Traditional versus Integrated Preservice Teacher Education Curriculum

Abstract

This empirical study is intended to assess whether a standards-based integrated teacher preparation curriculum is more beneficial in developing professional competencies than a traditional course-oriented curriculum at a college of education in a state university. Using multivariate analysis of variance, we found that students who went through the new integrated curriculum reported higher levels of professional preparation in all 13 standards and competency areas than those who went through the traditional course-oriented curriculum. This finding remained strong even when the teaching majors were included and controlled as another factor variable. Students in the integrated curriculum and those in the traditional curriculum had comparable characteristics, high school grade point averages (GPAs), and college GPAs. Additional related findings and suggestions for future studies also emerged.

Investigating Pre-service Science Teachers’ Developing Professional Knowledge Through the Lens of Differentiated Instruction

“…Although there is opposition to this reform (Beyer 2002;Finn et al 2000), the standards agenda represents an attempt to better prepare teachers for the complexities of today's classrooms. Many reform initiatives in teacher preparation stem from a perceived inadequacy of traditional programs (Darling-Hammond 1999;Kim et al 2004;Russell et al 2001) and are reflected in a movement towards student teachers being given more opportunities to integrate theory and practice, to experience the field sooner and more often, to adopt inquiry-based approaches to teaching, and to develop a comprehensive knowledge base for teaching. This entails changes in conceptual frameworks that undergird teacher preparation programs, as well as changes in the structure and content of programs.…”

Tendencias en la formación inicial docente

“…Y para cumplir con este último objetivo, debemos plantear la necesidad imperiosa de cambiar las estructuras organizativas y curriculares que imperan en la formación inicial de docentes (Minsun Kim, Andrews y Carr, 2004). No actuar en este sentido supone alimentar el engaño de creer que las universidades y los institutos de formación de maestros y profesores "forman" y que la escuela "deforma" (Marcelo y Vaillant, 2009).…”

Examining the University-Profession Divide: An Inquiry into a Teacher Education Program’s Practices

“…What we found was a significant amount of research that supported our schema. Kim, Andrews, and Carr (2004) define traditional university curriculum in teacher education as non-integrated courses, a linear arrangement of theory before practice, and a lack of connection between university faculty and school settings. Within this traditionalist model, the perception is that teacher development is a function of learning about teaching at the university and learning to teach in field experiences.…”