data at two diffe rent points of the year as the narratives were being developed. However, simply describing three unique cases does not shed light on the key concepts that differentiated ones ability to plan. Thus, after completing the descriptions of each apprentices development, this study included analysis that uncovered the common themes which emerged among the three apprentices (Patton, 2002). Once the apprentices had completed the apprenticeship, all digitized data (lesson plans, feedback, refl ections, portfolios, coach notes, emails) was converted into seve ral text files, which were en tered into Hyper Research, a qualitative analysis software pr ogram. This software cut down on time spent coding and created a platform where data codes could easily be co mbined, altered, and deleted based on need and
55 without having to start essentially from the beginn ing each time. At this time, once all of the data was gathered, the analysis began. Although many pieces of data were interesting to read, my first step was to engage in data reduction by only id entifying data that shed light on the research question: How do apprentice teachers in the Altern ative Certification Program in an urban school district develop in their pl anning and implementation of Di fferentiated Instruction? To start the analysis, a preliminary set of codes were created, which included code names that were almost identical to questions asked on the reflection questionnaire rather than themes which emerged throughout the work. After deciding that these codes did not demonstrate themes, they were all deleted and coding began anew. Th is time, new codes were discovered. The word discovered is appropriate here because the re searcher did not name th ese codes; they named themselves. The new codes were specific to the type of data they came from; lesson plans had codes such as, activity aligned to standard, used outside research to prepare, and planning using feedback. Feedback codes included items such as, request for more detail and suggestion. From these codes, six major themes emerged which became the basis for further synthesis and, ultimately, the findings of this research. A seventh theme was entertained, that of Writing Measurable, Standards-Based objectives, but it was determined that this was an indicator for the theme of Planning for a Standard rather than its own independent idea, and was therefore eliminated. These major themes are: collegial relations hips; classroom management; planning for a standard; planning for student n eed; and openness to consideri ng feedback. Self-regulation is considered an over-arching theme. Each theme is explained in full below. Collegial Relationships Establishing positive, respectful collegial re lationships is imperative in a social environment such as a school. There are many times when a teacher needs to interact with other
56 adults within the building walls, including admini stration, other members of faculty, and parents. An apprentice demonstrates her ability to have po sitive collegial relationships by her interactions with other adults at school in such instances as co-teaching, co llaborative planning, and generally getting along with others. Thes e relationships depend on the prof essionalism and respectfulness of each person involved. A teacher must be able to maintain positive collegial relationships in order to plan collaboratively or discuss a less on with colleagues before or after teaching the lesson is taught. Classroom Management Each apprentice had to come to terms with the new responsibility of managing the classroom and enforcing classroom rules. Classroo m management is defined as the ability of the apprentice to manage student behavior and activ ity. It includes creati ng a professional rapport with the students, using a system of reinfor cement or consequences, setting guidelines for movement around and outside of the classroom, es tablishing or following existing class rules, and maintaining consistency throughout. Even th e best lesson plan is ineffective if it is implemented in a classroom where the teacher is unable to manage the activity of students within. Planning for a Standard Since each apprentice is new to the field of education, lesson planning is an unfamiliar task. In order to properly incor porate state standards, which were created to provide consistency from one school to the next, into a lesson plan, apprentices must correlate their lesson objective, activity, and assessment to the selected standar d. The objective is a crucial part of the lesson plan, as it guides not only the re mainder of the activity, but also the assessment which determines whether a student has met the desired objective. It must be clearly stated and include a
57 measurable student behavior. Each apprentice varied in her ability to plan lessons that connected to the standard provided to guide each lesson. Planning for Student Need In addition to learning to plan to incorporate a state standar d, apprentices also learned how to plan for the needs of their students. Planning for student need is the ability of the apprentice to create a lesson plan geared toward a student need, including interest readiness, or learning style. This theme also includes using group, paired, or i ndividual assignments as needed to best address the specific need at hand. The apprentice base s readiness levels on pr ior student work or assessments, and grouping is flexib le based on need during each lesson. Openness to Considering Feedback Throughout the year, apprentices were given feedback regarding their lessons from their mentor teachers, coaches, and other observers. This feedback was given in order to provide ideas for improving something about an observed lesson, from the lesson plan to its implementation to classroom management techniques. Apprentices varied in their ability and willingness to consider this feedback for future lessons or expe riences. Considering feedback is an integral part of teaching, and lesson planning, since teachers ar e often observed by others, as well as given new mandates to use certain appr oaches in their classrooms. Self-Regulation as the Over-Arching Theme Self-regulation occurs when an apprentice is able to reflect up on her own practice and make changes based on that reflection. The appren tice is both critical and complimentary of her teaching, and seeks out opportunities to learn th rough research, workshops and classes, or observing others in action. When learning, the ap prentice showing self-regulation is able to find ways to incorporate ideas and strategies seen without prompting. The apprentice is comfortable in both the teacher and learner ro le. In addition, the apprentice is prepared to use what she has
58 learned to help her think on her feet when conf ronted with a challenging situation within the classroom. Honed self-regulation skills improve le sson planning because the teacher is reflective and willing to adapt her pr actice to meet the needs of her studen ts. This theme is considered to be over-arching because each of the other themes development was greatly influenced by the apprentices ability to self-regulate. Since the three apprentices dem onstrated varying degrees of mastery within each of these themes, a scale was created so that common voc abulary could be used to explain how each apprentice developed over the course of the year. The terms emerging, developing, and accomplished were used. An emerging behavior is one that is just beginning to surface and come into awareness. An emerging behavior may be so mething that an apprenti ce is conscious of, but has not yet acted upon. A behavior that is considered developi ng is one which is gradually unfolding over time. The apprentice is clearly aware of the need fo r the behavior, but has not yet mastered the skill. In demonstrating accomplishmen t, the apprentice demonstrated that she is highly skilled in a specific area, or has successfully shown her ability to fu lfill a certain theme. The five themes of collegial relationships, classroom management, planning for a standard, planning for student need, and openness to considering feedback each played a role in the development of the teaching skill of each appren tice. By mastering certain skills early in the year, such as classroom management and develo ping collegial relationshi ps, apprentices were then able to focus on planning appropriate lessons and learning from their own reflection. When classroom management was not developed, the re maining skills were not developed as fully. Once the narratives were constructed and the themes and degrees of mastery identified, the analysis moved to an interpreta tion mode. This interpretation sought to identify ways that the findings connected or disconnected to the self-regulation literature. This interpretive analysis
59 required movement between the themes and the self-regulation literature and these inferences can be found at the conclusi on of each case as well as in the concluding chapter. Credibility and Trustworthiness Lincoln and Guba identified eight procedures for verifying data (as cited in Glesne, 2006). In the case of this study, three of Lincoln and Gubas methods were used to check for trustworthiness: prolonged engage ment, persistent observation, and triangulation of data sources (as cited in Glesne, 2006). Prol onged engagement and persistent observation refer to the amount of time spent at the school site and the tight focu s on the parts of the data most relevant to the research question (Glesne, 2006). In order to ensure the reliability of data the data sources for this study were triangulated in s earch of inconsistencies between those sources. The lesson plans, feedback, apprentice reflections, portfolio submi ssions, and coachs notes were compared to one other. This was done to strengthen confidence in whatever conclusions are drawn (Patton, 2002). According to Glesne (2006), a qualitative re searcher uses many data sources to indicate that the more sources tapped for understanding, th e richer the data and the more believable the findings.
60 CHAPTER 5 THE CASE OF ROSE Roses Snapshot Rose came to the Apprenticeship program fr om a position as a program manager for a child protection agency. Her interest in children is evident since Rose has always had jobs working with children, and she felt that teaching was the only area in the field that she hadnt tried. With encouragement from family and friend s, she decided to apply for the apprenticeship. In her placement, Rose spent most of her time t eaching math and reading lessons to her group of students. Throughout the year, Rose showed tremendous growth in her planning and implementation of lessons, much of which can be attributed to working closely with her coach and mentor teacher, and taking their advice to hear t. Not only did she incorporate their feedback into her lessons, but she was al so self-reflective and put new know ledge from that self-reflection into practice. In an effort to describe Roses orientati on toward teaching, I offer the following excerpt culled from fieldnotes: Upon entering Roses classroom, students are found sitting on the carpet in the front of the room. Rose is beginning a math word wall review and asks for a student volunteer to lead the review. Several students raise th eir hands, and Rose calls on one of them, who stands up and walks over to the word wall. As the student calls on other students to answer math vocabulary questions, Rose stands listening, asking some stud ents to elaborate on th eir answers. Once the review is finished, Rose introduces the lesson, and as ks to students to return to their desks, which are grouped in fours or fives. Students begin wo rk, talking to each other as needed about the work they are doing. Noise level is at a minimum, and all students are engaged.
61 Based on this depiction, Rose can be charac terized as having developed some of the classroom management skills necessary to tran sition students during a lesson, allow children to work in small groups, and include children as pa rticipants in instruc tion. Additionally, Rose demonstrates the ability to ask probing and clar ifying questions that help her understand what her students are learning. Analysis Themes Several major themes emerged within Roses data, demonstrating how she developed in her planning and implementation of Differentiate d Instruction. These themes are not mutually exclusive but rather interdepende nt. For example, the stage of development in one theme often influenced the development or lack of development in another theme. The major themes that emerged as contributing to the apprentices ability to plan for differentiated instruction included: collegial relationships, classr oom management, planning for a standard, planning for student need, and openness to considering feedback. Additionally, an overarching theme of SelfRegulation also emerged as I bega n to identify attribution for a specific demonstrated ability. These themes relate to differentiation because each promotes an understanding of students, which is a necessity for proper differentiation. Co llegial relationships a llow for collaboration and an idea exchange between teachers, which in tu rn increases a teachers toolbox. When a teacher has clear classroom management procedures, she is able to get to know her students, which is necessary for differentiation. Planning for a standard and for student needs both require knowledge of differentiation because a student cannot learn a required standard of the lesson is at a level far above his or her own ability. Also, a stude nt is more likely to ma ster content if he or she finds it interesting. Finally, a teachers willingness to hear f eedback from colleagues and then consider the benefits of that f eedback in lessons allows the teacher to see her students from an outsiders perspective. This gives the teacher the opportunity to know her students further.
62 As each theme is introduced, Roses work is described using stages of growth. The stages representing Roses growth emerged on a c ontinuum from emerging, to developing, to accomplished. An emerging behavior is one that is just beginning to surface and come into awareness. The emerging behavior may be something that Rose is conscious of, but has not yet acted upon. A behavior that is c onsidered developing is one wh ich is gradually unfolding over time. In this case, Rose shows that she is awar e of the need for the behavior, but has not yet mastered the skill. Finally, an accomplished behavior is one that indicates a high level of the skill for a novice teacher in a specific area. The fo llowing section illustrates the themes that influenced Roses work related to planning fo r differentiated instruct ion. Additionally, Figure 5 shows on a continuum Marys growth within each theme. Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning Collegial relationships became a key facilitator to strengthening Roses planning process because they provided her with the opportunity to hear more ideas and get targeted feedback that was specific to her needs. Rose is considered an accomplished apprentice in the area of collegial and collaborative relationships. Even though she a nd her mentor teacher had some difficulties at the beginning of the year over their conflicting ideas of noise control and the importance of having a positive attitude (coach, personal co mmunication, September, 2006), Rose and her mentor eventually established a positive and working line of communication. By working with the coach, Rose and her mentor came to unde rstand each others perspective and came to a consensus regarding which student behaviors they could adjust to and which behaviors needed attention. Rose and her mentor teachers relationship st rengthened over time, as evidenced in their increasing commitment to co-teaching the classroom. By the end of the year, both teachers were fully utilized in the classroom. This working re lationship facilitated Roses ability to embrace
63 collaborative planning and teaching. To illustrate th is point, an excerpt from Roses portfolio is appropriate. Here, Rose discusses th e role collaboration played in planning: I learned that when a lesson is planned by a team of people numerous ideas can be shared and implemented. Each member of the team assists in students learning of different strategies to solve problems. I learned planning a lesson takes time and effort on everyone's part in order to be effective in teaching all students (Rose, portfolio, June 2007). Roses belief that th e co-teaching technique allowed them to share more inst ructional ideas was cl ear throughout the year as she learned to plan instruction. This level of collaboration and her attribution that colla boration contributed to her instructional planning justifie s her classification as accomplished. Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth Given that differentiated instruction require s grouping children and making individual accommodations, the process requires sophisticated classroom management if the children are expected to reach the stated goa l. Given the additional complexity of planning for differentiation, Rose actively developed her classroom management througho ut the apprenticeship year. Rose strived to create a positive classroom environment where parents were expected to be involved in their childs learning. Within the first few weeks of joining the class, Rose began contacting the parents of students she was concerned about. In early October, her mentor teacher designated one of her strengths as consistent disc ipline within the classroom (coach, supervisor notes, October, 2006) indicating Roses initial understanding of the im portance of classroom management and ability to attend to this theme ear ly in her apprenticeship year, and because it is a skill that Rose worked toward but had not ye t mastered, she was considered developing in the area of classroom management at the start of the year. During an observation in November, Roses co ach noted that two stude nts in Roses class began acting up during a lesson, and Rose did not re move them, even as their behavior escalated.
64 The observation notes written by her coach stat ed, Rose was well prep ared and the delivery would have been good except 2 of the boys in th e group absolutely ruined the lesson for her. Instead of removing them she continued to tr y to get them engaged in the group (coach, observation notes, November 2006). According to he r coach, Roses desire for the students to stay seated and learn may have gotten in the wa y of other students learning (coach, supervisor notes, 4236, 4555). However, by the end of the year Rose improved her consistency with an unfailing use of the CHAMPS program. Among ot her tools, she regularly reviewed acceptable student behavior before each le sson and transition period which made the expectation clear for the children in her classroom. Over the course of the year, Rose became accomplished in this area. Roses ability to keep a consistent classr oom management plan provided her with an opportunity to get to know her stude nts in a calm, learning-centered environment. Rose was able to observe and listen to her st udents as they talked through th eir learning, without constantly having to compete with the din of a room w ithout an enforced management plan. Roses management allowed her time to observe her stud ents, identify their needs, and monitor their progress. Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesso n Components Strengthens Planning In the beginning, Rose had difficulty writing co hesive lesson plans that show a strong tie between state standards, lesson objectives, and activities/assess ments. As a result, at the beginning of the school year she was clearly consid ered emerging in this skill. Part of Roses difficulty stemmed from not provi ding adequate detail about the activity in her lesson plans. Although her objectives generally linked to a st ate standard, the activity or assessment was poorly explained making it difficult to determine whether the objective/sta ndard related to the
65 assessment and correlated to the activity. The connectivity between the components that is needed for a well-articulated lesson was missing. For example, Roses first attempt at differentiating instruction came during a writing lesson in October. Roses written objectives st ate that students would generate ideas about writing, use complete sentences and punctuation in writing, and write about people, directly correspond to her selected standards, which incl ude generating ideas before writing, focusing on a central idea, and using end punc tuation and capitalization during writing (Rose, lesson plan 1, October, 2006). Although she was re latively clear in her objectives her activities were vague and did not address all the objectives and standards. Specifically, she asked students to complete a chart to describe helpers around sc hool. In a different section of her lesson plan, she explained that one group of students will be writing two or three sentences about helpers while the others worked on completing the helpers chart. Not all students were working towards meeting the standards provided, and there was no menti on of any accommodations within her plan. In order to better understand how and what to add to her lesson, Rose worked with the coach for about an hour, after which time, the coach stated that, She seem[ed] to have a better idea of what its about (coach, personal comm unication, November 7, 20 06). After revising her second Differentiated Instructi on lesson, observed in March, Rose again was able to match her objective, Students will tell a bout famous African-American inve ntors who contributed to our society, to a social studies st andard, The student knows signifi cant individuals in United States History since 1880. This time, Rose was better able to plan an assessment that would evaluate student mastery of the standard. Her assessment activity was appropriate, students would present a skit or drawing and retell information, and her evaluation included questioning the students about their chosen inventor, with extension ques tions which asked students how that particular
66 invention is used today. Since st udents had never done a skit befo re, she revised the activity so all students would be drawing a nd telling about their chosen inve ntor. The corresponding activity for this lesson included students writing about, dr awing, and explaining who their inventor was, what the invention was, and how we use that pr oduct today. Therefore, the activity matched both the state standard and her written objective. Roses final differentiated lesson plan, a math plan where students worked on solving word problems, was observed in May. She again was able to match her objective to the state standard, as both were related to students ability to explain strategies for addition and subtraction, and what the effects of those operations are. The e xplanation of her activity thoroughly told exactly what she expected to happen during the lesson, students would work to solve addition and subtraction word problems using manipulatives as needed, and sh e would assess their progress as she moved around the room. Rose made significant progress in her lesson pl an writing. This progress can be attributed to two factors. First, Rose had access to a coach who had enough time to provide Rose with multiple opportunities for one-on-one coaching re lated to planning. Second, Rose demonstrated an on-going openness as she accepted feedback in her desire to get things right. Although Rose made tremendous progress, Rose continues to feel that lesson planning remains a weakness (Rose, personal communication, August, 2007) and as a result she is committed to strengthening this component. Her articulation of this weakness indicates that Rose is committed to her own learning and is able to define her own strengths and weaknesses. She is also able to make these weaknesses public. Given the complexity of this theme and Roses on-going concerns, Rose is considered developing in this skill.
