History of Teacher Education

This article provides a historical overview of the field of teacher education. Teacher education refers to programs that help teachers develop quality and effective teaching and learning strategies to use in the classroom. The teacher education field began during the eighteenth century when Benjamin Franklin recognized the need to have quality, educated teachers who could train others to teach. Today, teacher education programs provide future teachers with a number of methods to use while teaching, including reflective teaching skills, tools to use while teaching in diverse settings, instruction on how to use the realistic approach, episteme & phronesis, use of computers & technology, training during early field experiences, tools to use when teaching disabled students, and enhanced focus on clinical experiences and training access during the five-year programs.

Keywords Accountability; No Child Left Behind (NCLB); Normal schools; Pedagogy; Teacher education; Teacher quality; Teacher preparation programs

History of Education > History of Teacher Education

Overview

Teacher education refers to programs that help teachers develop quality and effective teaching and learning strategies to use in the classroom (Hagger & McIntyre, 2000). The field of Teacher Education can generally be defined as a group of educational programs that prepare future teachers.

Research on teacher education shows that the profession involves more than just an understanding of teaching, but also an understanding of the process in which new teachers learn effective teaching techniques, and how they can be taught to do so. Hagger and McIntyre (2000) posit that initial teacher education can be understood best in terms of interactions among intelligent people in varying positions, who have their own agendas and have their own unique ways of pursuing them. The differences in ideas and understandings that new student teachers bring to the profession, the passion for their individual preconceptions, and how learning is influenced within teacher education programs all make up the body of research on teacher education today.

The teacher education field has a long history of development. The preparation of teachers in the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in the seventeenth and eighteenth century United States was very different. No high-school or college diploma was required during that time, so becoming a teacher involved obtaining approval from a local clergy member or board of trustees connected with a religious institution. As long as one could read, write, spell and was considered to have a positive moral character, he or she was deemed qualified to be a teacher (Ornstein & Levine, 2006).

Prior to the American Revolution in 1775, nine colonial colleges were charted, each existing to grant academic degrees. These institutions were: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth, Cornell University, College of William & Mary and Rutgers University (Roche, 1986). Most teachers in these colleges were untrained women who were poorly paid, and others were ex-soldiers or indentured servants. Because individuals were struggling to make it on a new continent, they accepted whatever pay was offered (Parker, 1990).

In 1750, Benjamin Franklin recognized the need for quality, educated teachers who could train others to teach. He believed that future teachers could be educated in a Philadelphia academy that he helped establish, which had been modeled after some of the London academies in which he served as an apprentice. So Franklin set out to make this plan come to fruition. Later, additional academies were created to educate future teachers by English Quakers, Baptists and other nonconformists, many of which were established because their sons had been barred from Oxford and Cambridge colleges which were controlled by the Church of England (Parker, 1990).

The academies, which offered applied subjects, operated as terminal secondary schools that appealed to many rising middle class Americans. Some of the academies were private for example, the early Zion Parnassus Academy (1785), located near Salisbury, NC. Others include a private academy in Concord, VT, Phillips Academy in Andover, MA, and seminaries in Plymouth, NH and Craftsbury, VT, all established by Congregational minister Samuel Read Hall (1795-1877), often referred to as a "teacher of teachers," (Parker, 1990, p. 4). Hall created a number of instructor's manuals to use in the academies, which were later used by the normal schools as a textbook (Parker, 1990).

After 1827, the state of New York offered financial support to academies to prepare teachers, as most were private, multipurpose institutions, whose teacher education departments received little respect. Even the colleges had little respect for the teaching education programs in the academies, because most were liberal and believed that no professional training should take place at their institutions. Therefore, they offered no support toward preparing future teachers. Consequently, until the establishment of Normal Schools, teacher education had no real home (Parker, 1990).

Normal schools were established during the nineteenth century. They were two-year educational institutions that offered history and philosophy of education courses, methods of teaching, and practice teaching for those striving to become teachers. Many of these schools however, became four-year teacher education colleges by the end of the nineteenth century (Ornstein & Levine, 2006).

Enrollment in normal schools was initially slow. In 1839, enrollment in the first state-supported normal school consisted of only three female students. Student enrollment increased by 1840 however, with 26 students from ten states between Maine and California completing the teacher education programs by the end of the term. By 1875, enrollment had increased to over 23,000 in 70 state-supported normal schools throughout 25 states, including ten county-supported schools and ten city-supported normal schools. Courses on the history of education, teaching elementary school subjects, and the art of teaching made up the normal school curriculum. Each normal school included student teaching practice sites, also known as laboratory schools or practice schools (Parker, 1990).

