Dewey argued that personal experiences in schools are critical to the education of teachers; however, he also argued that all experiences are not necessarily educative. This study examines the potential of a novel approach to providing prospective teachers with experiences with children. This article describes the benefits of teacher education students’ participation in concurrent field placements, one in the conventional classroom setting and the second in a community-based after-school program. Prospective teachers’ reflections on these experiences indicated that contrasting settings for learning and teaching were instrumental in their understanding the multiple sources of influence that create both opportunities and constraints to teaching and learning at each site.

Drawing on examples of collaborative projects in two urban Professional Development Schools, the authors argue against educational reform based solely on curricular standards. They advocate the resources and structures to establish critical relationships enabling educators to learn about themselves as they learn with others, thereby creating the opportunity for the understanding and development of different perspectives. Analyzing relationships characterizing contrastive PDS collaborations, they suggest that relational knowing—or knowledge of curriculum and instruction, knowledge of self and other, and knowledge of critical action—must be in place before school and university reform can occur.

One of the fundamental values built in to current special education practice is the notion of equity for students with disabilities. In a review regarding the least restrictive environment (LRE), Yell (1995) said, "LRE is a principle stating that students with disabilities are to be educated in settings as close to regular classes as appropriate for the child" (p. 193). Although almost all stakeholders agree with these goals in principle, there is significant and heated debate in the professional community about how to achieve these goals. Much of the discussion on LRE seems to reflect a specific place-a physical context such as the general education classroom. In this article, we draw on a sociocultural framework to propose an expanded view of LRE. Specifically, we argue that a focus on the physical setting is not the most appropriate unit of analysis. Rather, we suggest that the same placement or setting can be either facilitating or restrictive, depending on the social organization of specific activity settings that comprise a given context. A different view is provided by sociocultural theory, which proposes a unit of analysis that includes the individual in interaction with a specific activity setting.

Purpose The researchers developed a model of mentoring student teachers, known as Shared Mentoring in Learning Environments (SMILE), to provide opportunities for classroom teachers to build shared understanding with university field supervisors. The purpose of this paper is to compare teaching efficacy of those student teachers who matriculated through the SMILE approach with mentoring student teachers who matriculated through a traditional approach to mentoring and identifying aspects of SMILE that may have contributed to the development of teacher efficacy. Design/methodology/approach A total of 29 student teachers participated in the SMILE model of supporting student teaching, and 29 student teachers (comparison group) were provided with a traditional support structure. At the start and end of their one-year post-baccalaureate credential program, all student teachers completed a teaching efficacy questionnaire. During the last month of the teacher-credential program, all student teachers were interviewed in focus groups regarding the quality of their student-teaching mentoring. In addition, the researchers asked classroom teachers in the SMILE cohort to complete a questionnaire, identifying specific strengths and weaknesses of the SMILE model of mentoring student teachers. Findings Student teachers in the SMILE cohort improved their teaching efficacy in comparison with student teachers in a traditional model of support. SMILE student teachers appreciated critical feedback, while the comparison group participants focused on whether feedback was positive or negative. In addition, SMILE student teachers attributed their development of instructional skills to the mentoring process from classroom teachers and university supervisors, while comparison group participants attributed their development as teachers mainly to their classroom teachers who modeled effective instructional strategies. SMILE classroom teachers made reference to how particular aspects of the model (e.g. sequencing and lesson study) contributed to both student- and mentor-teacher development. Originality/value The SMILE approach to mentoring student teachers facilitated collaboration between university field supervisors and classroom teachers in joint mentoring of future teachers into their profession, a rare occurrence in teacher education programs. Joint mentoring led to improved teaching efficacy among student teachers.

In the midst of unprecedented knowledge generation in the field of education, the definition of learning disabilities and the methods used for its identification have essentially remained the same for nearly 30 years. Working from a sociohistorical perspective, the authors’ distinct professional positions within education (university academic, federal program officer, and school administrator) serve as the lenses to examine the constancy of the official definition and the means for the identification of learning disabilities relative to changes throughout the historical chronologies of educational theory, policy, and practice. The concept of context as that which weaves is used to illustrate the relationships across several historical episodes.