On April 28th of 2012, the administration reported that the Board of Trustees from the Carnegie Corporation of New York named eleven universities and colleges from the United States TNE institutions or Teachers for New Era Institutions. These nominations were based from the recommendations of Daniel Fallon – the Education Division Chair and President Vartan Gregorian.

These universities and colleges were selected by a process in which analysts from RAND conducted research and solicited advice from a national advisory panel, proposal reviews and site visits. The selections are determined on the basis on the progress of the goals and visions expressed within their proposals. Each individual college and university selection will secure a five million dollar grant spanning a five year period. This will be matched by each institution thus bringing the total sum of commitment to ten million dollars.

The goal of this initiative is to create a challenge for these nationwide colleges and universities to reconstruct their educational programs created for teachers as well as to solidify a national standard for excellence. This is referenced in “Teachers for a New Era” from the Carnegie Corporation of New York’s prospectus. It was also reported that new and current research founded on large data-sets using everyday math, which connect the records of pupils to individual teachers through a wide array of cities as well as states have confirmed that the way and efficiency of how a student learns can be greatly influenced by the quality of the teacher.

These same researchers and reports insist that the learning effect a teacher has on the pupil is large and significant enough to be considered probably one of the most important of all the factors in the quality and impact on student learning. Thus, it greatly influences the achievement of students in school. They continue by noting that the nation needs to be assured that prospective teachers of only the highest quality possible are being trained and educated by every college and university.

In 1983, the Department of Education released a report, which has become famous, named “A Nation at own Risk.” This report sounded an alarm on the need for better teacher education, and since then, the knowledge base has increased.  Since then teachers and educators have cultivated an agreement in regards to what constitutes the standard for essential principles for excellence through which student gain credentials, within the higher education system, which would best enable them in their path towards their teaching career.

Three design principles makeup the organization of Teachers for a New Era as detailed through the prospectus. The first point of concern is to ensure a teacher education program is led and headed by respect for evidence. This is marked by paying close attention to each student’s learning gains under the teachers skillful tutoring, and who have, themselves, already graduated from the program. This gives them the advantage of being familiar with the program. Educating prospective teachers must be one of the primary concerns for the faculty of the disciplines of arts and sciences, and general and liberal education must be made high priority.

In current teacher news today, Michael Gove, who is the Education Secretary, seems to be stuck in a golden age that never truly happened, according the secretary of the teachers union.

A member of the National Association of Head Teachers, Russell Hobby, states that Michael Grove’s belief that the educational system was better through the 50’s and 60’s is quite misleading, as only a small percentage of people had taken a formal exam by the time they were 16 in those days.

Presently, there are many more pupils who receive A to C grades at GCSE, which is the equivalent to the former O levels. However, the year 1968 is still known as the golden age since all students left knowing how to read and write.

However, there is no actual golden age for education. We were only feeling good back then because we were only concerned of a certain number of children. If we don’t feel good about education now, it is only because we consider ourselves to be accountable for each and every child’s education and success.

Michael Grove does not hesitate to state his desire to return schools to a traditional curriculum, which concentrates on more core subjects than elective courses. He believes that students should focus on British history in order to take pride in their country.

Mr. Groves does not believe that it is wrong to add more curriculums to the agenda based on our past and all of our values. He also believes it is a wonderful idea for ex-servicemen to take part in instilling discipline within the schools. Mr. Groves believes that many of the virtues the children’s parents had received have disappeared from the school system and should be restored, including self discipline, a fulfilling sense of purpose, and a strong belief in teamwork.

Mr. Hobby, who spoke at the annual conference against Mr. Groves’ policies, attacked the Education Secretary for his remarks and criticism against the literacy standards of current schools. He states that in the year 1995, only a small amount of students, specifically 49 percent, had reached the standards for reading writing by the age of 11. However, the figures are now backing up to an 82 percent average.

Mr. Hobby is very firm in stating that they must do something to help the 18 percent, but there is a certain way of going about it. He believes we must build their character and confidence firstly, rather than putting them down, as that will only send us backwards instead of forwards. He does not believe in dismissing the core values of reading and writing, but believes promoting problem solving, and teamwork will help children in the real world beyond school.

The school system during the 50’s and 60’s was based closely on English, math, science, geography, history, Latin and other modern languages. The use of selection meant that only one in four students went to grammar school. The rest of the students went to secondary schools. Class sizes were usually much larger during this time.

As for 21^st century curriculum, some places still retain selection for the grammar schools, but a majority of students go to secondary schools. There is a curriculum test taken at age 11, a reading test taken at six, an assessment at seven for math and English, and teacher surveys are given to find out the discipline levels.