When the public school systems began to form in the Midwest and western states in the late 1800s, growth in normal schools was significantly enhanced. Program duration for the normal schools began at one year, and later increased to three years once the schools became more secure (Parker, 1990). Normal schools received additional support in 1862, when the Morrill Act was established. It granted 30,000 acres worth of federal land grants to senators and representatives in the Congress in each state, and provided support to the teacher education profession. The land was used to establish college institutions focusing on engineering, agricultural education, liberal arts, as well as professional education (Andrews, 1918).

After 1900 the problems facing teacher education came to the forefront. Parker (1990) writes that low pay, part-year work (since schools were only open 3 to 7 months each year) and unfair hiring practices plagued the teacher education profession. Most teaching jobs went to relatives of school board members, and because it was so difficult to get a teaching position, few young people chose to spend time and money on teacher education in colleges or normal schools. This lack of interest in teacher education drove the efforts of the National Teachers Association, established in 1857 and reorganized in 1870 as the National Education Association (NEA). Its mission was to recruit teachers, promote teacher institutes, support normal schools and increase teacher salaries.

Though the NEA had the ability to advocate for various teacher issues, the teacher education profession faced other issues that were beyond its scope. For example, teacher quality and the guidelines required for certification/licensing was at issue. At this time, teacher certification was local and controlled by districts until individual states gained control. Because the need for teachers was so great, certification requirements were often low and often overlooked, thereby resulting in poor teacher quality in many of the teacher education programs (Parker, 1990).

Historically, however, individual state education laws have governed teacher preparation programs in the United States, deeming that each state is responsible for the functions of public elementary and secondary education in their states. In addition, states are expected to play a significant role in licensing teachers. The rationale of state educator licensing programs is that parents need to send their children to school, and because they send their children to school, they have the right to expect that a reasonable amount of standard of care will be displayed while the school is in charge of their child. In addition, parents have the right to expect that teachers have the appropriate knowledge and skills necessary to provide their children with a quality education. Licenses protect educators from arbitrary dismissals based on the assertion that the teacher does not have the knowledge and skills needed for the task (Early, 1994).

Today, individual states must make necessary changes in their teacher education programs, and institutions must modify certification program requirements to maintain their historical role as arbitrator of educational quality (Bales, 2006). To date, all public school teachers in the United States are required to be certified by the state in their specific subject area or grade level. With the exception of alternative certification or temporary certification, a bachelor's degree or five years of college-level work is required to begin to teach (Ornstein & Levine, 2006; Kaye, 2003).

Decades ago, teachers could obtain teaching certificates that were good for life. Today certificates issued by the states are valid for three to five years, and require proof of positive evaluations or college coursework for renewal. The process of issuing teaching certifications is not without issue. Differences in requirements from state-to-state often lead to problems in teacher preparation programs. It becomes difficult to measure the preparedness of entering teachers because of the diversity of required arts and science semester hours. Across the nation, some programs require thirty hours and some require up to seventy-five hours. In addition, courses vary in content from program to program, making it difficult for states and institutions to guarantee that educators have studied the same concepts and have the same types of skills (Ornstein & Levine, 2006).

State mandates are also at issue for the teacher education profession. Though teacher education programs have traditionally been the responsibility of individual states, the United States Constitution affirms that one of its roles is to provide for the welfare of its citizens. With this obligation national policymakers issue state mandates to address student achievement and teacher quality, often during perceived educational crises. Examples include national policies and reauthorizations like the 1958 National Defense Education Act (NDEA), the 1963 ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act), later referred to as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001, and the 1992 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA). Each mandate has been developed in an effort to push specific education reforms in each state (Royster & Chernay, 1981; Bales, 2006).

Teacher quality is one aspect of NCLB that is of great importance. The mandate requires all individuals who teach students to be "highly qualified" in the subject in which they teach. Highly qualified is defined as holding a state certification, at least an earned bachelor's degree, and successful completion of the basic skills and subject matter tests for their specific areas of interest. Some NCLB opponents feel this definition fails to include the quality of teaching in terms of content knowledge, and has caused many states to use paper-and-pencil tests as determinants of teacher quality. For example, in Washington State, the requirement for entering the teacher education program includes passing the basic skills test as well as the Praxis II, a timed paper-and-pencil exam of pedagogy and content knowledge (Selwyn, 2007).

Applications

Reflective Teaching

Institutions have placed emphasis on producing "reflective" teachers who regularly observe and reflect on their teaching, then make the necessary adjustments to their teaching methods. This concept is also known as "expert decision-making," "higher-order self-reflection," and "inquiry-oriented teacher education" (Stewart, 1994; Yost, Sentner & Forlenz-Bailey, 2000; Risko, Vukelich & Roskos, 2002). Reflective teaching implies that teachers develop continuously so their training is an ongoing process (Korthagen & Kessels, 1999). Though teacher education programs vary from institution to institution, hundreds of programs have incorporated reflective teaching in their curriculums.