67 Planning for Student Need: Knowin g Students Enables Differentiation Although Roses lesson planning was often weak, in that her plans were not adequately detailed and lacked connectivity between standard, objective, a nd activity, she did strive to accommodate all learning styles and student needs within her lessons. Given this personal belief and commitment to her individual students, at the start of the school year this theme was seen as developing in Roses instructional planning. Roses commitment to meeting individual students needs was evident as she grouped students based on previous assessment scores. Fo r one lesson in February, students who earned below 70% on an equivalency test were put in one group and those who had more success on that particular concept were placed in another gr oup. Using a co-teach model where she partnered with her coach, Rose used the assessment scores to respond to the needs of those students who required some extra help in understanding how to create equivalent numbers through adding and subtracting. In this lesson, her follow-up for those who understood th e work consisted of students creating their own number sentences equivalent to the numbers she provided to be the equation answers. Knowing the needs of so me of her students, Rose also made manipulatives available to students. The students were not required to use them but they were encouraged to use the materials as she realized that ma ny were not ready for the abstract application of the concept she was teaching. During another math lesson in May, Rose used a similar strategy, where she reviewed with the students several ways to so lve a given problem. Not only did this approach teach the students that multiple approaches exist to solving the pr oblem, but students also had the opportunity to work out the problem in the manner they be st understood. Again, they were able to use manipulatives as needed. This accommodated those students who needed tactile or visual assistance to understand the concep t, but did not hinder those who did not need the manipulatives
68 in order to correctly answer th e questions. By using on-going formal and informal assessment to guide student grouping and providi ng student choice throughout he r lessons, Rose was able to self-regulate her planning in a way that acknow ledged her commitment to addressing the needs of all of her students. By the end of the year, Roses use of student data to inform future instruction is consequently considered accomplished in planning for student needs. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning: Embracing Feedback St rengthens Planning Throughout the year, Rose was given feedback from her mentor teacher, coach, and this researcher regarding her lesson planning and im plementation. One of Roses greatest strengths was visible here, as she both accepted and applied a dvice that was given to her. Because of this, Rose was considered accomplished in terms of be ing open to feedback when writing lesson plans throughout the year. Her general demeanor regard ing feedback was that she wanted as much feedback as possible from anyone who would gi ve it to her because she wanted to be a good teacher. She and her coach spent many hours revi ewing and adding detail to her lesson plans, since thinking about the small details needed to get through a lesson was one of Roses selfidentified weaknesses. According to her coach in January, 2007, Rose has really worked hard to improve her plan writing and takes feedback and puts it into practice. Roses motivation to learn from others is a key element of her learning to differentiate instruction. By the time of her third observed lesson, the acti vities the students were participating in were more clearly explained. A math lesson plan on word problem strategies was taught in May, and Roses lesson included exactly what she planned to do, including what she specifically planned to say to the students. Her lesson incl uded specific instructions for the children to follow, for example, When your paper is put at your seat, you may go back to your seat and begin solving the problem. Be sure and explain your thinking, and show the most efficient way to solve the problem. If you fini sh solving the problem before time is called, think about it and
69 see if you can solve it a different way (Rose, lesson 3, May, 2007). This increased detail in her lesson was motivated by the requests made by he r instructors that she think through and write down, step-by-step, what she expected to say to the students, and also wh at types of responses she expected to hear from the students. Rose in ternalized the feedback given to her, and thus wrote stronger plans. Due to her evidenced im provement as a result of how Rose embraced feedback, her accomplished status in this area is clear. Self-Regulation as an Over-Arching Theme The idea of self-regulation in teacher educa tion springs from the view that a teacher should view herself and be viewed as a learner (Manning & Payne, 1993). As such, literature that involves self-regulation can be applied to t hose learning to be a teacher. There are many definitions for self-regulation, several of which in clude the idea that self-regulation occurs when a teacher is conscious of his or her own thoughts and decisions as they are happening, and then reflects on those thoughts and takes action (Greene & Azevedo, 2007; Manning & Payne, 1993; Randi, 2004). According to Manning and Payne (1993) pro-activity is a key characteristic of a self-regulated teacher; pro-activity being the ability of a teacher to do more than simply realize a situation is occurring in the cl assroom. A pro-active teacher take s that realization and instantly thinks about how to handle the s ituation, thinking about [his or her] decisions on how best to put out fires or even to leave them burni ng (Manning and Payne, 1993). Additionally, a selfregulated learner can be described as someone who is, active, efficiently managing their own learning through monitoring and strategy use (as cited in Greene & Azevedo, 2007). In this study, self-regulation is considered an over-arching theme because each of the established secondary themes of collegial relationships, classroom management, planning for a standard, planning for student needs, and taki ng feedback into consideration during planning require self-regulatory development in order for the apprentice to improve. As stated previously,
70 development of self-regulation skills occurs at ones own pace. Additionally, being able to selfregulate in one area does not guarantee self-regulat ory ability in another area, which accounts for the varied developmental stages that can be f ound across the secondary themes. Roses case also illustrates that the nature of teacher learning in both the area of Differen tiated Instruction and self-regulation is enhanced by the presence of an on-site coach who is both familiar with Roses emerging teaching practice as well as the specific students in her classroom and the curriculum that is being taught. Roses Ability to Self-Regulate within Each Theme Collegial Relationships By October of her apprenticeship year, Rose demonstrated more than once, the beginnings of self-regulation in developing and maintaining collegi al relationships. Rose moved through Pintrichs (2000) phases of contextual self-regulation in one instance when she was combating negativity in her cla ssroom environment. In this ex cerpt, from a communication with Roses coach, Rose and her mentor were workin g out a compromise regarding student behavior: The behavior management issues I had noticed were also ones she's been worried about. It seems to come down to a difference in noise tolerance level between herself and her mentor. They have talked about it and sh e is working to become a little more tolerant of some chaos because they are still learning and her mentor is willing to let her tighten up in some areas that are driving her crazy. Everything seems pretty good. (coach, Personal Communication, September, 2006). Roses perceptions of her working environmen t were such that she desired change. She monitored the conditions of the cl assroom, and made an effort to renegotiate with her mentor the classroom rules and procedures, br inging forth a change that satisf ied both Rose and her mentor.
71 A second instance of Roses developing self-reg ulation skills regardi ng collegial relations is evident in October, as she considers her motivation for teachi ng. In this example, Rose finds herself in a negative work environment, of which she feels her mentor teacher is part. Her mentor teacher was absent one day, and the next day, Rose sent her coach an email where she talked about her reasons for becoming a teacher, and how she was managing the negative work environment in terms of he r goal of becoming a teacher: I will deal with what ever comes my way. I love children and I choose this profession because of my love for children. I will not fo rget my reason for being here. Everywhere you go there will be people that make things harder than it has to be. I'm glad that my mindset has changed over the years. About 10 years ago, I would have had a few choice words for everyone and would have walked out. I'm past that st age in my life. I have learned to take one day at a time and ma ke sure that I include laughter and fun in my life. This keeps me fr om melting under the pressure. I'm su re you notice by now that I love to joke around and laugh. At the same time I do take some things very seriously. Don't worry I'm not going to leave. Yesterday, Mrs. [X] was not th ere and I had a blast teaching the entire day. I knew at the end of the day that I can and will make this my career. She came in around 4:00 p.m. and was surprise (sic) to still see me there. We talked about how the day went and she was very much the person I first met. I really think th at she talks with Mrs. [Y] and that's where some of the negative behavior comes from. We will see what happens from here. (Rose, personal communication, October, 2006) Rose moved through Pintrichs (2000) phase s of identifying her goal of becoming a teacher, awareness and monitoring of overcoming ne gativity in order to do so, finding herself in control of her own attitude, and at tributing her desire to stay to her developm ent in dealing with pressure-filled situations. A third and final example demonstrating the pow er of collegial relationships is illustrated within Roses portfolio, where she described a collaborative planning situation where she worked with her colleagues to plan for a math unit. She explains, When a lesson is planned by a team of people numerous ideas can be shared and implemented. Each member of the team assist (sic) in students learning of different strategies to solve proble ms. I learned planning a lesson takes time and effort on
72 everyone's part in order to be effective in te aching all students. I also learned that when decisions are made collectively, everyone has the same goals and objectives (Rose, portfolio, June, 2007) Here, Rose reflects that a collaborative c ontext not only helps w ith identifying common goals for students which is a self-regulating factor, but the sharing of ideas among teachers provides a greater bank of strategi es from which she must weigh th e most appropriate strategy to share with her students. This se lf-regulating behavior offers Ro se the chance to increase her students opportunities to learn. Roses ability to self-regulate in terms of collegial relationships is evident from the beginning of her apprenticeship. She made a vi sible effort to not only be aware of her surroundings, but also to control the situations she found herself in, reacting and reflecting on her environment in order to proactively steer it in a direction that was comfortable to her. Classroom Management Rose also showed the beginnings of self-regu lation in her work as she learned from her own experiences with classroom management. Du ring a lesson observed by the researcher during the beginning of the school year, Rose decided to assess her students using a rubric she had designed for her students class work activity. The rubric was a tool Rose believed would allow her students to be more successful in their lear ning. She believed the us e of the rubric would allow her students to be more self-regulating and her choice to use the rubr ic to help her reach her student learning goals indicated a level of t eacher self-regulation emerging in her practice. As a result of these beliefs and goals, Rose decided to review the rubric, in its entirety, before her first graders got started on their seatwork. The ru bric explanation went on for quite some time, as they had never used one before and Rose ma de certain to thoroughly go over each section. Unfortunately, by the time the students got to the activity, many had a difficult time staying on task and focused. Rose realized this through monitoring the behavior of the students
73 as she reviewed the rubric with them. In her refl ection of the activity, Rose stated that she would, not review the rubric during th e lesson. It did somewhat take aw ay from the lesson and it really wasnt that important at the time (Rose, personal communication, November, 2006). Once again, Rose displayed teacher self-regulation as she monitored the students response. Roses goal was to be sure students understood the rubr ic she was using to grade them, but as she monitored the classroom situation which found her students restless, Rose reflected on the situation and decided to change her use of rubrics in future o ccurrences. In this example, the goal-setting activity, monitoring and action whic h are central components of self-regulation (Pintrich, 2000) create a source of dissonance that Ro se will need to reconcile in her future use of rubrics. Thus, recognizing this dissonance b ecomes detrimental to Roses learning as the dissonance provides motivation to re vise her instructional planning. During the same lesson, Rose noticed th at her lower/middle writers were on task throughout, and she reasoned that this was due to her guidance throughout the lesson, including clues she provided about beginning and ending sentence punctuation. Sin ce she spent additional time during the lesson working with each group, which was a developing strategy, Rose thought about the new successes she felt her students were having and attributed them to her extra assistance. Because she thought about her actions this is an example of developing selfregulation. By the end of the year, Rose was able to reflect not just on her own lesson, but also on how her actions impacted her students. Duri ng her final observati on in May, Rose thought about the groups her students put themselves in for a math lesson. She stated, Grouping would be looked at closely, the students personalities sometimes clash (Rose, lesson three reflection, May, 2007). In effect, she learned from her ow n monitoring of and re flection on her teaching
74 experience that even student-led groups may need teacher input. Rose has shown that she is able to think about her actions and take steps to improve her teaching based on that reflection. Planning for a Standard Rose had a more difficult time with pla nning lessons than with either classroom management or developing relationships with her colleagues. Becau se self-regulation is contextual (Pintrich, 2000) and individual (Man ning & Payne, 1993), this uneven development is to be expected. Again using Pintrich s (2000) model within the theme, Planning for a standard Rose can be seen actively learning to regulat e both her thought proces ses and behaviors in regards to lesson planning. Rose verbalized her goal, which was to improve as a teacher (Rose, personal communication, November 2006), and, in terms of the m onitoring stage of the selfregulation model, she was also aware that in orde r to improve in writing lesson plans, she would need to work closely with her coach. Knowing he r goal allowed Rose to make efforts to seek help and try harder to achieve it. Much of the feedback Rose received on he r lesson plans was related to providing more detail when describing her objectiv es and her activities. For exampl e, Roses first differentiated lesson did not clearly explain what the students would be working on: Lesson states: The second group will model what the helper does by drawing pictures of the helper. Students will choose which group they would like to take part during the lesson. Feedback: Does this relate back to the obj ective? Are they writing anything? Will they write about the picture? Lesson states: This grouping will allow for students to model and identify who the other group has described. Feedback: Which DI strategy does this demonstrate? Lesson states: This method will allow students to demonstrate their writing skill, focus on topic, begin each sentence with a capital lett er, and use correct punctuation and form letters correctly.
