Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
To cite this article: Mary M. Harris Corresponding author & Frances van Tassell (2005) The
professional development school as learning organization, European Journal of Teacher Education,
28:2, 179-194, DOI: 10.1080/02619760500093255
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02619760500093255
Desarrollo Profesional, publicado por el Consejo Nacional para la Acreditacion de Educacion para
Maestros. Lo primero y lo mas importante de los cinco estandares del PDS es que se concentra en
las cualidades de los centros de aprendizaje. La contribucion de los estandares con la viabilidad del
centro de aprendizaje del programa de preparacion para maestros como una organizacion
aflorando es discutida.
Viele Ausbildungsprogramme fu r Lehrer in den USA haben Lerngemeinschaften in
Zusammenarbeit mit regionalen Schulbezirken entwickelt.Durch die Zusammenarbeit eines
Lehrerbildungsprogrammes an einer Universitat mit Partnern im Schulsystem [vom Kindergarten
bis einschliesslich 12. (Abschluss)-Klasse, K-12], entsteht eine Fach-Ausbildungs-Gruppe
(Professional Development Program, PDS). Die so entstandene Organisation konzentriert sich
gleichzeitig auf das Lernen von Schulern und der auszubildenden sowie der praktizierenden
Lehrer. Diese Untersuchung berichtet uber Erfahrungen mit einer PDS in zwei verschiedenen
Ausbildungsprogrammen fur Lehrer unter Berucksichtigung von Normen, die der Nationalrat fur
Akkreditierung fur Lehrerbildung (National Cuncil for Accreditation of Teacher Education)
veroffentlicht hat. Die erste und wichtigste der funf PDS Normen befasst sich mit den Qualitaten
der Lerngemeinschaft. Der Beitrag der Normen zur Aussagekraft der PDS Lerngemeinschaft als
einer neu entehenden Organisation wird erortert.
standards had been field tested at 17 PDS sites and were based on a review of the
literature describing work in PDSs (see, for example, Darling-Hammond, 1994; Clark,
1999; Johnson et al., 2000) and a description of the essential characteristics of a PDS
(see, for example, Osguthorpe et al., 1995; Levine & Trachtman, 1997; Levine, 1998;
Murrell, 1998). The standards were published with descriptive commentary and with
rubrics that denote a PDS as meeting the standards at a beginning, developing,
standard or leading level. It is possible for a PDS partnership to meet the five
standards at different developmental levels and/or to return to an earlier level on one
standard or another as it deals with growth and change.
The five standards are briefly summarized below.
Standard I. Learning community
A learning community is at the heart of a PDS. This standard defines the PDS as a
learning-centered community that supports the integrated learning and development
of P-12 students, candidates, and PDS partners through inquiry-based practice
(NCATE, 2001, p. 11). A common vision of teaching and learning grounded in
research and practice guides the work of the partnership and results in improvements
in the practice of individuals and of the partnering institutions. The partner
institutions include the university, the school district and the teachers union or
professional education association(s). School and university faculty (including arts
and sciences faculty), community members and other PDS sites are important
participants in the extended learning community.
Standard II. Accountability and quality assurance
PDS partners are accountable to one another and to the public for upholding
professional standards. The partners set clear criteria for institutional and individual
participation, establish outcome goals for participants, develop assessments and use
results to examine their practice systematically. The partnership demonstrates its
impact at the local, state and national levels (NCATE, 2001).
Standard III. Collaboration
PDS partners strive to move from independent to interdependent practice through
joint work. They design roles and structures to support shared work that improves
outcomes for P-12 students, teacher candidates and school and university faculty.
Each partner contributes to the joint work (NCATE, 2001, p.15).
Standard IV. Diversity and equity
Partners and candidates develop and demonstrate knowledge, skills and dispositions
resulting in learning for all P-12 students. The policies and practices of the partner
institutions and their inclusion of diverse participants and learning communities are
components of this standard (NCATE, 2001).
In the UND teacher education conceptual document these values indicate nine goals
for teacher candidates. Through a series of summer workshops, complementary goals
References
Abdal-Haqq, I. (1998) Professional development schools: weighing the evidence (Thousand Oaks, CA,
Corwin).
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (2004) Professional development schools
at a glance. Available online at: www.aacte.otg/Eric/pds_glance.htm (accessed 1 November
2004).
Bakke, J. & Harris, M. (1998) Lake Agassiz professional development school, in: M. Harris (Ed.)
Under construction: excellence in education at Lake Agassiz elementary school (Grand Forks, ND,
College of Education and Human Development), 4045.
Banks, J. A. (1993) Multicultural education: development, dimensions, and challenges, Phi Delta
Kappan, 1, 2228.
Barrentine, S. (1999) Facilitating preservice students development of thematic units, The Teacher
Educator, 34(4), 276290.
Bredeson, P. V. (2003) Designs for learning: a new architecture for professional development in schools
(Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin).
Clark, R. W. (1999) Effective professional development schools (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass).
Cobb, J. B. (2000) The impact of a professional development school on preservice teacher
preparation, inservice teachers professionalism, and childrens achievement, Action in
Teacher Education, 22(3), 6476.
Cobb, J. B. (2001) Graduates of professional development school programs: perceptions of the
teacher as change agent, Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4), 119.
Council of Chief State School Officers (1992) Model standards for beginning teacher licensing and
development: a resource for state dialogue. Available online at: www.ccsso.org/intascst.html
(accessed 7 February 2001).
Cowart, M. & Rademacher, J. A. (1998) In my opinion: what students say about professional
development schools, Teaching and Change, 6(1), 119131.
Cowart, M. & Rademacher, J. A. (2003) Turning student voice into student outcomes, in:
D. L. Wiseman & S. L. Knight (Eds) Linking schooluniversity collaboration and K-12 student
outcomes (Washington, American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education), 87102.
Crocco, M. S., Faithfull, B. & Schwartz, S. (2003) Inquiring minds want to know: action research at
New York City professional development school, Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 1930.
Darling-Hammond, L. (Ed.) (1994) Professional development schools: schools for developing a profession
(New York, Teachers College Press).
Day, C. (1999) Developing teachers: the challenges of lifelong learning (London, Falmer Press).
Fullan, M. G. (1995) The limits and potential of professional development, in: T. R. Gurskey
& M. Huberman (Eds) Professional development in education: new paradigms and practices
(New York, Teachers College Press), 253268.
Fuller, M. (1998) Diversity at Lake Agassiz School: we are all one family and we have to take care
of one another, in: M. Harris (Ed.) Under construction: excellence in education at Lake Agassiz
elementary school (Grand Forks, ND, College of Education and Human Development),
714.