Teaching in Diverse Settings

With the U.S. education system continuously becoming more and more diverse, it is necessary for future teachers to have some type of cultural competence training. Smith (1998), Claycomb (2000) and Holm & Horn (2003) suggest that many Teacher Education programs and teacher licensing programs require future teachers to prove that they understand why it is important to understand the backgrounds of diverse students. For example, the Praxis III, a teacher performance assessment, includes within its licensing agreement, that a candidate demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the knowledge and experiences of students from different backgrounds.

Realistic Approach

Realistic mathematics education, also known as the Realistic Approach, assumes that students can and should develop their own mathematical notions based on practical experiences and/or problems. Because mathematics causes so many problems for so many children, finding ways to help children apply what they learn is necessary. The realistic approach for example, instructs the teacher to present an everyday problem to the child. He or she might encourage the child to attempt to solve the problem by using practical mathematics, inquiry and reflection, teamwork to help solve the problem, and hands-on activities. The idea is that the child acquires knowledge and skills through experience to use in a real-life dilemma (Korthagen & Kessels, 1999).

Episteme vs. Phronesis

Aristotle's concepts of episteme and phronesis are used to help explain confusion associated with the word "theory." Kessels and Korthagen (1996) posit that epistemic knowledge requires a teacher to offer general conceptions that apply to a variety of situations. This information is based on research and can be considered theory. Episteme strives to help individuals think in more broad terms, helping individuals know more about many situations. On the other hand, phronesis knowledge is situation-specific and should be applied on a case by case basis. This knowledge is more perceptual than conceptual, and focuses the attention of the individual on specific characteristics of the problem, and how one might perceive a particular situation. Phronesis is also considered to be a key element in the idea of theory development.

Computer & Technology Use

Most teacher education programs today offer some type of training on computers and other technology. Coker and Wilson (1997), AACTE (2000) & Loschert (2003) suggests that 90% or more teacher education programs have some type of computer or technology laboratories, which include an extensive variety of activities. Future teachers are taught basic computer skills, introduced to elementary and secondary school hardware and software, and learn to use technology in their lesson design and delivery.

Early Field Experience

During the early part of many teacher education programs, candidates are required to spend a great deal of time in elementary and secondary schools to help with their preparation. Classroom observation, teacher aide duties or similar field experiences at other schools are among the duties assigned. Most of these experiences relate significantly to pedagogical methods and educational psychology courses taught within the teacher education programs (Swanson, 1995; Berliner, 2000; Hove & Gill, 2003).

Teaching Disabled Students

Most teacher education programs require future teachers to interact with students with various disabilities. Because teachers often have special-needs students in their classes, this training helps prepare them for real-life experiences with disabled students. By law, disabled students must be included in regular classes as often as possible. Full inclusion of disabled students is the goal, regardless of the extent of the child's disability. For this reason, most teachers should expect to have responsibilities dealing with special needs of students (Strawderman & Lindsey, 1995; Littleton, 2000).

Fifth-Year & Five-Year Programs

Several states and numerous institutions of higher learning incorporated fifth-year programs or extended teacher education programs through five years of training during the 1980s. In fifth-year programs, there are little to no professional-study courses involved during the first four years, and preparation for the teaching career is the focus of the fifth year. In five-year programs, candidates have an opportunity to experience professional preparation throughout the entire undergraduate term, with enhanced focus on clinical experiences and training (Darling-Hammond, 1998).

Viewpoints

Teacher Educator's View

Selwyn (2007) believes that potential teacher candidates who don't test well on the required exams by No Child Left Behind are being eliminated as a result of the increased emphasis on testing used to determine one's teaching abilities. This focus presents an image of teachers who cannot use their knowledge of the curriculum, students and human development to make good decisions.

Research findings have been inconclusive, however, in regard to whether teacher academic abilities explain how well they will perform in the classroom as teachers. Though there are over 600 tests used throughout the U.S. to measure candidates' content knowledge and basic skills, there are still no findings to suggest that these tests have the ability to predict who will be a good teacher (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005). There are many discrepancies about what the most effective teaching techniques are, so much so that it is impossible to quantify or test for what makes a good, quality teacher (Wilson & Youngs, 2005).

Future Education Research & Policymaking

Bales (2006) suggests that policymakers are not giving the teacher education field the opportunity to use its professional judgment in preparing future teachers. Instead, a "tug-of-war" (p. 406) between state and national authorities is present as these authorities feel that graduates of teacher education programs are not adequately prepared to address student achievement needs in the classrooms. The tug-of-war is over teacher licensing, recruitment, preparation and professional development policymaking, and has placed educators on the sideline in the war with little or no input.