75 Feedback: Will both groups work for this st andard? One group isnt writing. (Rose, lesson 1 feedback, 229,267; 269,294; 296,329) This interaction via email between Rose and me illustrates her beginning lack of detail in her lesson plans. The feedback I provided was mean t to help Rose think a bout the questions left unanswered in her lesson plan that may come up during implementation of the lesson. The email dialogue was a variation of coaching Rose throug h self-talk, in an attempt to help her think through these points on her own in the future. Through much of the year, Rose struggled with being able to thoroughly develop her written plans. By increasing her effort, asking for help and receiving i ndividual coaching, Rose was eventually able to increase the level of de tail written in her plans. Rose included the following math lesson plan, implemen ted in May, in her portfolio: Opening: Start by asking a few students what they think efficient means? Two students will be selected to pass out sporks. I need help passing out theses sporks efficiently. Select student 1 (pass out one by one), Select student 2 (pass out in bundles). Have class watch students while they pass out sporks. I wi ll then ask what made this student finish before other student. Then continue with aski ng which way was more efficient? Allow 2 4 students to respond. Main activity/activities: Tell story problem to students, begin, Today were going to look at a story problem. Now close your eyes while I tell you a story: The other day, I was at the toy store in the ma ll. I saw two children building a tower out of Lego blocks. They built the tower with 12 Lego blocks. Then they put some more blocks on the tower. They ended up with 27 Lego blocks on the tower. Have 2 students retell story, Post the stor y problem (on chart pa per) with the question. How many Lego blocks did they put on the tower? Show student word problem sheet and let th em know this is the problem we will be working on today. When your paper is put at your seat, you may go back to your seat and begin solving the problem. Be sure and explai n your thinking, and show the most efficient way to solve the problem. [Ask,] If you finish solving the problem before time is called, thi nk about it and see if you can solve it a different way. (Rose, lesson 3, May, 2007)
76 This example shows her development in provid ing detail in her plans. Rose improved in this aspect of her lesson planni ng, from the earlier example with unc lear activities to here, where she details everything that she expects to oc cur within her lesson. In stead of leaving her instructions up to whatever comes to her at the moment, she has prepared instructions that even take into considerati on those students who may finish the assignment earlier than others. By providing such detail, the li nk to the stated standard is clear; without detail, it was difficult to determine the link between the state standard an d the lesson activity. Linking this example to self-regulation, Rose monitored her actions, and then increased the amount of effort she gave to lesson planning, and thus was able to improve her pl ans. Rose demonstrates that she is able to control her behavior and pro-actively make a focu sed effort to improve. Planning for Student Needs Roses ability to plan for student needs su rpassed her ability to plan using a specific standard to guide her lessons. He r goal from the start of the ap prenticeship was for all of her students to learn, and she believed that using differentiated less on planning strategies was an appropriate way to help each of her student s achieve. In her reflection after her first differentiated lesson, Rose states, I need to keep in mind that each student le arns at a different pace and the lesson and activities should accommodate each learner. Ma ke sure that the students are grouped according to ability as well as interest, behavior and motivation. After this my planning has changed it helps me to take a closer look at how we as professionals need to understand that all stude nts can accomplished task but it has to be in a way that they understand and based on important factors that each student brings to the classroom. All students have some type of knowledge. I need to know each student learning style. (Rose, reflection 1, 3550,3680; 3897,4171; 4174,4257) Here, Rose demonstrated that she was cognitivel y aware of her goal for all students to learn. Additionally, she took responsibility for needing to know that students lear n in different ways
77 and at different paces. She recognized that a teacher needs to use th at knowledge to plan specifically for and accommodate her students as individual learners. Rose similarly demonstrated self-regulation in terms of teaching so that students were involved and interested in the le sson. With her goal of student learning in mind, Rose discussed her thoughts regarding modeling a nd presenting a lesson that has students learning styles in mind: I learned that modeling and stude nts participation is also important in the delivery of a lesson. Teachers should plan and think a bout how students can be accommodated on their learning level. I learned that some students need hands on, othe rs need visual as well as auditory. I learned the stude nts should be engaged and involved in the lesson if it is planned well. (Rose, portfolio, May, 2007) Roses awareness of her efforts in this area allowed her the ability to adjust instruction to meet the needs of her students by supplying manipul atives, and providing both written and oral instructions. Her reflection shows that she is able to make a conscious choice regarding the most appropriate way to implement a lesson. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning Providing feedback is one way to scaffold apprentice teachers learning by providing support to the novice teacher thr ough dialogue, specifica lly during lesson plan review and postobservation conferences. According to Manning a nd Payne (1993), The quality of the verbal dialogue within the teacher education program is the crux of the scaffold. Roses desire for feedback directly relates to the goal she set for herself and her students: for all students to learn. She takes control of this behavi or by asking for help when it is needed, and persisting in her efforts to improve her lesson planning skills. Rose accepted feedback and made appropriate lesson plan revisions, which serv ed to create stronger lessons This, however, was a developing skill; this example illustrates Rose s skill in this area at the beginning of the year, showing that,
78 although she wanted help with her planning, she did not at first put forth th e effort to actually receive the help she requested: 10-25-06 Rose was supposed to have her 2nd formal observation today. She requested a meeting last week to work on lesson plan writing. When I came to her room she had nothing prepared so she canceled the meeting. Th e instructions I gave the group were very clear, lesson plans must be in at least 24 hours in advance so I can give feedback on your lesson plan. Rose did not turn hers in until after 9:00 the night before her observation. What she turned in was incomplete and not ev en a lesson. I went to her room this morning and told her I would not observe her until sh e did what was required for the observation. She seemed to know she had messed up and willingly said she'd redo her lesson and choose another day to get observed. I am frustrat ed with the lack of effort and concerned that she truly doesn't understand what goes in to planning a lesson. I don't know how to help her if she isn't going to hold up her end or even seem to care. 11-7-06 Rose had her 2nd formal observation to day. Her lesson plan was much better than previous ones but still needed some editing. It seems to be di fficult for her to really think through all the little details of a lesson and keep her focus on what she is trying to teach. (coach, supervisor notes, 3276,3332; 3840,4063) This example shows that although Rose recognized that she needed help with lesson planning, her reaction did not allow her to receive that help. It is not known why she did not act in a manner that would have provided her the help she requested. As the year continued, Rose made more of an effort to sit with her coach to work on lesson planning. Her coach explained, Researcher emailed me and asked me to help Rose with her D.I. lesson plan. We sat down and worked on it together for about an hour. She seems to have a better idea of what it's about. Planning conti nues to be an issue for her (coach, supervisor notes, November, 2006). Only one month late r, Roses coach noticed improvement: Rose's last observation in December was really good. She was much improved with her plan writing and she did a great job of teach ing. She and her mentor do a great job of coteaching together. Rose has really worked ha rd to improve her plan writing and takes feedback and puts it into practice. (Coach, personal communication, January, 2007) Sometime between November and her observation in December, Rose increased her effort and took control of her planning and lesson implemen tation behaviors. This is the third phase of Pintrichs model for self-regulation, followed onl y by a reaction and reflection on the behavior,
79 which is apparent several months later in an em ail from Rose. When asked what she felt least comfortable doing in the classroom Rose stated, In the beginning, the lesson plan and the actual teaching the lesson (Rose, personal communicat ion, August, 2007). However, lesson plans and the delivery (Rose, personal communication, Augus t, 2007) were also cons idered the areas in which Rose felt she made the most improveme nt throughout the year. Rose was aware that, although she made improvements, she still needed to work on this skill. Awareness is the second phase of Pintrichs (2002) self-r egulation model, and so at this point, Rose is learning how to self-regulate her practice. Conclusion Rose showed tremendous growth throughout he r apprenticeship. Her lesson plans slowly became more detailed and thorough as she accepted feedback and applied the feedback to her work. Her continued experiences in the classroom also impacted he r work as an educator, as she reflected upon those experiences and incorporated her reflections into her future actions. Roses awareness of her students as indi vidual learners influenced her instructional planning work. For example, although her written plans started out w eak, she had the students in mind and was thus able to create valuable learning experiences target ed at their needs. Roses willingness to be selfreflective, seek and accept feedback, and mon itor her own learning are each self-regulatory capacities that will allow her the opportunity to continue to learn from both herself and others. See Table 5-1 for a summary of Roses self-regu latory development as evidenced by Pintrichs (2000) chart.
80 E=Emerging behavior D= Developing behavior A= Accomplished behavior Start of school year (Septembe r) End of school year (May) Collegial relationships: E D A Classroom management: E D A Planning for standard: E D A Planning for student needs: E D A Openness to Consider feedback in lesson planning: E D A Figure 5-1. Roses Developmental Themes Continuum
81Table 5-1. Roses growth and development in self-regulation skills: Phas es & Areas of Self-Regulati on. From Pintrich, P.R. (20 00). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Ze idner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp.452-502). New York: Academic Press. Roses Examples of Regulation 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 1. Forethought, Planning, Activation goal: positive work environment goal: collaborate with peers goal: all students will learn determining her weaknesses in lesson planning collaboration with peers rubric review lesson plan difficulty classroom noise level was stressful negative work environment different student needs curricular expectations 2. Monitoring This classroom is a negative work environment collaboration with peers differentiating instruction is important to reach all students realizing her lesson plan was not complete in time for her meeting with coach collaboration with peers is worth the time rubric review took too much time awareness that help with planning is needed classroom noise level was discussed with mentor conditions are not what would be preferred different student needs curricular expectations 3. Control Need to address negative work environment collaboration with peers allows more ideas to be shared differentiating instruction done during certain lessons deciding to redo lesson after coming to help session with coach without a finished plan collaboration with peers about math rubric review would be done a different day next time request of help from coach classroom noise level was adjusted in some situations considered own feelings on this matter different student needs curricular expectations
82Table 5-1. Continued Roses Examples of Regulation 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 4. Reaction & Reflection A negative work environment can be adjusted with a positive attitude collaboration with peers is beneficial differentiating instruction allowed students to be successful learners collaboration with peers helps with writing strong plans rubric review is important, but not at that time lesson plans improved classroom noise level is improved and tolerable reflection upon own attitude and how this will be addressed different student needs curricular expectations
83 CHAPTER 6 THE CASE OF MARY Marys Snapshot When she herself was in third grade, Mary decided she wanted to be a teacher when she grew up. However, Mary took a different path once she entered college, working as a loan processor. She states that when she saw the A pprenticeship program oppor tunity, she decided to make the change in her career, a nd feels it is, one of the best decisions [she has] ever made (Mary, personal communication, August 13, 2007). Ma ry spent the majority of her time teaching reading. She is considered a more developed ap prentice because, from the start, she had an understanding of basic teaching behaviors, includ ing using a consistent classroom management system and creating a positive classroom atmosphere. As a result of these skills, Mary was able to focus on more sophisticated functions, such as openness to consider feedback in lesson planning and developing collegi al relationships in order to improve her own practice. In an effort to describe Marys orientat ion toward teaching, I offer the following excerpt culled from fieldnotes: Upon entering Marys classroom, all student s are seated at their desks, which are arranged in groups of five or six. Marys desk is in one corner of the room, while her mentor teachers desk is located on the far side of the same wall. CHAMPS behaviors are posted on the wall, with the appropriate student behaviors liste d for each category. Mary positions herself near the students when she speaks to them, standing away from the whiteboard at the front of the room. She calls them to the carpet, where she e xplains the days lesson and then divides them into groups, one of which she asks to return to one of the groups of si x desks. The second group remains on the carpet where she tells them what to do for their assignment. She returns to the group seated at the desks and goes over their ta sk with them, and then circulates around the
84 room, providing assistance to both groups of student s. Students talk with each other about their given assignment as they work together to complete it. Based on this description, Mary can be char acterized as having developed some of the classroom management skills necessary to tran sition students during a lesson, allow children to work in small groups, and differentiate instruc tion. Additionally, Mary de monstrates the ability to work with two groups of student s engaged in different tasks. Analysis Themes As identified previously, several major themes emerged within Marys data, demonstrating how Mary developed in her pl anning and implementation of Differentiated Instruction. Each of the major themes will be disc ussed in terms of Marys growth, as evidenced by the stages of emerging, developing, and accomplished. The major themes that emerged as contributing to the apprentices ability to plan for differentiated instruction included: collegial relationships, classroom management, planning fo r a standard, planning for student need, and openness to consider feedback in planning. Additi onally, an overarching theme of self-regulation also emerged as I began to iden tify attribution for a specific dem onstrated ability. As the most advanced apprentice of the sample, Mary demo nstrates accomplished behaviors within all themes by the end of the school year. The following section illustrates the themes that influenced Marys work related to planning for differentia ted instruction. Additiona lly, Figure 6 shows on a continuum Marys growth within each theme. Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning At the start of the school year, Mary quickly demonstrated competence regarding collegial relationships. Even as an apprentice, Mary became involved with school trainings and brought what she learned back to her grade level team. In September of her apprenticeship year, Mary became the standards coaching grade level re presentative. In this role, she gave feedback
85 regarding what she had learned to her mentor teacher. Taking this role on so early in the year demonstrates that Mary was comfortable in the bo th the learner and peer teacher role within her grade level. Doing this enabled her to develop strong collegial relationships with other teachers at her school. Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth Mary expressed that the most challenging part of teaching was classroom management. When she entered the classroom, she had a diffi cult time being firm and consistent. She said, The one thing I had to really get used to was disc ipline. I tend to give in and feel bad, so that was something I had a hard time with and had to get over quickly. Once I was over the feeling bad part it was easier for me to discipline. It is a necessity!! (Mary, 2007). In October, Mary attended a CHAMPS training for behavior ma nagement, and by early November, her coach commented that, She seems to have found more of a balance between classroom management and having fun with the students. She didnt seem as serious and her relationships with the students were very obvious. Her management has really improved (coach, 2006). Because she was aware of her difficulty and made effort to im prove, she is considered developing at the start of the year. By the end of the year, she cons istently implemented CHAMPS and demonstrated complete competence in managing her class, and she was then considered to be accomplished in classroom management. Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesso n Components Strengthens Planning Planning for a state standard means that th e objective, activity, a nd assessment of the lesson plan match. The activity and assessment should be described in full, so that connection to the standard is clear. Marys lessons plans were consistently written cl early and thoroughly, and also related directly to the state standards. Beginning with her firs t observed differentiated instruction lesson plan, implemented in November, Marys plan for the students was described in
86 full. Her objective, Students will identify autho rs purpose, is measurable and clear, and it directly relates to her selected standards, the first being to identify authors purpose, and the second being to read and organize information for different purposes. He r students were divided into two groups for this activity, and in both ca ses, they were given activities in which they determined the authors purpose of at least one piece of writing. With feedback, she was able to do this at the start of the year and was cons idered at a high degree of developing in writing strong objectives that tied directly to standards. A later le sson plan had the stated objective, Students will discuss during a presentation the importance of using words not violence to make changes, with the correlated standard bei ng, The student understands the importance of participation through community service, civi c improvement, and poli tical activities. The activities throughout th e lesson plan were well-explained, an d the student presentations at the conclusion of their work time, which was spent researching how famous Civil Rights activists successfully used words rather than violence to push for change, did address the objective of the lesson. Mary differentiated this lesson by giving students the oppor tunity to choose which Civil Rights activist to research. This activity was pa rt of a greater unit fo r social studies. A final example of Marys accomplishment in writing standards-based lessons can be found in May, when she was teaching a math lesson on telling time. Mary explained throughout what each student would be doing during the le sson. Again, students were divided into groups, the objective being to learn how to tell time in increments of 1-minute, 5-minutes, 30-minutes or 60-minutes using the handmade clock, whic h was crafted using a tortilla face, M&Ms for minutes, and licorice for hands. The standards she was addressing in the lesson were again closely tied to her objective: One was related to using graphic models to tell time; the other was about solving real world problem s related to time. Each group wa s working towards a clear goal,
87 which was determined by readiness, and she would easily be able to tell which students had and had not met her objective. One group was telling time in 1 minute intervals, while another group was used 5 minute intervals, and the last group worked with 30 minute intervals. Mary consistently wrote her objectives to correlate to a state standard, and ther efore is designated as excellent within this the theme of writing clear, m easurable objectives to correlate to a standard. Planning for Student Need: Knowin g Students Enables Differentiation Mary strove to address the wide gamut of student needs, from planning fun, hands-on lessons which are essential to student participa tion, to planning based on academic need. Mary planned many creative lessons th roughout the year that direct ly involved students in their learning. Aside from the aforementioned tortilla clock lesson, Mary also created a grid on the floor of the classroom to help students learn how to use ordered pairs. She turned this grid into the floor plan of a zoo, and students had to use or dered pairs to describe the location of animals in the zoo. As an extension to that lesson, stude nts played a teacher-made version of the game, Battleship, and had to use correct ordered pairs to sink their partners ships. As part of a language arts lesson, Mary introduced the topic of non-violent reactions to civic problems by describing a situation to which st udents could relate. She explaine d that the city commission was going to put a building where the local baseball field and park wa s located. She asked students for ways to approach the problem without using violence, and then conne cted their answers to the main players of the Civil Rights Movement. Making these connections helped Mary involve her students and get them interest ed in the topic at hand. Each of these lessons was created to catch and maintain students interest, but they are also tightly corre lated to the lesson, and standard, at hand. Mary focused a great deal of her attenti on on monitoring student progress and delivering instruction based on student need. She used a ho mework tracking system and pre-assessments to
88 help her determine both student need and grow th. Mary developed this system for going over homework with each individual stud ent daily. According to her portfol io, she used this system as a formative assessment, which helped her plan her lessons around what the students seemed to understand or misunderstand. Because she feels th at homework should have a purpose, which is to practice the skills students are learning in sc hool, she needed her stud ents to do the work she assigned. In order to guarantee that the homewor k assignments were done by the students, Mary provided a biweekly incentive for those students w ho did at least all but two assignments in each two-week period. Mary frequently used student assessments to guide her practice. This allowed her to create flexible groups, which were catered to match each students need during a particular lesson. In one instance during a language arts lesson, Ma ry was teaching the students about authors purpose. She gave them a pre-quiz on authors purpose which she created on FCAT Explorer a few days prior to the lesson. The results of this quiz guided her as she decided which students to place in one of two groups where authors purpo se would be studied. The students who earned the higher scores were placed in a group where th ey had to write about a page on the topic of their choice. At the end of the writing, they were to explain the purpose of their writing. Once all group members were finished, students exchange d writings and then had to determine the purpose of each others writing. The second group of students worked in pairs. Mary provided them with clippings from newspapers and magazi nes. With their partners, each student had to determine the purpose of each clipping, and wr ite down evidence to support their answers. Clippings included items such as comic strips, advertisements, and news stories. Once the practice was complete, Mary collected the stude nts work and looked for evidence of learning. She then determined which students had mastered the skill and which needed further assistance.