It is almost a ‘given’ today that a good elementary or secondary teacher is one who has mastered the content and the discipline he or she teaches. However, the relationship between knowledge in specific content domains (how much and what science, history, English?) and pedagogy (what teaching methods are associated with what types of learning?) is not well researched. Nevertheless, most people agree that the subject matter knowledge of too many teachers is inadequate.  Math teachers need to more deeply understand mathematical concepts, how math facts are learned, and the processes of mathematical problem solving.  History teachers need to know the facts of history, the methods of historiography, the structure of the discipline, and its rules of evidence. Yet these critical lessons are more likely to be taught in schools of arts and sciences than in education schools, and the bridge between faculty in arts and sciences and their colleagues in education is often very weak, and sometimes nonexistent.

One of the design principles of the Teachers for a New Era project is that education needs a close partnership with arts and sciences. Presumably the experts in content (arts and sciences faculty) and the experts in how to teach it (education faculty) should collaborate to help prepare teachers in both areas.  However, this partnership is made difficult by a number of barriers.

Specialization in doctoral level preparation has lead many faculty members to become deeply knowledgeable about a narrow aspect of their discipline. This is reinforced by a tenure structure that rewards scholarship that is discipline-specific and published in journals that only scholars in the same field read.  Collaboration with education faculty takes valuable time from a researcher who is rewarded for scholarly papers and inventions in physics, chemistry, or psychology.  When these faculty teach, they are more likely to present in-depth knowledge that ignores the broad domain of the discipline, knowledge that teachers need. Furthermore, the task of translating experts specialized knowledge for teachers (what is it that their students need to know) is seldom rewarded and often ignored.  Given severe time limitations, an untenured faculty member’s pursuit of excellence as a cellular biology researcher may be antithetical to the goal of preparing top-notch biology teachers.

Education schools are often on the low rung of the academic hierarchy so there is little social support for such collaborations.  The stereotype that teacher candidates are less qualified than their arts and sciences peers affects faculty members’ views of students, even though evidence contradicts the claim.  Comments like “you are too smart to teach biology; you should go into pre-med” are too common, and faculty in arts and sciences rarely think about advising their students to think about teaching as a career.  This same attitude means faculty don’t ask and discover, “what about my discipline do teachers need to know?”

Learning about state standards in English might lead faculty to require at least one course in Shakespeare, but there is little reason for faculty to take the time to learn that high school English teachers in many states must teach at least one Shakespeare play each year.  The fact that state and national policies change the content teachers are expected to teach so often increases faculty cynicism about education.  Furthermore, the current academic debate around contested theories (postmodernism, critical theory, feminism etc.) is often more influential in shaping the major than the needs of K-12 teachers.  This is not to say these conceptual frameworks for textual analysis should not be taught to English majors, but the Bard also should be taught if English majors are to be prepared for the nation’s schools.

Disdain and dismissal of the value of colleagues also exists in schools of education, where faculty are too quick to believe arts and sciences faculty don’t care about teaching and learning.  Many faculty in schools of education have been in arts and sciences departments and are well aware of the attitudes against education faculty.  These same faculty are likely to counter with distrust and condemnation of those who “just don’t get it” when it comes to preK-12 education and the reality of public schools in the 21^st century.

Nevertheless teachers report that they need better preparation in what to teach, even as they struggle with how to teach it.  There are compelling reasons for colleagues in arts and sciences to partner with education faculty, even when the institutional climate militates against such collaboration.

Some arts and sciences faculty see involvement with teacher education as a civic responsibility.  Faculty with social justice values may consider it a civic duty to become involved in elementary and secondary education.  Concerns about the growing inequities in access to college and professional training may lead them to collaborate with education colleagues, to understand state regulations, and to develop pedagogy that is appropriate for their content areas.

Second, many faculty in arts and sciences are parents.  From their concerns about their own children as well as those of their community at large, they may see developing high quality teachers as an important role for parents who have specialized disciplinary training. If we who have the privileges of living the academic life can share some of it with those who are working with K-12 teachers, all our children will benefit.

Third, in an era of instability, critique (e.g., the Shilling Commission chaired by George Miller) and cost-cutting in higher education, departmental self-interest is well-served by  teacher education students. Those who major in their discipline keep enrollments high and justify additional hiring within the department.  They also provide an answer to the Shilling commission’s charge that universities are divorced from the needs of society.  And if we do not improve mathematics and science teaching at the elementary and secondary level, we will continue to see a downward spiral in the number of students entering science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

Fourth, grant incentives can bring faculty into collaborations. We have found that particularly in the humanities, even small stipends can induce faculty to go to a school and work with student teachers and their cooperating teachers.  Once such faculty find that their disciplinary work can be positively affected by work in schools, they are hooked and their teaching and syllabi improve.  Other faculty have been drawn into schools through joint research on development of knowledge in mathematics or literacy. Finally,  some faculty see teaching as a way for their students who some day will be physicists, chemists, or mathematicians to consolidate their knowledge of their discipline by teaching for several years before pursuing doctoral studies.  Suggesting that they spend a few years as a high school teacher may be good advice.

