What is professionalized subject‐matter in teacher‐training?

Hurd, A. W.

doi:10.1002/sce.3730160313

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hurd presented a series of studies (18,19,20,21) designed to determine what constitutes professionalized subjectmatter in practice. He reported (a) the viewpoint of instructors in science in institutions preparing teachers, (b) student reactions to professionalized courses, (c) descriptive accounts by instructors of professionalized courses.…”

Section: Professionalized and Survey Courses In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter IX: Teacher Education in Science and Mathematics

Burnett¹

1942

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Professionalized and Survey Courses In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter IX: Teacher Education in Science and Mathematics

Burnett¹

1942

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analysis of some professionalized subject‐matter courses in science in teacher‐training institutions

Hurd

1933

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This analysis was conducted as a part of a n investigation of a Committee on Teacher Training appointed by the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. I t logically follows two earlier investigations, the first a questionnaire to instructors in science in teacher training institutions, which had as its purpose the collection of opinions of what constitutes professionalized subject-matter: and the second an analysis of professionalized courses by means of specially prepared blanks filled out by students after visiting certain professionalized subjectmatter classes in teacher training institutions.2 Whereas the first two reports summarized (1) opinion as to what professionalized courses are, and (2) accounts of what actually happened in certain professionalized courses, the present report summarizes descriptive accounts of their own professionalized courses by 19 instructors. The purpose has been to discover what specific things these instructors had done toward professionalizing these courses.I t is to be noted that these courses are statedly subject-matter courses. They combine the teaching of subject-matter and the study of organizing and presenting subject-matter to classes which will later be taught by the students in training. There is a clear assumption that socalled methods courses shall include subject-matter. There is likewise a clear assumption that subject-matter courses for prospective teachers will be devised specifically for these teachers-that they will not be conventional subject-matter courses intended alike for engineers, dentists, doctors, and farmers, as well as for teachers. I t seems to follow that selected subject-matter for elementary, junior high, and senior high school teachers should not be identical, but should be specifically organized to meet the needs of the particular student-teacher group.The questionnaire including 31 items was sent to a relatively small number of instructors who, in an earlier que~tionnaire,~ listed professionalized subject-matter courses in their institutions. The supposition was that those who were teaching such courses would be most likely to supply valuable information on the subject of professionalization. This report is based upon nineteen replies received. 277

show abstract