89 The primary assessment allowed her to place stud ents in groups according to their need of practice regarding authors purpose, and this differentiation a llowed all of her students to make appropriate learning gains. A second example of Marys use of assessmen t to guide her practice is in the case of telling time. Again, she gave the students a prequiz to determine readiness and understanding of telling time. The pre-quiz included questions on both clock reading and word problems. From their answers, Mary was able to determine wh ether students needed to be placed in a group practicing quarter and half hour increments, five minute increments, or solving word problems. Because she gave students a pre-quiz, each stud ent was in a group of other students practicing the same skill; those who needed practice with ba sic clock-reading skills were allowed to hone their skill, while those more advanced could mo ve forward and work on more abstract thinking with word problems. Mary often planned for students to work in groups. Within her written portfolio, she stated that putting students into groups provided many benefits. First, it gave the students an opportunity to ask each other for help before consulting with the teacher, which increased cooperation within her classroom. Second, student s working together freed her to walk around the room and assist all groups, rather than stay ing with one struggling st udent the entire time. During her time telling lesson, Mary planned for students to work in cooperative groups. She required them to pose any questions to their grou p members before asking her for help. She felt that doing this allowed them th e opportunity to gain a greater unde rstanding of the concepts they were working on. Between giving pre-assessments to determine student groups, basing lessons around student interest, and relati ng activities to what students already know, Mary has shown
90 from the start that she is accomplished at deve loping her instruction based on the needs of her students. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning: Embracing Feedback St rengthens Planning Another of Marys skills is her openness to consider fee dback from peers, her mentor, and coaches to improve her lessons. She made a visi ble effort to take the suggestions of others from the start. One stand out example is found while Mary was planning for her second differentiated lesson observation. The first lesson plan she turned in was decidedly lacking in the detail and thoroughness of her previous lessons. She did not include an objective in her plan, and it wasnt clear which standard she was addressi ng. Additionally, her asse ssment plan was vague, likely due to the fact that she did not have an objective for her lesson. Feedback was provided to her by the researcher, which expl ained that she needed to more clearly explain what she was expecting of the students. She would need to add an objective and be sure the assessment matched what she decided the students were going to learn. Once Mary focused in on her objective, her lesson became more cohesi ve, and its implementation was a success. Self-Regulation as Over-Arching Theme As noted previously, self-regulation is consid ered an over-arching theme because each of the established secondary themes of collegial relationships, classroom management, planning for a standard, planning for student needs, and openness to considering feedback in planning require self-regulatory development in order for the apprentice to impr ove. Marys ability to selfregulate within each theme is explained in detail below. Marys Ability to Self-Regulate within Each Theme Collegial Relationships Establishing positive relationships with colleagues directly relates to an apprentices working environment, or context. In Marys case, she made an effort to collaborate with her
91 mentor teacher when she realized that she had not seen her mentor write plans for an extended period. Mary decided she wanted to understand how this was done, so she asked her mentor to make time for them to discuss how to write lesson plans for a week at a time. By doing this, Mary took control of her context by seeking help to work towards being able to plan on her own. Mary sent an email describing her efforts at meeting with her mentor: Have a good relationship with my mentor-we are working on getting togeth er once a week to work on lesson plans-haven't seen much of those so this is definitely needed!! (Mary, personal communication, October, 2006). Mary demonstrates her willingness to seek out help when she feels she needs it; this proactivity is part of self-regulation (Manning & Payne, 1993). Mary also made several attempts to co-t each with both her mentor and coach. In one particular example, Mary led the lesson and her co ach assisted the students. Her coach has this to say about the co-teaching experience: During Marys first spring observation she incor porated me (Lauren) into the lesson as a co-teacher. The co-teaching model utilized wa s one teach/one assistMy role in the lesson was to walk around and assist the kids with th e set up of their game. There were also an odd number of students so I was able to play the game with one of the students. (coach, personal communicatio n, January, 2007) Mary took advantage of having two adults in the classroom, and used the second adult to assist students with their work, which freed her to circ ulate around the room and work with students as needed. Mary used foresight in planning a lesson th at incorporated available resources. Foresight and planning is an early phase in Pint richs (2000) model for self-regulation. In these instances, Mary demonstrated that sh e is able to work with her colleagues, and also use available resources to improve instru ction for her students. Additionally, she showed that she is willing to take the initiative and re quest help when needed; asking her mentor teacher for help with planning not only showed that she sa w a need, but also showed that she is willing to take control of a situation so she can create a suitable outcome for her learning.
92 Classroom Management Similar to Marys identification of her n eed to understand lesson planning, Mary also experienced a felt difficulty with classroom management at the beginning of the school year. Her five-week progress report noted th at one of her areas of impr ovement was consistency with CHAMPS and student flip cards (coach, person al communication, October, 2006). Very shortly after, Mary attended a CHAMPS training fo r classroom management, after which Mary commented, We went to CHAMPS training last week and that wa s a big help-really enjoyed it (Mary, personal communication, October, 2006). Mary sought help in an ar ea she felt needed work, and thus improved her ski lls in the area of classroom ma nagement. By the beginning of November, her coach noted, [Mary] seems to ha ve found more of a balance between classroom management and having fun with the students. Sh e didn't seem as serious and her relationships with the students were very obvious. Her mana gement has really improved (coach, personal communication, November, 2006). In an email the following August, Mary noted, The one thing I had to really get used to was discipline. I tend to give in and feel bad, so that was something I had a hard time with a nd had to get over quickly. Once I was over the feeling bad part it was easier for me to discip line. It is a necessity !!...Discipline would be what I would say I improved on the most throug hout the whole year. Also, just being able to take charge of the class, at first I was intimidated and ne rvous, but once those feelings go away it was easier and I got a lot more comfortable in the classroom as a whole. (Mary, personal communication, August, 2007) According to Pintrichs model, Mary renegotiated her context and adjusted her actions to suit a need. This is the third phase in this model for self-regulati on. By further explaining her felt improvement in the classroom atmosphere, Mary re flected on the change she felt when she first realized she was in control of the class. Planning for a Standard While participating in a January workshop on differentiating instru ction, Marys class watched a video showing an experienced teache r modeling a differentiated lesson. The teacher
93 created a hands-on lesson where students used tortillas and candy to cr eate a clock, and then answered readiness specific wo rd problems about time. Mary bo rrowed this lesson and adapted it to fit the needs of her own classroom. Even thoug h the apprentices were not told to use this specific lesson, Mary saw an opportunity for her st udents to engage in a fun, hands-on lesson that addressed one of the required grade-level standard s. Marys reflection afte r this lesson stated, A lot of the students finally understood how to c ount by 5's on the clock to tell time. All groups were able to make their clocks tell the time they pickedeven if they needed help from the others the groups were able to get to the right answer (Mary, portfoli o, May, 2007). Here, Marys goal of making sure her students understood how to tell time pushed her to bo rrow an engaging lesson that she selected to match a re quired standard, and differentiating the content made sure that all students were learning what they needed to move them to the next level. Planning for Student Need Mary was very motivated in addressing stude nt need within her lessons. Time and time again, she used what she knew about the students to create engaging lesso ns that addressed the standard at hand as well as the needs of her st udents. After her authors purpose lesson, Mary reflected on how well her students comp leted their assigned activities: When we get back into authors purpose I will make sure to pay special attention to the students today who still had some difficulty to make sure they get it. I think with more articles and books of different types they will be able to see the Authors purpose betterthey already understood it better th an the first time we did itIn the future, I will be more aware of my students abilities and try to group them together like I did for this lesson so everyone will be learning on their level. It seem s to be more fun for them toogetting away from constant whole group instructio n. (Mary, reflection 1, November, 2006) In this situation Mary cognitively set a goal, fo r students to understand authors purpose. She then monitored their progress in learning this ski ll, selecting specific targ ets for each student to accomplish, based on their own need. Upon reflec tion, Mary decided that students had made progress, and would likely continue to do so as they continued working with authors purpose.
94 This example illustrates Marys movement thr ough each phase of self-regul ation in the area of cognition. Mary also addressed student need outside of daily lesson planning. When she discovered that most of her students were not completi ng their assigned homework, she thought about and planned a solution to this probl em, one within the context of her classroom. In doing so, she moved through Pintrichs first phase of contextu al self-regulation. She accordingly made a plan to change students experience of doing ho mework, creating a homework tracking system, complete with a motivational reward. She then moved to the next phase of self-regulation, changing the context of the as signments. After implementing her homework tracking system, Mary evaluated its success: I learned that it was difficult to know who understood the lessons being taught daily if homework wasn't checked. You can not just assess students on tests; checking homework daily will show you who is st ruggling and who understands. By having the students come to me individually I am able to take the time to review the homework before class starts so I know what I need to add to my lesson plan s for that day. Checking homework also helps me to see what I can plan for the following day as well if they are ready to move forwardI also learned that a lot of st udents will not do homework if there are no consequences, good or bad. This is why I implemented the reward every 2 weeks for those who complete homeworkThis is to keep them doing the homework because a lot of them wouldn't do it in the beginning of the year, but there has been great improvement since I implemented this. (Mary, portfolio, May 2007). Again, Mary successfully made a full cycle thro ugh the phases of self-re gulation: perceiving a part of her context she wished to change, making a plan to do so, monitoring the change, and evaluating its worth. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning As an accomplished apprentice, Mary was cr itical of her own t eaching and took her own criticisms, as well as the feedback of others, a nd used what she learned to improve her practice. During her lesson regarding authors purpose, Mary noticed that th e students in the identification of purpose group were having trouble keeping th eir clippings organized. This problem was
95 discussed during her post-obser vation conference, and she iden tified the problem and possible solutions, one being to label the clippings with an identifying letter, which could then be recorded within the students answers: My arti cles I had printed out I feel were good and the students enjoyed them, but I should have labeled them for them so they knew what to call them when writing down the categories on their autho rs purpose worksheet. But they made up their own titles so it was fine, but next time I woul d title it for them (Mary, reflection 1, 2323,2454). Mary reflected on her lesson, thinking of ways to make change for the future, which is the last phase of self-regulation. During Marys lesson on telling time, student s used tortillas and candy to create a clock. She and the students discovered that the tortillas were not the best thing to use for the face of the clock, and so they thought of other items that coul d be used in their plac e. Mary planned to use student feedback to make future experiences wi th this particular less on even more successful: The materials I used were effective because it got the students excited to use them and see how they were going to make a clock out of them. They did give me some suggestions on what I could use instead of the tortillas because they smelled-(paper or cardboard) (Mar y, reflection 3, May, 2007). Again, she noted in her reflection ways to make this change for future lessons in order to improve the result. Rather than simp ly complaining about how a lesson didnt work perfectly, Mary looked for ways to improve it, lis tening to feedback from her students, and then wrote down where and what changes needed to occur. Experienced teachers see possible lesson ideas ev en when they are not specifically working on planning. Mary shows diligence in learning from her own experience and the experiences of others. Mary herself states that she is comfortable in all aspe cts of teaching (Mary, personal communication, August 13, 2007). It is clear that her lesson plans show a concern for student
96 interest and a desire for stude nt learning. Her lessons are both engaging and tightly focused around the required standards, and since she ba ses her student groups around readiness, her students are learning at th eir risk level: they are working just above what they already know, but are not frustrated by doing someth ing far above their readiness. Because she entered the classroom already able to attend to things like positive collegial relationships and classroom ma nagement, and planning appropria te lessons that address both stand and student need, Mary was able to focus her attention on self-refl ection and considering feedback in her planning. Mary does not only teach day-by-day; sh e is constantly thinking about her work and pro-actively making changes as she s ees fit. These are char acteristics of a selfregulated teacher (Manning & Payne 1993). See Table 6-1 for an i llustration of Marys use of self-regulation to improve her pr actice. Although she is not self -regulating in all aspects of teaching, as a beginning teacher, she is able to move through much of the self-regulation cycle by following her goals through fr om planning to reflection. Conclusion The most important thing about Mary is that her willingness to both take feedback and try new ideas allowed her the opportunity to learn how to be a better teacher. She got to know her students, which was visible through her ability to plan lessons that address students' interests and abilities. Her lessons were focused and met the re quired standards, and so were respectful of students' time and effort, and because she check ed their homework regularly for needs, her lessons that followed addressed those needs.
97 E=Emerging behavior D= Developing behavior A= Accomplished behavior Start of school year (Septembe r) End of school year (May) Collegial relationships: E D A Classroom management: E D A Planning for standard: E D A Planning for student needs: E D A Openness to consider feedback in lesson planning: E D A Figure 6-1. Marys Developmental Themes Continuum
98Table 6-1. Marys growth and development in self-regulation skills: Phases & Areas of Self-Regulation. From Pintrich, P.R. (20 00). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Ze idner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp.452-502). New York: Academic Press. Marys Examples of Regulation 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 1. Forethought, Planning, Activation Goal 1: How to use 2 adults in the room? Goal 2: teach students so they know authors purpose Students not listening 2. Monitoring There are 2 adults in the room. Awareness of the need to learn how to manage classroom Awareness of the need to learn how to plan lessons CHAMPS training 3. Control Need to utilize both adults through use of co-teaching. Borrow others lesson ideas Didnt see enough examples of lesson planning, so asked to meet with mentor. Took CHAMPS training More consistent use of classroom management 4. Reaction & Reflection Upon reflection, students improved ability to identify authors purpose. Student behavior improved Students better behaved.
99 CHAPTER 7 THE CASE OF JANE Janes Snapshot Jane entered teaching after working as an architect. She cites Jesus as her reason for entering the apprenticeship, believing that teachin g is her calling (Jane, personal communication, August 13, 2007). Jane regularly tau ght science, often connecting th e science curriculum to math and language arts standards. Mo st of her time as an appren tice was spent working on the rudimentary skills of teaching, including cla ssroom management and navigating collegial relationships. Although Jane was capable of planning creative lessons she had difficulty presenting them at the students levels, as well as implementation, because she spent so much time working on these attention-grabbing issues. In an effort to describe Janes orienta tion toward teaching, I offer the following excerpt culled from fieldnotes: Upon entering Janes classroom, the noise leve l is very high. Some students are sitting at their desks, while others are walking around the room, seemingl y with no destination in mind. Jane stands at the front of the room, working wi th a group of students seated at a kidney-shaped table, her back to the rest of the class. None of the students behind her appear to be working on any classwork. After she explains the assignmen t to the students in the small group, she turns around to the others, telling them they need to sit down and get to work. She makes an attempt to circulate to those students, but sh e is soon called back to the kidne y-shaped table to assist some of those students. The rest of the class again starts talking and movi ng around the room. Jane seems unable to manage either group, as few of th e students make an effort to complete the task they are assigned. The atmosphere is chaotic, and it is appears difficult for students to concentrate through the chaos.