When collaboration between arts and science and education faculty occurs, what and how faculty in arts and sciences teach may change. AtBostonCollegea faculty member from the English department collaborated with a faculty member in education to improve the teaching of English in a large urban high school.  It was a revelation to the English department faculty member to learn that all children do not learn the same way and that different methods of teaching are required to be successful with a variety of learners.  The students who matriculate at places like BC and NYU all can adapt to learn the way the professor teaches.  High school students are not as forgiving.

Faculty may realize the importance of finding out about schools and what future teachers need by themselves. But leadership at the top is also necessary. At NYU the Provost and Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, have taken the time (actually weekends of time) to learn about the challenges schools face, and have formed a Teacher Education Council that is made up of both arts and science and education faculty.  Similar efforts are occurring across the colleges and universities involved in the Teachers for a New Era initiative.  We all have a lot to learn from these efforts to bring arts and sciences faculty into the endeavor to prepare teachers skilled to teach rich and deep content.

********************

TNE Learning Network Prepares for Second National Meeting, Launches Website

The TNE Learning Network will hold its second national meeting inPhiladelphia,PAfrom November 30 –December 1, 2006.  This meeting will provide an opportunity for the teams from the 30 Learning Network institutions, 11 TNE sites, and their partners to study and explore the TNE design principles and their real world applications, including the best work of others who are implementing reforms.  It is structured to encourage members to reach out to others with shared interests and strengthen connections among Learning Network and TNE institutions.  Desired results for the meeting include the establishment of “threads” of interest around which subgroups of institutions could cluster and an increased capacity of participating institutions to guide the Learning Network’s development in such areas as regional networks and conferences, functions of the Learning Network website, and the future of the Network itself.

Additional information about the meeting can be found on the Learning Network’s newly launched website at www.tnelearningnetwork.org.  The website features news links and a search engine for articles relevant to Learning Network activities.  A journal feature, which will serve as an outlet for publishing new work devoted to programmatic and organizational change in teacher education, is currently under construction.

********************

Carnegie Corporation Approves Resolution Authorizing Renewal of TNE Funds

OnSeptember 28, 2006, the board of trustees for Carnegie Corporation ofNew Yorkapproved a resolution authorizing the president of the Corporation to expend funds in support of renewals for the seven TNE institutions whose initial grants come formally to an end in this year.  The board heard a report by Daniel Fallon, chair of the Education Division, on the status and progress of the TNE initiative.  The examples of the impact of TNE provided by the seven sites were essential to the presentation, as were the examples provided by the first-round sites whose renewal grants were approved last year.  The use of empirical measures of success, particularly evidence of pupil learning, was especially heartening to members of the board.  The seven institutions authorized to receive renewal funding were: BostonCollege;FloridaA&MUniversity;Stanford.

********************

Academy for Educational Development Hosts the TNE Evidence Forum

The Academy for Educational Development hosted the TNE Evidence Forum in San Francisco, Californiafrom September 17 ^– 20, 2006.  The meeting’s purpose was to discuss various research and evaluation strategies to help strengthen a growing body of evidence-based knowledge about teacher education.  More than 60 representatives of the 11 TNE institutions gathered at the Hotel Monaco to share information about their evidence-gathering activities.  Three external research advisors – Dan Goldhaber, Elliott Medrich and Bob Yinger – were also on hand to participate in discussions, help strengthen the institutions’ evidence-gathering strategies, and provide a synthesis of the major trends and challenges that arose.

Breakout discussion topics on the first full day focused on assessment of pupil learning growth, assessment of candidate skills, knowledge, and performance, and assessment of novice teacher skills, knowledge, and performance.  Based on issues that arose during the first day’s discussions, conference participants selected sustaining TNE and fostering leadership, research design, and portfolio issues as some of the discussion topics for day two.  For many of the institutions, these discussions provided guidance on the final revisions of their evidence plans, due to the Carnegie Corporation onOctober 1, 2006.  The conference was conducted with funding from Carnegie Corporation ofNew York.

********************

TNE Institutions Prepare Detailed Evidence Plans

In March of 2006, Carnegie Corporation of New York requested that the TNE institutions develop evidence plans addressing four major evidence domains:  1) assessment and evidence gathering pertinent to pupil learning growth; 2) assessment of candidate knowledge, skills, and performance; 3) assessment of new teacher knowledge, skills, and performance; and 4) continuous program improvement, inclusive of curriculum review and adjustment, and, where appropriate, curriculum redesign.  Within each domain, sites were asked to elaborate on focus areas such as each evidence-gathering activity’s rationale, design, and findings (for activities already underway).