100 Based on this depiction, Jane can be characte rized as a teacher who has not yet developed the classroom management skills necessary to keep her students focused and on task. Additionally, although she made an attempt to attend to student needs, her lack of awareness regarding her students actions keeps he r from being an effective teacher. Analysis Themes As identified previously, several major themes emerged within Janes data, demonstrating how Jane developed in her planning and implementa tion of differentiated in struction. Each of the major themes will be discussed in terms of Ja nes growth, as evidenced by the stages of emerging, developing, and accomplished. The major th emes that emerged as contributing to the apprentices ability to plan for differentiated instruction included collegial relationships, classroom management, planning for a standard, planning for student need, and openness to consider feedback in planning. Additionally, an overarching theme of self-regulation also emerged as I began to identify attribution for a specific demonstrated ability. The following section illustrates the themes th at influenced Janes work related to planning for differentiated instruction. Additionally, Figure 7 shows on a con tinuum Janes growth within each theme. Collegial Relationships: Collegial Relationships Strengthen Planning Jane was first placed in a second grade clas sroom, where her difficulties establishing positive relationships with colleagues began. Her mentor teacher did not have a consistent classroom management system in place, and Jane s first experiences in the classroom involved many discipline problems. After approximately one month in the classroom, her mentor resigned. Before a new teacher was found, Jane ca lled for a parent confer ence with parents who have been hostile in the past, without inviting another faculty member. This conference led to some amount of trouble, as the parents later ac cused Jane of making inappropriate comments. Without a witness, Jane was faced with a he said-she said situation. As an apprentice, Jane was
101 not to take on this responsibility herself; a mo re experienced faculty member should have been in the room during a situation such as this. This is an early example of Jane s inability to decipher when she should lead situations and when she needed to work with a colleague, and why she is considered emerging regarding collegial rela tionships at the beginning of the year. In October of her apprenticeship, Jane wrote an email to her principal, stating several concerns she noticed duri ng this placement regarding the teache rs abilities and what content had been taught. Jane stated that sh e would like the opportunity to take over the class from that point on, even though she had not completed her apprentic eship or gained state certification, and the class was riddled with classroom management problems as they went from substitute to substitute. She reasoned that the students kne w her, and she knew them, so she was most qualified to complete the year. However, due to Janes inexperience, she was moved to a neighboring classroom with a differe nt teacher, and a new teacher was hired to take over with her original students. This tran sition did not go smoothly, as Jane again tried to remain with her former charges for reading inst ruction through the begi nning of November. Due to the perceived tone of her email and her subsequent insistence th at she take control of the class, the principal was inclined to remove Jane from the program Jane apologized and worked out the situation with the principal, and was able to stay to finish the year in her new placement. Janes preoccupation regarding these matters prevented her from finding the time to plan appropriate lessons for the students. Therefore, she demonstrated that her skill regarding collegial relationships was emerging at th is point of the school year. In April, Jane again asked to be removed from her placement and put with another mentor. Due to Janes difficulty keeping day-to-day cont rol of the students, as well as her tendency to teach above the students levels, her mentor to ld her she could not recommend her for a teaching
102 position. Instead of taking her mentors feedback regarding maintaining c onsistent expectations and toning down her working vocabulary so stude nts could follow her speech, Jane kept doing the same things she had been doing, which invite d chaos into her classroom. Her request to switch classrooms was not honored, and Jane remained in this second grade classroom. Even at the end of the year, Jane had trouble adapting her behavior to the needs of her classroom. Although she claimed to get along with her me ntor, this is not all it takes for positive relationships with colleagues. Jane did not unde rstand the need to be flexible rather than confrontational, even in May, wh ich meant that she was still cons idered to be at the emerging level in developing positive collegial relationships. Classroom Management: Classroom Management Facilitates Growth When Jane entered her second placement in November, she had a lot of ground to make up. She especially needed help with classroom management, as her students appeared to be running the class. Beginning with her first observation, Jane was gi ven a great deal of feedback, including ways to help her keep the students focused on the lesson at hand. During these postobservation conferences, Jane seemed to agree w ith the feedback, but made no motions to act on it since the same behaviors were seen in subsequent observati ons. During a lesson observation on October 25, Janes coach noted that Jane spent a majority of the lesson yelling over the students, to no avail as she did not gain their attention. Jane asked the coach to take over the lesson for her, which she did successfully. Jane and her coach disc ussed this issue, but it was seen again in an observation on December 6. Her coach was conc erned that Jane did not see classroom management as a trouble area to focus on, even after she was provided with feedback regarding how to implement a consistent management pl an. Throughout the year, Jane struggled with classroom management, not using the school behavior program, CHAMPS, which other apprentices used successfully, but instead waiting until April to create an elaborate plan, a token
103 system in which students earned money to be sp ent at the end of the year. Because she waited until almost the end of the year to begin, and since students had to wait weeks to purchase their prize, and since control of the classroom was taken away from Ja ne by her mentor teacher, this management plan was only moderately successf ul. Jane noted an improvement in student behavior, but her mentor teacher still felt that sh e needed to take over as the lead teacher. Had she taken the feedback given to her by her me ntor and coach, it is likely she would have implemented a management system much earlier in the year, or followed the lead of others throughout the school successfully using CHAMPS. Jane took a different approach to classr oom management during an observation on May 16, a science lesson about volcanoes. The researcher waited outside the d oor for about 5 minutes, per Janes request, as she tried to get the class settled. At this po int, she came to the door with several students, and asked the teacher next door to take th em during her observation. These students were celebrating the succ ess of being asked to leave befo re the lesson even began with high-fives and shouts. Jane did not send them out with any work to do, so they spent the next forty minutes missing content and instruction. By asking students to leave before they had a chance to misbehave, Jane shows that she could not maintain the classroom environment so that all students were able to particip ate in the lesson without disruption. On several occasions throughout the year, Jane disciplined students in the public forum of the classroom by stopping the lesson midway to discuss inappropriate behaviors. She also spoke harshly to some students (coac h, personal communication, April, 2007). Harsh speech was also observed earlier in the year, in January, during a science lesso n. The feedback she was given regarding ways to speak to students and the info rmation from literature she was assigned which discussed ways to establish relationships with students went unheeded, and students continued
104 acting out during her instruction time. Because Jane didnt try to implement a behavior plan until far into the school year, she is considered emerging at that point, but due to her realization that change needed to make indicates that by years end, she could be considered developing: she did not yet effectively handle classroom management, but she did see it as an issue that needed her attention. Janes difficulty with differentiating inst ruction is directly refl ected in her difficulties with classroom management because it shows a disconnect between her and her students. There is a cycle of disrespect in her classroom; her students dont show her respect because she doesnt show them respect. This creates a problem with di fferentiation because doing so is possible only when a teacher really knows her students. Planning for a Standard: Linking Lesso n Components Strengthens Planning Jane progressed in her ability to write measurable, standa rds-based objectives. She started the year at the emerging level, writing objectives that were br oad ideas of what she wanted students to be able to do that were loosely based on the state standard. For example, a lesson from October (Jane, Lesson 1, October 2007) had as its stated objectives, ) to allow the students to practice the reading comprehension skills they have learned this year, 2) allow the students to learn more about spid ers and connect this informati on to the world we live in. Neither of these objectives relate specifically to the standards Jane chose for this lesson, which required students to read for information and wr ite for a specific purpose. Her objectives did not include a measurable task for students to complete so it would be difficult for Jane to determine whether students met the goal within her assessment By her second lesson in March, Jane had improve d in this area. Her objectives for social studies lesson stated that student s were to research African Amer icans who have contributed to American society in the time directly af ter the Civil War and learn methodologies for communicating information to their colleagues. Th e standards Jane selected to accompany these
105 objectives were tied to understanding that histor y tells a story and the contributions of famous historical figures. In this cas e, Janes objectives are more cl ear and measurable, but do not both directly relate to a standard. In addition, the assessment for th is activity was for students to present a summary of what was learned along with their group project choice. The assessment does correlate to the standard, but it only loosely connects with the objective; in a concise and correct lesson plan, all of these el ements should be linked together. A final example of Janes growth regarding planning to address a standard is found in a May science lesson. Her objective for this lesson, to have students learn how and why a volcano is made, does not require a measurable student behavior, and is not re lated to the standard selected: The student uses maps, globes, and ot her three dimensional obj ects to identify and locate places. Her assessment for this activity does match the objective, as it asks for students to either write a paragraph explaining how a volcano is made or draw a picture and label it. Both assignments require students to use specific voc abulary to explain how a volcano is formed. It appears that Jane made an attempt to find a sta ndard to match what she wanted to do with the students, but proper lesson planning should happen the other way: a standard is selected, and then activities are created to teac h that particular standard. But because Jane has made an attempt to correlate the standard with th e parts of her lesson, she is determ ined to be developing at this skill at the end of the school year. However, her ability to plan suitable lessons is only the beginning. The next step in planning to a standard will come when Jane is able to plan for a standard with specific student in mind, an idea address in the following section. Planning for Student Need: Knowin g Students Enables Differentiation Jane also struggled with writing her lessons to suit the needs of her students. She is considered emerging in this skill at the start of the year. Although she wr ote well-written lessons, they were often above the level of her learners which caused students to lose focus and become
106 disruptive. In preparation for th e aforementioned activity on spiders, Jane prepared an elaborate display board with maps, text, and pictures re lated to spiders. She printed text found on the internet and glued it to the board, without the text revisions that woul d have brought the text down to second grade reading level. The font wa s very small, and students at the board had a difficult time both reading the text and understa nding what was read. Additionally, students at the board were given work packets to complete, al so typed in a difficult to read font. Because of these problems, students in the activity board gr oup needed constant help from Jane, who was trying to work with the remainde r of the class at the same time. The end result was an entire room of off task students, all of whom needed a question answered before they could progress in their work. Jane was being pulled in several di rections at once. Jane did learn from this experience, and subsequent lessons were geared much more closely to students readiness levels. Jane was able to create several relevant a nd creative lessons for her students. In these instances, she did have their atte ntion and behavior issues were at a minimum. She used her architectural background to catch the students interest. In one le sson, Jane reinforced lessons on estimating, measuring, and scale through diagrams and model building. In another language arts lesson, Jane created a scavenge r hunt where students searched for words with the a sound. Perhaps her most engaging lesson was a school fiel d trip where she brought students outside to study the wind. She introduced the lesson with a di scussion with the students, who were seated on the carpet. They talked about personal experien ces with wind, and then Ja ne introduced to the group new vocabulary words and reviewed vocabular y on the topic they had previously learned. The students then lined up and we nt outside to observe the wind a nd how it affected the flag that was on top of the school. Jane also used her coach as a team-teacher. Students were engaged and
107 on task, and although the coach noted some behavi or problems, the active lesson brought about fewer problems than usual. Another strong, active science lesson was observed in February. This time, students worked in groups of four to measure water te mperature. One group member was the recorder, and the remaining three were in charge of meas uring water temperature in hot, cold, and mixed bowls of water. Only one pencil was availabl e to each group, and all supplies were set up and ready when students returned fr om lunch. Janes coach noted an improvement in classroom management during this lesson, and students were again actively creati ng their own knowledge about water temperature. Jane was able to make science fun, and students responded appropriately. Her use of active, engaging lessons helped keep behavior issues to a minimum. Jane eventually began considering the needs of her students when pla nning lessons; however, she was better able to address their interests than she wa s able to address their r eadiness. Her skills in differentiation are rudimentary, as she does not address students needs as indivi dual learners instead focusing on gaining the attention of the entire class. Given her difficulties in classroom management, however, this may be considered a va lid starting point for Jane. At the end of the year, taking her active, hands-on science lesson pl ans into consideration, Jane is considered developing in this skill. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning: Embracing Feedback St rengthens Planning Jane resisted feedback in all aspects of her practice. As di scussed previously, her coachs suggestions that Jane work on discipline went unheeded until late in the school year. In November, apprentices were required to create a lesson plan showing di fferentiation. Her lesson on spiders was submitted and feedback was given to Jane. Her lesson required that some of the students create a chart to compare spiders to ins ects, and other students were asked to fill in the blanks in sentences about spiders, after readi ng sentences about spiders on a display board and
108 then use that information to write their own pa ragraph. The feedback Ja ne received asked the following: Have they written a paragraph like this beforepicking information to go into a paragraph? and Are they good at grouping sim ilar ideas together? ...T hey will have to know how to group the same things together in order to compare. Rather than address the feedback when revising her lesson, Jane chose to complete ly revamp the lesson before the observation, not giving the observer time to review the changes. Her new lesson did not include any part of the original plan, showing a resist ance to incorporating sugges tions into her first lesson. Jane did demonstrate that she heard feedback given to her regarding a lesson written in March for a differentiated planning assignment. He r preliminary lesson activity gave the students six choices from which they could choose to co mplete their activity: a diorama, poster, news report, play, poem, or song. Fee dback was given, suggesting to Jane that she limit the activity choices to a more manageable number. She wa s reminded that she would need to show an example and have a way to score each type of pr oject, and that it may en d up being a great deal of work for her as the teacher, rather than what could be a fun learning e xperience for the entire class. As a result, Jane did limit the activities to a poster, play, poem, or song. She decided that, although the other options were wo rthy, students would need to lear n how to do them prior to the assignment and so would be removed from the li st for the time being. Additionally, she limited the number of research choices for the same a ssignment. By mid-way through the year, Jane did show greater willingness to accept feedback; however, she did not routinely do so. Although considered emerging at the onset of the school year she is considered to be developing in this skill by years end. Self-Regulation as Over-Arching Theme As explained in pervious chapters, self-regu lation is considered an over-arching theme because each of the established secondary themes of collegial relationships, classroom
109 management, planning for a standard, planning fo r student needs, and openness to consider feedback in planning require self -regulatory development in orde r for the apprentice to improve. The follow sections illustrate how Jane demonstrat ed her ability to self-r egulate within each of the aforementioned themes. Janes Ability to Self-Regulate within Each Theme Collegial Relationships Jane had great difficulty forming positive relationships with her colleagues. One reason could be that how she tried to reach her goal for student learning was not aligned with the methods of others at her school. Throughout the y ear, Jane became preoccupied with matters that did not involve the students in her class, or th e methods she was supposed to be learning, both in her university classes and by observation. Jane was ve ry concerned for the future of her students, but this very large-scale worry kept her from seeing the here and now. With her inexperience came a grand vision of affecting ev ery child. She needed to meet w ith the principal at that exact moment so they could do the one thing to make things better for the students, and if they didnt they would lose the kids. Although the principal al so had the best interest of the students in mind, she did not work with the same immediacy as Jane. Cognitively, Jane was able to set a goal for student learning, but she was not able to monitor how her im mediacy was negatively affecting the situation. After her original mentor teacher resigned, Jane sent an email to her principal requesting that she take over the class. She expressed c oncern that the disruption in the students education would have serious implicati ons on their future as students. She concluded by saying she would continue to speak up and send emails until the situation was remedied to her satisfaction. According to Pintrichs (2000) mode l for self-regulation, Jane made a judgment regarding the efficacy of those around her. Howeve r, her zest for an imme diate solution of her choosing did not take into account that others around her had more authority than she. Although
110 she tried to take control of th e situation, which is phase three of the model, her failure to understand her lack of authority hur t her relationships with colleag ues, and most especially her principal. Jane had difficulties with the type of pr ofessionalism required when working in a school. She seems to focus only on immediate concerns and doesnt seem to give any forethought to her actions. After the original email she sent to her principal, Jane was requi red to issue an apology due to her perceived tone. Her apology reflected her inability to understand the hierarchy present in a school setting, and instead relied on her knowl edge of the corporate world to decide how to act. Her closing statement expressed a desire to remain at work at this school, and a request for a personal conversation between herself and the principal sometime the following week. This example demonstrates the disconnect Jane felt be tween her life in the corporate world and her new life in a school. Jane reached the third phase of self-regulation regarding behavior, which was seeking help, but it took her several weeks to come to term s with and accept her assignment, and this came only after she was faced with termination from the program due to what was perceived as her unprofessional behavior. The following illustration again shows Janes trouble with professionalism, this time concerning her new mentor teacher: Spoke with Jane's new mentor. She is work ing on Jane's classroom management skills, following the curriculum and professional behavi ors. It sounds like she is totally in tuned with what Jane needs. She has her working in small groups with students that are at or above grade level. She said she has really had to get on to he r about interrup ting her in the middle of teaching or conversations. (coac h, personal communication, November, 2006) Again, Jane was not aware of the behavioral expe ctations in place in her environment, and she had difficulty interpreting her envi ronment in terms of her own needs. A dichotomy existed here because Jane explained that she didnt want to interrupt her principal during the work day, and so writes an email instead, but later is told to stop interrupting her mentor teacher during instruction
111 and conversations. She did not seem able to ge t past the planning phase and it could be argued that she did not even en ter this phase, as her actions do not give any evidence to support the notion that she used forethought to make decisions to act. Classroom Management Jane again demonstrated difficulty with se lf-regulation in terms of the next theme, classroom management. When visiting her classroom, it appeared that she didnt even notice that students were out of their seats and talking ove r her. Her voice got loud er as she talked over them, but she made no effort to stop their misbehav ior. This excerpt is from a classroom visit by her coach in October, Jane had her 2nd formal observation todayShe r eally needs classroom management. She was screaming over the kids, no one was paying attention; there was no learning taking place. It finally got so bad she aske d me to finish the lesson for her. I did and the kids did great (coach, supervisor notes, October, 2006). Although Jane was aware that her classroom context needed to be adjusted, she co uld not take control of the situation herself. Because her coach was able to take over the class, with positive results, it is clear that control could be gained. However, Jane did not make any efforts to change her own behavior. For example, even though Jane attended CHAMPS cla ssroom management training in the fall, she did not use the CHAMPS method in her classroom. Using this technique could potentially have had an affect on her students behavior, but she did not put her training into practice. By April, Jane was beginning to take contro l over her environment, however it was still not consistent and there were still many holes in her approach. The following excerpts, from the coachs notes from an April obs ervation, show some degree of conscious classroom monitoring on Janes part. She made an effort to be cleare r with her expectations, but she still seemed to miss a lot of things her students were doing, which s hows that she is not able to scan the entire room and monitor the conditions in the room.
112 Glad to see you are trying new management methods. I see a big improvement. Instead of talking over them or getting frustrated you are not menti oning every little thing going wrong and interrupting the lesson (moves the tape and trash can away from [student] w/out stopping lesson) Getting better at explicit directions (g et out your journal; ra ise your hand if you dont have one, etc...) Are you aware of what [student] is doing in the back of the room? -Watch how you are speaking to the students. There are a few you seem to have a shorter fuse with... It is so important for the student s to think of you as being completely fair. (coach, observation notes, April, 2007). Although Jane shows her ability to make some changes in her classroom environment, upon reflection, she does not see a problem with the thi ngs going on that still need work. Even in May, during another observation, she speaks conde scendingly to some students (Researcher, conference notes, May 2007), even though she has b een given feedback on this subject before. Her ability to change the context is limited, a nd her reflection on this matter appears weak. Planning for a Standard Janes inexperience and idealism kept her from providing the students with an atmosphere to learn. In planning lessons she fe lt they should be able to do, she missed out on providing them with lessons they were capable of mastering, which would have brought them to those other lessons. Jane was eventually able to pl an appropriate lesson objectives that correlated to a state standard, which shows some degree of cognitive self-regulation in this area. However, it is difficult to determine whether Jane consid ered her own thinking processes when creating her lessons, matching them to an appropriate state sta ndard. There is no evidence of her reflection in this area, but an assumption can be made based on her improvement that she had a goal in mind of improving her planned lessons and tying her ob jectives and activities more tightly to state requirements. An example of her growth is seen in the difference between an objective written in November, The first objective of this lesson is to allow the students to practice the reading
113 comprehension skills they have learned this year (Jane, lesson 1 revised, 399,534), and a later objective written in March, The students should learn methodologi es for communicating information to their peers that they have acqui red through research of th e African American of their choice (Jane, lesson 2 revised, 488,653). A lthough not all of her plans demonstrate growth in this skill, Jane does show so me degree of improvement but it is difficult to determine whether this growth is due to conscious goal-se tting and forethought on Janes part. Planning for Student Needs In planning to address student needs, Jane clearly thought about and planned with students in mind. Her grade book incl uded an intricate char t with student assessment scores in all subject areas, along with possible trouble spot s students might be facing. However, her monitoring and control in this area did not nece ssarily address the need s of the students which she so thoroughly documented, which limits the de gree of self-regulation Jane achieved within this theme. During Janes first differentiated lesson obs ervation activity in N ovember, Jane created activity packets for each reading readiness level group. These packets were made up entirely of different worksheets with different tasks on the topic of spiders, including reading comprehension and vocabulary questions, along with a drawing activity (Jane, lesson 1 revised, November, 2006). Jane attempted to give the st udents work they could accomplish, but she didnt realize that the font was difficult to read, a nd that what she had given them was really just a packet of worksheets. Students struggled during the time at this center, but Jane did not make any changes to the task, nor di d she describe these difficult ies in her reflection, instead discussing the creativity her stude nts displayed, I was pleased w ith the hidden talents of my group 3 students. Some were extremely creative and utilized the difficult words and phrases presented to them. I think these talents were displayed because the subject and possibly the
114 photos in the display inspired them (Jane, lesso n 1 reflection, November, 2006). It is clear that Janes interpretation of the activity focused on a positive result; however, this focus also shows that she was not fully aware of the needs of her students during this particular activity. Later in the year, however, Ja ne showed some improvement in creating activities that met students needs in both interest a nd readiness as a class, but she st ill was not attending to specific needs students had as indi vidual learners which is a key to differentiation: The co-teaching model utilized was team t eaching. We were teaching a science lesson to her 2nd grade class. The purpose of the le sson was to assess the students background knowledge of wind and how to measure wind. Sh e also introduced new vocabulary words of instruments that measure wind. She starte d with a whole group in troduction with the students seated on the carpet. We talked a bout our experiences with wind. What do you think creates wind? What does wind feel like ? How can you tell when it is windy out? Jane introduced the words: anemometer, wind sock, and Beaufort scale. We also discussed using your senses (touch, sight, etc.) as tools. The word mete orologist was also reviewed from a previous lesson. After the mini less on on the floor the students lined up and we went outside to observe the wi nd and how it affects the flag on the top of the school. It was a very windy day and we saw a variety of affects that wind has on the flag. (coach, supervisor notes, January, 2007) Like Janes improvement in Planning for a Standa rd, it is difficult to determine whether Janes improvement occurred due to conscious thought a nd action on her part. Self-regulation is, in part, possible due to a pro-active effort to iden tify a goal and work towards meeting it. Janes lesson reflection and thoughts f ound in her portfolio do not illu strate an intentional action towards a specified goal. Openness to Consider Feedback in Planning Jane struggled throughout the school year with taking others feedback into consideration when planning her lessons. She had a particular ly difficult time finding room for improvement in any of her lessons. Jane was able to be compliment ary of her own practice, but didnt see that, in many cases, the classroom management and pl anning problems got in the way of a truly successful class period. Jane did take many opportunities to read literature and attend trainings
115 related to topics of interest to her, like the science training she attende d in the spring, but she tended to stay away from those topics that would have made an impact on the skills that needed the most help. Similarly, she did not appear to put into practice any of the information she read about. For example, she was given reading materials about writing workshops, but, according to notes made on this topic, One thing that bothered me about Jane was th at I had sent her mate rials about writer's workshop and she didn't seem to have even looked at themWe should just keep our eye on this. Each time I have been there she has bl amed the lack of curriculum in the classroom on her inability to navigate. (University S upervisor, personal communication, September, 2006) Jane shows a considerable lack of foresight in terms of accepting feedback on other matters as well, including her own school work for her unive rsity coursework. She was given an assignment and was asked to revise it, but decided against the revisions, stating in part that she did not feel that the instructions were specific. Also, othe r work had been accepted without the revisions, so she would not be revising her work (Jane, pe rsonal communication, October, 2006). What Jane didnt consider was that the request for her to make changes on her assignment was in her best interest, and that she may have missed an oppor tunity for learning. Although she showed an awareness of what others were doing, she did not demonstrate an awareness of her own needs, again showing a lack of ability to self-regulate in a school context. Two months later, in December, Jane agai n had a discussion with her coach about her need to accept feedback and take it seriously, I had a very honest meeting with Jane right before Christmas. We discussed what she needs to do in order to be successf ul in this program. She is a very strong planner butshe also does not know how to effectively implement the lessons she creates (coach, personal comm unication, January, 2007). Jane rea lly struggled with awareness of her own needs, and seemed re peatedly unable to perceive the felt difficulties and make efforts to choose strategies that would have a pos itive affect on her work (Pintrich, 2000).
116 Table 7 illustrates instances where Jane s howed self-regulation skills. Jane does not demonstrate an ability to fully self-regulat e within any of the themes which designate developmental stages of an apprentice teacher Although she begins by making some goals, she does not demonstrate an ability to follow t hose goals to completion. She does make small changes in her practice, but these changes do not seem to stem from any conscious action on her part, but instead appear to be last ditch efforts where Jane is just random ly trying one things or another without first thinking through a plan of action. Conclusion Perhaps the most interesting thing about Ja ne was her reluctance to see her students as real students. By this I mean that she took very specific and organized no tes about each student's progress, but she did not use that information to pl an her lessons to meet their needs. Her use of differentiated instruction was very limited, and I think this has a lot to do with her lack of classroom management. Because she had very littl e authority in the room, she had little chance to implement worthwhile lessons. By the time the class got settled, time for the lesson was almost over.
117 E=Emerging behavior D= Developing behavior A= Accomplished behavior Start of school year (Septembe r) End of school year (May) Collegial relationships: E D A Classroom management: E D A Planning for standard: E D A Planning for student needs: E D A Openness to consider feedback in planning: E D A Figure 7-1. Janes Developmental Themes Continuum
118Table 7-1. Janes growth and development in self-regulation skills: Phas es & Areas of Self-Regulation. From Pintrich, P.R. (20 00). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Ze idner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp.452-502). New York: Academic Press. Janes Examples of Regulation 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 1. Forethought, Planning, Activation Goal: Students will learn Goal: create plans that address students needs Childrens needs were not being met 2. Monitoring Environment was not conducive to student learning 3. Control Email sent to principal requesting meeting 4. Reaction & Reflection
119 CHAPTER 8 DISCUSSION The research questions driving this qualitati ve study were, How do apprentice teachers in the Alternative Certification Program in an urba n school district devel op in their planning and implementation of differentiated instruction? and What are the key elemen ts that facilitate or inhibit alternatively certified teacher planning for differentiated instru ction? Throughout this study, I focused on how each individual apprentice developed in her ability to plan and implement differentiated instruction in her cl assrooms. To these ends, Chapters 5, 6, and 7 illustrated how Rose, Mary, and Jane, each of whom arrived to their apprenticeships with their own background experiences, abilities, and needs, grew in their abil ity to plan for differentiated instruction. Assertions In this chapter, I look across these cases to cull so me assertions that can inform those interested in understanding how to facilitate a novice, alternatively certified teachers ability to plan for differentiated instruction. These asse rtions, presented in Table 8.1, emerged as I examined the activities shared acro ss the narratives, the critical events that set occurred, and the themes describing the work of each apprentice. Assertion one: Five conditions, including positive collegial relationships, effective classroom management, ability to plan for a standard, focus on student need, and openness to feedback in planning, facilitate the app rentices ability to plan for differentiated instruction. After looking at lesson plan s, reflections, portfolio en tries, and various personal communications between the apprentices and their teachers, five main conditions emerged that either facilitated or inhibited an apprentices ability to plan fo r Differentiated Instruction. These five conditions were positive colle gial relationships, effective cl assroom management, ability to
120 plan for a standard, focus on student need, and incorporating feedback into plan. Without a positive relationship with others at school, colla boration in formal and informal planning is difficult and as a result appr entice growth was inhibited. Establishing positive, respectful collegial relationships is imperative in a social environment such as a school. There are many times when a teacher needs to interact with other adults within the building walls, including administration, other members of faculty, and pare nts. A teacher must be able to maintain positive collegial relationships in order to pl an collaboratively or discuss a lesson with colleagues before or after a lesson is taught. A pprentices demonstrated their ability to have positive collegial relationships by interacting with ot her adults at school in such instances as coteaching, collaborative planning, and informally connecting with others. When the apprentices had developed strong collegial relationships, learning about di fferentiated instruction was strengthened because they were able to gain ne w perspectives and ideas regarding their students and lessons from their colleagues. Additionally, a lack of a cons istent classroom management program inhibited growth in the area of differentiated instru ction. Classroom management re fers to the ability of the apprentice to manage student behavior and activity and includes creating a professional rapport with the students, using a system of reinfor cement or consequences, setting guidelines for movement around and outside of the classroom, es tablishing or following existing class rules, and maintaining consistency throughout. When th e apprentice could not maintain discipline within her classroom it was difficult, if not impos sible, for her to truly know her students. By putting so much attention on discipline, the appr entice could not monitor the learning that was occurring or not occurring within the classroom. Each apprentice had to come to terms with the new responsibility of managing the classroom a nd enforcing classroom rules. Even the best
121 lesson plan was ineffective if it was implemented in a classroom where the teacher was unable to manage the activity of students within. Thus, the ability to plan for and implement a well differentiated lesson, and monitor the student learning that occurre d during the lesson was highly influenced by the apprentices ability to manage a classroom. Being able to plan for a standard demonstrat es an apprentices know ledge of state learning goals and how to help students learn those goals in ways that are suitable for each student as an individual learner. Since each apprentice was new to the fi eld of education, lesson planning was an unfamiliar task. In order to properly inco rporate state standards, created to provide consistency from one school to the next, into a lesson plan, apprentices needed to learn to correlate their lesson objective, activity, and assessme nt to the selected standard. The objective is a crucial part of the lesson pla n, as it guides not only the remai nder of the activit y, but also the assessment which determines whether a student ha s met the desired standa rd. The objective must be clearly stated and include a measurable st udent behavior. Differen tiating a lesson requires giving careful attention to the lesson objective, identif ying different activities that meet that objective, and carefully consider ing alternatives for assessing the learning that has occurred. Given the complexity of this task, it is not surp rising that each apprentice varied in her ability to plan lessons that not only connected to the st andard provided to guide each lesson, but also addressed the individual needs of all students. In addition to learning to plan for the state st andard, apprentices also learned how to plan based on the differentiated needs of their stude nts. Planning for differentiation requires the apprentice to create a lesson plan geared toward a student need, in cluding interest, readiness, or learning style. This theme also includes using gr oup, paired, or individual assignments as needed to best address the specific need at hand. The apprentice based readiness levels on prior student
122 work or assessments, and grouping is flexible based on need during each lesson. Knowing ones students is central to the ability of a teacher to differentiate instruction. Finally, openness to consider feedback is important because others can sometimes see things that remain invisible to the apprentice. Feedback requires taking ideas into consideration, and apprentices who accepted fee dback showed that they were looking for ways to improve and had thought about how those suggestions woul d impact her classroom. Throughout the year, apprentices were given feedback regarding their lessons from thei r mentor teachers, coaches, and other observers. This feedback was given in orde r to improve the lesson plan and an observed lesson. Apprentices varied in their ability and w illingness to consider this feedback in future lessons or experiences. Consideratio n of feedback was an integral part of learning about teaching and strengthening lesson planning, as seen in bo th Rose and Marys cases where they showed evidence of change after engaging in dialogue about the lesson plan and the observation. In Janes case, growth was inhibited due to her inability to consider or integrate the feedback that she received. Assertion two: Apprentices movement to wards mastery of these five conditions varies and, as a result, teacher educators need to differentiate their supervision to support apprentice learning. Although the apprentices each particip ated in the same workshops, read the same materials, watched the same videos, an d had the same coach, they evidenced different degrees of mastery in their ability to differe ntiate instruction. Since the three apprentices demonstrated varying degrees of mastery within each of these themes, a scale was created to capture that variation and illustrate how each appr entice developed over the course of the year in each area. Apprentices showed emerging behavior when the ability was just beginning to surface and come into awareness. An emerging behavi or was something that an apprentice was
123 conscious of, but had not yet acted upon. A beha vior that was considered developing was one which was gradually unfolding over time. The appr entice was clearly aware of the need for the behavior, but had not yet mastered the skill. In demonstrating accomplishment, the apprentice demonstrated that she was highly skilled in a spec ific area, or had successfully shown her ability to fulfill a certain theme. Although Rose, Mary, and Jane demonstrated ve ry different skill levels in the area of planning for differentiation throughout their ap prenticeship year, several commonalities were found between them. Using a Venn diagram, Figur e 8-1 illustrates the strengths of each apprentice and highlights the commonalities wh en apprentices showed overlapping areas of strength in their ability to differentiate instru ction. For example, both Ro se and Jane used their mentor teacher or coach as a co-teacher during lessons to support differentiation, making full use of both adults in the classroom Additionally, Mary and Jane ma de an effort to encourage differentiation based on student in terest and learning by creating hands-on lessons across subject areas. Rose and Mary, the two stronger apprenti ces, also planned lessons with the academic needs of their students in mind, using curriculum-based assessments, and they both regularly used CHAMPS for their classroom management pla n, which promoted consistency in discipline. These two apprentices also accepted and applied feedback from their coach and mentor. Rose struggled with writing detailed lesson plans, but she worked with her coach and her mentor teacher to make these plans more clear and thor ough. Mary consistently reflected on her practice, looking for ways to improve a lesson for the future whether the future was the next day or the next year. Additionally, she was very self-critical and did not shy away from constructive criticism. Finally, Jane kept detailed notes about her student s and collected resources to incorporate science into reading and math lessons, as she believed in linki ng subjects together to