The four initial sites submitted their evidence plans to Carnegie Corporation onJune 30, 2006; the seven second-round sites made their submissions onOctober 1, 2006.  Several sites engaged evidence consultants to assist development of their plans.  The plans will be used by the TNE site liaisons to monitor progress in gathering TNE evidence and to identify potential technical assistance needs.  They will also be shared with the TNE Research Coordinating Council.

********************

UniversityofTexasatEl Pasoto Host English Language Development Conference

OnNovember 5-7, 2006, theUniversityofTexasat El Paso (UTEP) will host the third annual TNE English Language Development (ELD) conference.  The conference will focus on ELD issues such as serving classrooms in which multiple languages are spoken, teaching English as a second language in various content areas and grade levels, and engaging parents of English-language learners in their children’s academic success.  Conference participants will include TNE site representatives and other experts in ELD.  James Crawford, Co-director of the Institute for Education and Language, and Louis Moll, ELD expert from theUniversityofArizona, will provide keynote presentations.  Other scheduled events include site visits to three local schools which face ELD challenges and anEl Pasoborder area tour.

********************

New Names and Faces

TheUniversityofWashingtonwelcomes Patrick Sexton as its new TNE Associate Project Director.  Patrick comes to the UW TNE team after six years at theAlliancefor Education, a local education fund leveraging public support for public education inSeattle.  Patrick provided leadership to theAlliance’s Effective Teaching and Secondary Reform efforts.  As a senior partnership manager Patrick worked closely with district, union, school and community leaders to move systemic reform and renewal in areas as diverse as professional growth and teacher evaluation, public engagement, personalization and small learning communities, and the academic achievement gap in math and science.  Patrick will be responsible for the day to day management of the UW TNE project.  One of his goals will be to help the UW TNE team focus on integrating the various parts of their work and sustaining the gains made during the five-year grant.

Peter Williamson has been named the new director of TNE at Stanford.  Having recently completed his Ph.D. at Stanford in Curriculum and Teacher Education, he is now a faculty member in the Stanford Teacher Education Program (STEP). Prior to becoming the director, Peter served as the induction coordinator for TNE. He has extensive experience teaching and leading Bay Area schools, and has worked on multiple literacy and school reform initiatives. His research interests include new teacher induction, urban education, and language acquisition.

Thomas G. White, Ph.D. (developmental psychology) is joining Victor Luftig as co-director of TNE at theUniversityofVirginia.  Tom comes to UVA from the Fairfax County (VA) Public Schools where he was a program evaluator focusing on early reading interventions, school effectiveness, and professional development. He has a wide range of experience in educational research and program evaluation.  He is particularly interested in research on new teacher induction, building university-school partnerships, and sustaining the legacy of TNE.

If you ever have an curiosity in bettering the standard of instructor education and learning in particular, and educating and knowing ordinarily, you are likely to discover intriguing content articles, studies, and data collected in these Instructors for the New Period (TNE) Quarterly Newsletters. Newsletters incorporate lively commentary describing TNE routines since they unfold about the campuses with the taking part establishments, alongside observations of students, policymakers, and practitioners who’re operating from the subject and should present analytical perception within the development of one’s initiative. Individuals for the eleven TNE organizations will identify the e-newsletter mainly helpful for a discussion board to the trade of data and concepts.

The TNE Mastering Network’s recently released blog – www.tnelearningnetwork.org – functions information inbound links including a research motor for content pieces suitable to Grasping Community routines. A journal function, which is able to function an outlet for publishing new give good results dedicated to programmatic and organizational switch in instructor instruction, is right now beneath design.

In other information, the training Community held its 2nd country wide assembly in Philadelphia, PA from November thirty – December one, 2006. The assembly supplied a chance for that groups through the thirty Finding out Community organizations, eleven TNE web sites, and their companions to review solar and look into the TNE style ideas and their actual environment apps, for example one of the best succeed of other folks who’re applying reforms. Explore the TNE Grasping Community blog to find out more around the assembly.

Eleven colleges and universities in the United States were designated “Teachers for a New Era” (TNE) institutions by the Board of Trustees of the Carnegie Corporation of New York upon the recommendation of President Vartan Gregorian and Education Division Chair Daniel Fallon.

The institutions were identified through a process that included research conducted by analysts from the RAND Corporation, the advice of a distinguished national advisory panel, site visits, and proposal review. Contingent upon progress toward aims expressed in their proposals, each institution will receive a grant for $5million over five years, which the institution must match, for a total commitment at each site of at least $10million.

The TNE initiative challenges the colleges and universities to restructure their programs of education for teachers so as to set a national standard for excellence, as described in the Carnegie Corporation of New York’s prospectus, Teachers for a New Era: A National Initiative to Improve the Quality of Teaching.