124 help students make curricular connections. Ho wever, her work remained independent from others as she was hesitant to collabora te and accept feedback from others. Although every apprentice was able to differentiate at different levels and speeds, some of them caught on right away and were able to create sophisticated lessons for their experience level. Others needed a lot of step-by-step support and scaffolding. In an analysis of the apprentices work over the course of the year, Ro se demonstrates the most growth in the five themes that underpin the ability to learn diffe rentiation and Mary continues her accelerated trajectory of growth. Jane, on the other hand, co ntinues to show less pr ogress in her planning development, as evidenced by the amount of deta il in their lessons as well as the kinds of information missing from their plans. Generally, th e more specific they were in their lessons, the less scaffolding they needed. Because the apprentices movement towards mastery of these five conditions varies, school-based coaches need to differentiate their supervision to support ap prentice learning. This type of supervision requires frequent, timely, a nd intense contextually sensitive interaction that often requires more time than typically dedicated to traditional supervis ion. Given the variation in the apprentices movement towards mastery, coaches need to attend to the individual apprentices needs, creating a context that encourag es collaboration as well as critical friendship. Assertion three: Growth and lack of growth on one theme or condition influences an apprentices ability to di fferentiate instruction. The five themes that became conditions for facilitating differentiated instruct ion each played a role in the a pprentices growth. For example, by mastering certain skills early in the year, such as classroom mana gement and developing collegial relationships, Rose and Mary were then able to focus on planning appropriate lessons and learning from their own reflection and from re flection with others. It became clear that when
125 classroom management was not developed, as in Janes case learning about Differentiated Instruction often suffered as well. Each apprentice had experiences that contribut ed to their development within each theme, but each also processed those experiences differen tly. Rose and Mary both showed characteristic of self-regulation, as each pro-ac tively worked to make change and reflect on their practice. However, in developing their skills in self-regu lation, each moved throug h the five established themes. Mary and Rose did not have difficulty getting along with thei r colleagues, and both quickly determined that they needed to have a consistent behavior management plan. Having these skills early in the year fr eed them to think more critically about their skills in creating strong learning experiences for their students. Because Jane spent so much time working on the dynamic between herself and other staff at her school, including her prin cipal, she had less time and en ergy to put towards her teaching and lesson planning. Additionally, the classroom environment she maintained, lacking a consistent classroom management plan, led to a chaotic situation where she could not really know if her students were learning. Assertion four: Learning how to differenti ate instruction requires an apprentices willingness to consider and accept feedback. Although I cant claim that the feedback inherent in the coaching and mentoring process caused th e growth in Rose and Marys ability to differentiate instruction, this study does indicate that an appr entices ability to plan for differentiated instruction streng thened after coaching and mentoring. Mary and Rose believed that collaboration was a help rather than an inco nvenience. Both worked regularly with coaches and mentors, discussing challenges they faced and ways to correct problems, as evidenced in the appearance of collegial relationshi ps as a developmental theme. Ra ndi (2004) agrees with their
126 stance, stating that a community where individu als examine and discuss their self-regulation is beneficial. The study also documented less development in the apprentices abilit y to differentiate instruction when collegial relati onships and feedback were not highly valued by the apprentice. Without a positive relationship with others at sc hool, collaboration in formal and informal planning is difficult and, as a result, the a pprentice has fewer opportunities to create the conditions and cognition necessary to strengthen her planning. Finally, accepting feedback is important because others can sometimes see things th at remain invisible to the apprentice. This is particularly important for the novice teacher who may not be able to notice or monitor her own teaching process fully without the help of a p eer or coach. By attending to feedback, an apprentice indicates that a teach er is looking for ways to im prove, and has thought about how those suggestions would impact her classroom. This assertion highlights the importance of th e novices willingness to be open to critique and collaboration if they are to strengthen their planning and teaching process. This assertion also highlights the importance of making the need for this dispos ition clear to the apprentice and making frequent and substantive feedback from co aches, mentors, and peers a part of the culture of learning to teach. Assertion five: Apprentices with strong self-regulatory capabilities demonstrate a stronger ability to plan and implem ent differentiated instruction. As indicated, five themes or conditions facilitated growth in the apprentices ability to plan for differentiation. While looking through the data, I realized that there was somethi ng about Mary that separated her ability to plan for differentiated instruction fr om Rose and Jane, and something similar between them that separated both Mary and Rose from Jane. Pintrichs (2000) model of self-regulation
127 served as a basis for understa nding this difference. Table 82 builds on Pintrichs work and illustrates the self-regulation skills of all thr ee apprentices using different colored text to illustrate the self-regulatory activ ities of each apprentice. Rose, Mary, and Jane are represented in the table using the colors green, red, and blue, respectively. As illustrated in the Table, Rose and Mary are more adept at self-regulating their teaching. Rose uses forethought and planning in all cate gories of Pintrichs self-regulation model (2000). Both Rose and Mary show an ability to monitor situations a nd take action, as they deemed necessary. They also show a greater abili ty to self-regulate thei r thinking, behavior, and context. Jane, on the other hand, shows a lesse r degree of self-regulat ory ability. Although she made progress in planning for, monitoring, and controlling her context during the year, she did not take the next step to reflect on her actions Additionally, she was not able to self-regulate within any other aspect of her teaching. Rose, Mary, and Jane, as individual learners, show different degrees of self-regulation in their wor k. By placing examples of their work together on the same chart, the difference in their orientatio n toward self-regulatory behavior became clear. Self-regulation (Manning & Payne, 1993), in pa rt, concerns a teachers conscious goalsetting and pro-active stance towards making a ch ange in the classroom. See Figure 8.3 for the model I developed using Pintri chs (2002) framework. Here, Pi ntrichs framework (2000) is considered a beginning organizer for the idea of self-regulation. I t hought about Pintrichs model, as well as a model proposed by Winne and Hadwin, which was reviewed by Greene & Azevedo (2007), and decided that there is a simpler way to illustrate self-regulation. Similar to the inquiry proce ss (Dana & Yendol-Silva, 2003), se lf-regulation begins with a question: What is my goal? What is wrong with this classroom picture? From here, a selfregulating teacher will make a cogni tive effort to monitor the c onditions in question, consciously
128 thinking about the situation, and then work to co ntrol the situation by making an attempt to reach the set goal or change th e context in question. Making another para llel to the inquir y process, this step in self-regulation is simila r to creating a plan of action to study. Next, the teacher evaluates the situation, comparing the results with the goals set. The teacher also reacts to the results, reflecting on the consequences and deciding what to do next. Again, this model parallels inquiry, where, in the final stages before repeating the cycle, the teacher analyzes collected data and moves forward from that point. The self-regulation condition or theme is c onsidered to be over-arching because the development of each of the other themes was grea tly influenced by the apprentices ability to self-regulate. Apprentices with strong self-regulato ry capabilities demonstrated a stronger ability to plan and implement Differentiated Instruction. Th is stronger ability is possibly due to the fact that teachers who engage in self-regulatory beha viors are more likely to know what is going on with students, lessons, and the general goings-on in the room because they consciously think about these things throughout the day. When some thing happens, they are aware, and they make a decision to act, or not act, as they see fit (Manning & Payne, 1993). Assertion six: given the importance of moni toring ones own teaching in learning to differentiate instruction, apprentices mu st have both coursework dedicated to understanding the principles of differentiated in struction and field placements that provide regular opportunities to teach, generate d eep knowledge of the children, context, and curriculum, and have frequent access to coaching. In order to create this blend of coursework and field experience that may best support novice teachers, there are several components that must be included. First, the use of mode ling and providing clear examples of strong differentiated lesson plans is crucial. In the case of this study, it was very helpful to give the
129 apprentices an example of a lesson plan that diffe rentiated so they could see exactly what I was talking about, and that differentiating di dn't require restructur ing the entire class. During the second workshop, we spent time as an entire gr oup discussing one persons differentiated lesson, going over each part of the lesson in depth to look at instances where the lesson showed differentiation, as well as places where the lesson seemed incomplete or unclear. This lesson deconstruction helped the apprentices understand the importance of clarity and description in their plans, as well as see a peer s work in differentiating an activ ity for her class. This assertion agrees with research stating that modeling is a key component of coursework (Brimijoin & Alouf, 2003, Davenport & Smetana, 2004). In addition to modeling and showing real lif e examples, video was a highly effective way to see an effective teacher at work differentiati ng. One particular video showed a teacher move through the planning process, leading up to impl ementation and lesson reflection. Prior to the video, apprentices seemed to have the opinion that they ha d to differentiate every lesson all the time, and the video helped them see first hand th at teachers don't really do that right away. Differentiating instruction takes times, and it's ok to start small. I don't think I was able to get that idea across as well as the teacher in the video. I was surprised at the comments the apprentices made after watching the video, becaus e it seemed like many of their ah-has were things I had already mentioned to them, but for some reason the video hit home. However, simply seeing examples and wa tching videos during th eir classes are not enough. If the apprentices did not ha ve the daily field experience, paired with an on-site coach and other nearby resources, either in person or via email, the cour sework would not have been as effective. It is imperative that the apprentices have the opportunity to pr actice their new skills so they can learn from the experience, and then d econstruct that learning wi th a more experienced
130 coach who can talk through the experience with th em. Also, these conversations with their coach allowed the coach to understand the specific n eeds of each apprentice, thus giving them the opportunity to differentiate their own instructio n for each apprentices needs during coursework and informal conferences. This is in alignm ent with Brimijoin & Aloufs work (2003), which argues that professional developm ent should be differentiated. Concluding Thoughts The findings from this study di rectly affect teacher educa tion practices. Knowing that novice teachers develop in several specific areas while on their way to becoming independent teachers will help teacher educators focus their in struction and support in these areas. If we, as teacher educators, share those areas with novice teachers, we will be en couraging their selfregulatory skills as they will have specific areas to set goals. If the apprentices are aware of these developmental milestones, teaching will become le ss of a mystery; they will be aware of which areas they need to accomplish before they can focus on the more teaching specific areas, like planning for a standard or plan ning for student needs. If we can help novice teachers develop positive relationships with their colleagues and implement and enforce a consistent behavior management plan early in their apprenticeship or internship, they will be more quickly on their way to developing the other necessary teaching skills. This being said, this study could potentially be improved with a larger sample size. The limited size of three participants made it difficult to generalize th e findings to all novice teachers within a similar context. However, since the ap prentices came to the program with significantly different backgrounds and experiences, some degree of generalization is warranted and permissible, as they are somewhat repres entative of the popula tion entering teaching apprenticeships from different careers.
131 Although the findings from this study, paired with my belief that a simpler model for self-regulation was needed, led me to create a new model for self-regulation, I have not tested that model in contexts outside of the three appr entices studied for this research. The model needs to be examined, and perhaps modified, to determine whether novice teachers experience these stages in the manner I have articulated. Similarl y, further work needs to be done to create a deeper parallel between the stag es of self-regulation and the ph ases of the inquiry cycle. Further, the idea of self-re gulation as it applies to teacher s needs more attention. There appears to be some degree of dissonance when a novice teacher uses a st rategy she is told is effective, but upon reflection, she finds it didnt work. This is evident when Rose was deciding whether to use a rubric in the future. She consider ed the solution one of eith er-or: Either she used the rubric, or she didnt. What requires further study is how that either-or decision can be shifted to find other solutions: If not now, when? If this idea is supposed to be great, but it didnt work now, when can I try it again? In the field of teacher education, further work needs to be done to determine whether the five themes found in this analysis are common to teachers outside of this context. Since these apprentices all received their bachelors degrees in fields outside of education, the question remains as to whether those beginning teacher s moving through a typical university program face similar developmental hurdles in their journe ys to become independent teachers. Similarly, does the high-poverty context matter? Would th e development of apprentices or preservice teachers change if they were pl aced in a more affluent school? These are all areas that beg further study.
132 Table 8-1. Study Assertions Assertion One: Five conditions, includi ng positive collegial relationships, effective classroom management, ability to plan for a standard, focus on student need, and incorp orating feedback into plans, facilitate the apprentices ability to plan for Differentiated Instruction. Assertion Two: Apprentices movement to wards mastery of these five conditions varies and, as a result, coaches need to differentiate their supervision to support apprentice learning. Assertion Three: Growth and lack of growth on one condition influences an apprentices ability to differentiate instruction. Assertion Four: Learning how to differen tiate instruction requi res an apprentices willingness to accept and integrate feedback. Assertion Five: Apprentices with strong self-regulatory capabilities demonstrate a stronger ability to plan and impl ement Differentiated Instruction. Assertion Six: Given the importance of mon itoring ones own teaching in learning to differentiate instruction, apprentices must have coursework dedicated to understanding the principles of DI and field placements that provide regular opportunities to t each, generate deep knowledge of the children, context, and curriculu m, and have frequent access to coaching.
133. Figure 8-1. Comparison of apprentices strengths in their ability to plan for differentiated instruction Mary Jane Rose -self-critical -reflected thoroughly for ways to improve next lesson -incorporated science into reading and math lessons -struggled with writing plans with enough detail/information to be understood -worked with mentor to plan lessons -accepted and applied feedback -planned using assessment -CHAMPS allowed for more attention on lesson -consistently related lessonstostudents used DI in at least 3 lessons -got feedback on lessons before observations -learned from experience -planned for group work -used mentor or supervisor as coteacher during some lessons -Creative, hand-on lessons, encouraged active learning
134Table 8-2. Combined growth and developm ent in self-regulation skil ls among Rose, Mary, and Jane: Phases & Areas of SelfRegulation. From Pintrich, P.R. (2000). The ro le of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekae rts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp.452-502). New York: Academic Press. Rose, Mary, and Jane: Combined Examples of Regulation R= Rose; M= Mary; J= Jane 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 1. Forethought, Planning, Activation R: goal: positive work environment R: goal: collaborate with peers R: goal: all students will learn M: Goal 1: How to use 2 adults in the room? M: Goal 2: teach students so they know authors purpose J: Goal: Students will learn J: Goal: create plans that address students needs R: determining her weaknesses in lesson planning R: collaboration with peers R: rubric review R: lesson plan difficulty R: classroom noise level was stressful R: negative work environment M: Students not listening J: Childrens needs were not being met 2. Monitoring R: This classroom is a negative work environment R: collaboration with peers R: differentiating instruction is important to reach all students M: There are 2 adults in the room. R: realizing her lesson plan was not complete in time for her meeting with coach R: collaboration with peers is worth the time R: rubric review took too much time R: awareness that help with planning is needed M: Awareness of the need to learn how to manage classroom M: Awareness of the need to learn how to plan lessons R: classroom noise level was discussed with mentor R: conditions are not what would be preferred M: CHAMPS training J: Environment was not conducive to student learning
135 Rose, Mary, and Jane: Combined Examples of Regulation R= Rose; M= Mary; J= Jane 4 Phases: Cognition Motivation/ Affect Behavior Context 3. Control R: Need to address negative work environment R: collaboration with peers allows more ideas to be shared R: differentiating instruction done during certain lessons M: Need to utilize both adults through use of co-teaching. M: Borrow others lesson ideas R: deciding to redo lesson after coming to help session with coach without a finished plan R: collaboration with peers about math R: rubric review would be done a different day next time R: request of help from coach M: Didnt see enough examples of lesson planning, so asked to meet with mentor. M: Took CHAMPS training R: classroom noise level was adjusted in some situations R: considered own feelings on this matter M: More consistent use of classroom management J: Email sent to principal requesting meeting 4. Reaction & Reflection R: A negative work environment can be adjusted with a positive attitude R: collaboration with peers is beneficial R: differentiating instruction allowed students to be successful learners M: Upon reflection, students improved ability to identify authors purpose. R: collaboration with peers helps with writing strong plans R: rubric review is important, but not at that time R: lesson plans improved M: Student behavior improved R: classroom noise level is improved and tolerable R: reflection upon own attitude and how this will be addressed M: Students better behaved.
136 Figure 8-2. Modified self-re gulation model as a cycle.
137 APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC AND FCAT DATA, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL A AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL B Table A-1. Elementary School A demographic and FCAT data Date Enrollment PK KG 1st 2nd3rd4th5th6thBlack%Mixed%White% Free/Reduced Lunch% 8/15/06 508 1 77 93 74 10577801 97 2 1 82 Lunch percentage was calculated 2/9/07 Reading Mathematics % in each Achievement Level % in each Achievement Level Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test Number of Students Mean Developmental Scale Score 1 2 3 4 5 Number of Students Mean Developmental Scale Score 1 2 3 45 School 96 1119 34213015096 1175 27 30 36 60 District 10182 1326 20143425710176 1360 17 18 33 249 Grade 3 2007 State 2018941356 1913332882018621428 12 14 33 2813 School 93 1211 24204313093 1192 31 28 37 22 District 10119 1359 15123831410124 1344 17 19 36 226 Grade 3 2006 State 2042381382 1411373352044021409 12 16 34 2710 School 77 1441 29292613477 1430 18 30 40 101 District 9559 1539 1916342579560 1495 16 21 39 195 Grade 4 2007 State 1965121558 1814332781966321540 13 18 37 238 School 81 1430 27203814183 1316 36 40 17 70 District 9624 1539 1917342469628 1480 19 21 36 205 Grade 4 2006 State 1924801547 1916342671926101534 14 19 36 238 School 78 1523 21263815077 1576 22 44 21 130 District 9269 1638 1415372869266 1632 16 29 28 215 Grade 5 2007 State 1922891647 1415362961923691662 15 26 26 258 School 108 1479 2232415 0108 1436 44 44 12 10 District 9214 1609 1617372569204 1620 18 29 28 214 Grade 5 2006 State 1970541609 1617372561970761649 17 27 26 247
138 % in Each Achievement Level % earning Each Score Point FCAT Writing Number of Students Mean Scale Score 1 2 3 4 5 Mean Essay Score 1.01.52.02.53.03.54.0 4.5 5.0 5.56.0 School 75 258 35 35 291 03.3 3 1 8 5 232821 9 1 0 0 District 9383 290 21 27 401023.7 1 1 3 4 171736 12 6 2 1 Grade 4 2007 State 193796 302 17 23 431433.9 1 1 2 3 141537 15 8 2 1 School 83 262 3.5 2 4 5 6 201330 13 6 0 0 District 9464 286 -3.7 1 1 6 6 151434 14 8 2 0 Grade 4 2006 State 189589 296 -3.9 1 1 4 5 131331 16 12 3 1 % in each Achievement Level FCAT Science Number of Students Mean Score 1 2 3 4 5 School 78 273 42 42 14 1 0 District 9146 299 29 35 28 6 2 Grade 5 2007 State 191789 306 25 33 31 8 2 School 108 259 64 31 5 0 0 District 9019 293 32 37 25 5 1 Grade 5 2006 State 195877 299 29 36 27 6 2
139 % High Achieving % Showing Gains Florida School Accountability Reading Math Writing Science Reading Math Lowest Performing Readers Adequate Progress Reading Lowest Performing Math Adequate Progress Math Pct. Tested Retake Bonus Points Points Grade AYP 2007 51 46 65 15 56 84 61 YES 92 YES 100 NA 470 C NO 2006 54 28 73 53 53 60 YES 100 321 C No 2005 56 33 72 58 47 61 YES 100 327 C No 2004 46 43 89 51 67 50 YES 99 346 C No 2003 46 40 71 54 67 60 YES 99 338 C No 2002 42 31 67 54 72 41 NO 99 307 D Yes 07/11/07
140 Table A-2. Elementary School B demographic and FCAT data Date Enrollment PK KG 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Black% Mixed% White% Free/Reduced Lunch% 8/15/06 318 16 49 49 43 47 55 59 96 2 1 96 Lunch percentage was calculated 2/9/07 Reading Mathematics % in each Achievement Level % in each Achievement Level Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test Number of Students Mean Developmental Scale Score 12345 Number of Students Mean Developmental Scale Score 1 2 3 45 School 50 982 4628242050 1091 42 28 28 20 District 10182 1326 20143425710176 1360 17 18 33 249 Grade 3 2007 State 2018941356 1913332882018621428 12 14 33 2813 School 45 1183 22333311045 1119 44 33 22 00 District 10119 1359 15123831410124 1344 17 19 36 226 Grade 3 2006 State 2042381382 1411373352044021409 12 16 34 2710 School 53 1358 3821366053 1362 25 43 28 40 District 9559 1539 1916342579560 1495 16 21 39 195 Grade 4 2007 State 1965121558 1814332781966321540 13 18 37 238 School 56 1342 4525274055 1327 36 33 24 70 District 9624 1539 1917342469628 1480 19 21 36 205 Grade 4 2006 State 1924801547 1916342671926101534 14 19 36 238 School 50 1391 4024306050 1468 38 32 18 120 District 9269 1638 1415372869266 1632 16 29 28 215 Grade 5 2007 State 1922891647 1415362961923691662 15 26 26 258 School 38 1476 24323411038 1556 21 47 26 50 District 9214 1609 1617372569204 1620 18 29 28 214 Grade 5 2006 State 1970541609 1617372561970761649 17 27 26 247 % in Each Achievement Level % earning Each Score Point FCAT Writing Number of Students Mean Scale Score 1 2 3 4 5 Mean Essay Score 1.01.52.02.53.03.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.56.0 School 51 259 35 35272 03.7 0 0 2 4 1629 35 10 4 0 0 District 9383 290 21 27401023.7 1 1 3 4 1717 36 12 6 2 1 Grade 4 2007 State 193796 302 17 23431433.9 1 1 2 3 1415 37 15 8 2 1 School 53 248 3.5 0 4 6 6 2517 23 9 9 2 0 District 9464 286 -3.7 1 1 6 6 1514 34 14 8 2 0 Grade 4 2006 State 189589 296 -3.9 1 1 4 5 1313 31 16 12 3 1
141 % in each Achievement Level FCAT Science Number of Students Mean Score 1 2 3 45 School 50 250 62344 00 District9146 299 29352862 Grade 5 2007 State 191789 306 25333182 School 38 238 82163 00 District9019 293 32372551 Grade 5 2006 State 195877 299 29362762
142 % High Achieving % Showing Gains Florida School Accountability Reading Math Writing Science Reading Math Lowest Performing Readers Adequate Progress Reading Lowest Performing Math Adequate Progress Math Pct. Tested Retake Bonus Points Points Grade AYP 2007 38 39 78 6 53 68 47 NO 68 YES 100 NA 397 D NO 2006 40 31 74 50 75 67 YES 100 337 C No 2005 48 31 81 63 72 63 YES 99 358 C No 2004 39 34 76 53 83 63 YES 98 348 C No 2003 32 15 88 46 47 46 NO 99 274 F No 2002 36 23 62 56 52 56 YES 97 285 D Yes 07/11/07
143 APPENDIX B PATHWISE INSTRUCTION PLAN Pathwise Instruction Plan Teacher: Grade: Co-Teaching Method: Subject: 1. Learning Objectives What are your objectives for student learning in this lesson? That is, what do you intend students to learn? Why have you chosen these objectives? What Standards (National or State) relate to this lesson? 2. Content Knowledge 3. Student Grouping How will you group students for instruction? Why have you chosen this grouping? 4. Methods What teaching method(s) will you use for this lesson? What students need specific accommodations in this lesson? What specific accommodations have you made for these student needs? Why have you chosen this method or these methods? 5. Activities What activities have you planned? Activities Time Allowed Opening: Main activity/activities:
144 Closing: Important questions to ask: 6. Materials What instructional materials will you use, if any? Why have you chosen these materials? 7. Evaluation How and when do you plan to evaluate student learning on the conten t of this lesson? Why have you chosen this approach to evaluation? 8. Accomplished Practices Which of the Accomplished Practices does this lesson meet? Adapted for University Pathwise Instruction and Reflection Form by Vicki Wilson for Salt Fork (Region 10) RPDC and Muskingum Valley Educational Service Center/Muskingum College Goals 2000
145 APPENDIX C REFLECTION AFTER TEACHING
146 Name: ___________________________________ 1. Did you depart from anything you planned for today? If so, why? 2. Has anything that happened during this lesson influenced your evaluation plan? If so, how and why? 3. To what extent did the stude nts learn what was intended? How do you know? As part of your answer indicate: In what ways were your teaching methods effective? How do you know? In what ways were your ac tivities effective? How do you know? In what ways were the instructional materials effective? How do you know? How did any special considerations of accommodations affect the lesson? 4. Identify an individual or group of students who had difficulty in todays lesson. How do you account for this performance? How will you help this (these) student(s) achieve the learning objectives? 5. Identify an individual or group of students who did especially well in this le sson today. How do you account
147 for this performance? 6. If you were going to teach th is lesson again to the same group of students, what would you do differently? (Consider: grouping, methods, materials, evaluation, activities) Why? What would you do the same? Why? 7. Based on what happened in this lesson, what do you plan to teach next to this class? Be sure to explain how you will use information from this evaluation in future lesson planning. 8. How has your thinking about planning changed based on this experience with Differentiated Instruction?
148 LIST OF REFERENCES Anhalt, C. O., Ward, R. A., & Vinson, K. D. (2006). Teacher candidates' growth in designing mathematical tasks as e xhibited in their lesson planning. The Teacher Educator, 41 (3). Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Deve loping practice, deve loping practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of prof essional education (Adobe PDF). In G. Sykes & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Fran cisco: Jossey Bass. Berry, B. (2001). No shortcuts to preparing good teachers. Educational Leadership, 58 (8), 32-36. Bradshaw, L. & Hawk, P. (1996). Teacher Certification: Do es It Really Make a Difference in Student Achievement? Greenville, NC: East ern North Carolina Consortium for Assistance a nd Research in Education. Brimijoin, K., & Alouf, J. (2003). New Dimensions for Buildi ng Expertise in Mentoring and Differentiation Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. Brooks, D. M. (1987). Teacher inductions a new begi nning: Papers from the national commission on the induction process. Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators. Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifel ong learning: A comprehensive guide to theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Carey, K. (2004). The opportunity gap: No matter how you look at it, low-income and minority students get fewer good teachers. Thinking K-16 (Winter 2004), 36-37. Cleveland, D. (2003). Alternat ive teacher certification. The High School Journal, 86 (3), 1-51. Corno, L. (2001). Self-regulated learning: A volitional analys is. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and ac ademic achievement: Theory, research, and practice (Vol. II, pp. 111-142). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Crotty, M. (1998). Introduction: The research process. In Foundations of social research London: Sage Publications. Curran, B. & Goldrick, L. (2002). Mentoring and supporting new teachers. Issues brief. Washington, DC. National Governors Asso ciation: Center for Best Practices. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 467 748.
149 Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Silva, D. (2003). The reflective educator's guide to classroom research: Learning to te ach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (1988). The evolution of teacher policy Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation. Darling-Hammond, L. (1992). Teaching a nd knowledge: Policy issues posed by alternative certification for teachers. Peabody Journal of Education, 67 (3), 123154. Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A ., & Kline, S. (1999). A license to teach: Raising standards for teaching San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Davenport, J., & Smetana, L. (2004). Helping new teachers achieve excellence. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin (Winter). Edwards, C. J., Carr, S., & Siegel, W. (2006) Influences of Expe riences and Training on Effective Teaching Practices to Meet the Needs of Diverse Learners in Schools. Education, 126 (3), 12. Eraut, M., Alderton, J., Cole, G., & Senker, P. (1998). Development of knowledge and skills in employment. Brighton: University of Sussex. Feiman-Nemser, S. (1999). A conceptual revi ew of the literature on teacher induction. Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Education, Office of Research and Information. Feistritzer, C.E. (1996). Alternative teacher certification. Washington, D.C., National Center for Education Information: 26. Feistritzer, C. E. (1998). Alternative teacher certification: An overview [Electronic Version]. Retrieved August 8, 2004, fr om http://www.ncei.com/Alt-TeacherCert.htm Feistritzer, C. E., & Chester, D. T. (2000). Alternative teacher certi fication: A state-bystate analysis 2000 Washington, D.C.: National Center or Educational Information. Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). A theore tical review of Winne and Hadwin's model of self-regulated learning: New perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77 (3), 334-372.
150 Grossman, G. M. (1990). Credentialing the "New Model" of Appr enticeship Training: Overcoming the Paradox of Implementation (pp. 49). Haberman, M. (1991). The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73 290-294. Haberman, M. (2002). Achieving high quality in the selection, preparation and retention of teachers Accessed August 8, 2004, from Haberman Educational Foundation Web site: http://www.altcert.org/research/researc h.asp?article=Retention&page=Retention Haberman, M., & Rickards, W. H. (1990). Ur ban teachers to quit: Why they leave and what they do. Urban Education, 25 (3), 297-303. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Deciding to do a qualitative study. In Doing qualitative research in education settings New York: SUNY Press. Haycock, K. (2000). No more settling for less. Thinking K-16, 4 (1), 3-12. Huling-Austin, L. (1990). Teacher induction pr ograms and internships. In W. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher educatio n: A project of the association of teacher educators (pp. 535-548). New York: MacMillan Publishing Co. Jelmberg, J. (1996). College-Based Teach er Education versus State-Sponsored Alternative Programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 47 (1), 60-66. John, P. D. (1991). A qualitative study of British student teachers' lesson planning. Journal of Education for Teaching, 17 (3), 20. Jones, M. G., & Vesilind, E. M. (1996). Pu tting practice into theory: Changes in the organization of preservice teachers' pedagogical knowledge. American Educational Research Journal, 33 (1). Kim, M. K., & Sharp, J. (2000). Investiga ting and measuring preservice elementary mathematics teachers' decision about lesson planning after experiencing technologically-enhanced methods instruction Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19 (4). Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as a source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall. Kwakman, K. (1999). Leren van docenten tijd ens de beroepsloopbaan. Studies naar professionaliteit op de werkplek in he t voortgezet onderwijs. [Teacher learning during the professional career. Studies to the professionalism at the workplace in secondary education]. Nijmegen University.
151 Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34 (3), 159-165. Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). Differentiated In struction: Inclusive strategies for standards-based learning that benefit the whole class. American Secondary Education, 32 (3). Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999) Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), PCK and Science Education (pp. 95-132). The Netherlands: Kluwer Publishing. Manning, B. H., & Payne, B. D. (1993). A Vygotsk ian-based theory of teacher cognition: Toward the acquisition of mental reflection and self-regulation. Teaching & Teacher Education, 9 (4), 361-371. Marchant, G. (1990, Feb.). Alternative cer tification and the knowledge base for teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Ameri can Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. McKibbin, M., & Ray, L. (1994). A Guide fo r Alternative Cert ification Program Improvement. Educational Forum, 58 (2), 201-208. McTigue, J., & Brown, J. L. (2005). Differentia ted Instruction and educational standards: Is detente possible? Theory into Practice, 44 (3). Miles-Nixon, C., & Holloway, P. (1997). Altern ative Certification: The good, the bad and the ugly. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 63 (4), 40-47. Mitchell, K. J. E., Robinson, D. Z. E., Plake, B. S. E., & Knowles, K. T. E. (2001). Testing Teacher Candidates: The Role of Licensure Tests in Improving Teacher Quality (pp. 359): National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 2005 ( $49.95). Tel: 202-334-3313; Tel: 888-6246242 (Toll Free); Fax: 202-334-2451; Web site: http://www.nap.edu. Neubert, G. A., & Stover, L. T. (1994). Peer Coaching in Teacher Education. Fastback 371 (pp. 39): Phi Delta Kappa, 408 N. Un ion, P.O. Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789. No Child Left Behind (2001). Retrieved October 4, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02 Ornstein, A. C. (1997). How teachers plan lessons. High School Journal, 80 (4). Panasuk, R. M., & Todd, J. (2005). Effectiven ess of lesson planning: Factor analysis. Journal of Instruct ional Psychology, 32 (3).
152 Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Perry, N., & Drummond, L. (2002). Helpi ng young students become self-regulated researchers and writers. The Reading Teacher, 56 298-310. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal or ientation in self-regul ated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self regulation (pp. 452502). New York: Academic Press. Randi, J. (2004). Teachers as self-regulated learners. Teachers College Record, 106 (9), 1825-1853. Renick, P. R. (1996). Study of Differentiated Teachi ng Methods Used by First-Year Special Educators Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association. Salyer, B. A. (2003). Alternatively and Trad itionally Certified T eachers: The Same but Different. NASSP Bulletin, 87 (636), 16-27. Schloemer, P., & Brenan, K. (2006). From st udents to learners: Developing self-regulated learning. Journal of Education for Business, 82 (2), 81-87. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who unders tand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and t eaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22. Strangis, D. E., Pringle, R. M., & Knopf, H. T. (2006). Road map or roadblock: Science lesson planning and preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 28 (1). Thompson, S., & Smith, D. L. (2004). Creat ing highly qualified teachers for urban schools. The Professional Educator, XXVII (1 & 2), 73-88. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instructi on in mixed-ability classrooms Alexandria, VA: Association for Supe rvision and Curriculum Development. Tomlinson, C. A., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Tomchin, E. M., Landrum, M., Imbeau, M., et al. (1995). Preservice Teacher Preparation in Meeting the Needs of Gifted and Other Academically Diverse Learners Charlottesville, VA: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Document Number) Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education teacher learning. Higher Education, 50 447-471.
153 Vancouver, J. B. (2000). Self-regulation in organizational settings: A tale of two paradigms. In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation (pp. 303-342). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2005). Challenges and possibi lities for serving gifted learners in the regular classroom. Theory into Practice, 44 (3). Winne & Hadwin. (1998). Studying as self-regul ated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wolcott, H. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D.H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement; theoretical perspectives. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. .
154 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Katie Marie Tricarico was born on May 25, 1978. She spent elementary school in Flushing, NY and junior and se nior high school in Roanoke, VA, graduating from Cave Spring High School in 1996. She earned her B. S. in elementary education from the University of South Florida in 2000. Upon graduating, Katie taught 5th grade in Brandon, Florida for one semester before moving to Richmond, Virginia. Duri ng the two years spent in Richmond, she taught math, science, and history to 6th graders. She also bega n working towards gifted certification and taught th e schools first class of self-cont ained gifted students. After two years, she moved back to Tampa, Florida, and taught 4th grade math and science for one year before moving to a new magnet sc hool, where we began working towards International Baccalaureate Primary Years Pr ogramme certification. At this time, she completed the gifted education endo rsement. After two years teaching 5th grade language arts and social studies, she returned to college, attending the University of Florida, majoring in Curriculum and Instruction, w ith emphasis on teacher education, for her Master of Arts degree. After completion of this degree, Katie pl ans to continue her studies and earn a doctoral degree in education.