As a result of the contention that in some populations student achievement levels are inadequate and are less likely to have fully prepared, licensed educators, various groups across the nation have advocated for a change in control and accountability. In turn, locus of control and accountability in U.S. policies on teacher education have changed over the last 20 years. For example, what used to be an incentive for the teacher education field is now a mandate, and what used to be local accountability systems are now state and national-level accountability systems. However, no one approach works for the entire field of teacher education. Throughout the United States educational system, the standards-based policy is present but only represents a single solution and does not account for the diversity found in individual schools, or consider the unequal opportunities to learn that exist in different school systems (Bales, 2006).

A second issue concerning state and national policymakers is the small body of knowledge available on teacher education research. Though some research exists on alternative certification programs in the U.S., policymakers believe that a strong research agenda including international teacher education research could provide the United States with other alternatives to use in teacher preparation programs (Bales, 2006).

Some research suggests that the most effective teachers are those who reflect on the interactions they have with their students, and in turn use the new information gained to guide their classroom curriculums. Policymakers wish to investigate how successful teachers have been in using this new knowledge in their teaching. Questions to ask are whether dispositions were present in candidates before entering a teaching preparation program, and can teaching preparation programs help cultivate a candidate's skills? Because U.S. teacher preparation programs are not without fault, policymakers believe these programs can learn from collaborations with international colleagues. Answers to these questions could support the need to change recruitment processes, licensing, and professional development policies (Bales, 2006).

Bales (2006) stresses that policymakers must give the teacher education field the opportunity to use its professional judgment in preparing future teachers. They must not ignore the input of teacher education professionals but rather include them in the decisions to identify the best methods and opportunities for students to learn.

Terms & Concepts

1862 Morrill Act: The first Morrill Act of 1862 granted 30,000 acres worth of federal land grants to senators and representatives in the Congress in each state to support higher education. This act gave institutions the ability to educate people in agriculture, home economics, mechanical arts, and other professions that were practical at the time, including teacher education programs.

Accountability: Accountability refers to the idea of holding teachers, administrators, and school board members responsible for the performance of students or for appropriate use of educational funds.

Locus of Control: Locus of control refers to an individual's generalized expectations concerning where control over subsequent events resides.

National Teachers Association: The National Teachers Association was an organization with interests in recruiting teachers, promoting teachers' institutes, supporting normal schools and increasing salaries in the early 1900s. Later became the National Education Association.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB): NCLB is a federal plan instituted in 2001 that calls for schools to make annual gains in test scores on a pace that will have all students meeting state-defined standards by the year 2014.

Normal Schools: Normal schools were two-year teacher education institutions established during the eighteenth century.

Pedagogy: Pedagogy is the art or science of being a teacher, generally refers to methods of instruction or a style of instruction.

Praxis Exam: The Praxis exam is a timed paper-and-pencil exam of pedagogy and content knowledge used to assess a teacher's performance. It is required to receive professional licensure for teacher certification and was created by the Educational Testing Service (ETS).

Standard of Care: The standard of care is the amount of caution required of an individual who is responsible for another.

Teacher Education: Teacher education refers programs that help teachers develop quality and effective teaching and learning strategies to use in the classroom.

Teacher Preparation Programs: Teacher preparation programs are courses of study that prepare candidates to become certified teachers within the K-12 school system. Programs offer candidates specific courses in general education, subject matter preparation, professional education, special seminars and colloquia, and other opportunities for practical field experiences.

Teacher Quality: Teacher quality refers to teaching ability. The law defines 'highly qualified' mostly in terms of content. According to the No Child Left Behind plan, to be highly qualified, teachers must be certified by the state, have at least a bachelor's degree, and pass basic skills and subject area tests.

Bibliography

Andrews, B. (1918). The land grant of 1862 and the land-grant college. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 179). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Aronson, B., & Anderson, A. (2013). Critical Teacher Education and the Politics of Teacher Accreditation: Are We Practicing What We Preach?. Journal For Critical Education Policy Studies (JCEPS), 11, 244-262. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91543321&site=ehost-live

Bales, B. L. (2006). Teacher education policies in the United States: The accountability shift since 1980, Teaching and Teacher Education, 22 , 395-407.

Berliner, D. C. (2000). A personal response to those who bash teacher education. In A.C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 14-15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Claycomb, C. (2000). High-quality urban school teachers. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 16). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). The new teacher education: For better or for worse? Educational Researcher, 34 , 3-17.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Executive summary: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 1-36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Coker, D. R. & Wilson, M. (1997). Reconceptualizing the process of teacher preparation. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 179). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Early, P. M. (1994). Federal attention to teacher certification and licensure: Two policy case studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.

Hagger, H. & McIntyre (2000). What can research tell us about teacher education? Oxford Review, 26 , 483-494.

Holm, L. & Horn, C. (2003). Priming schools of education for today's teachers. In A.C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 16). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Hove, A. & Gill, B. (2003). The Benedum Collaborative Model of teacher education. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 14-15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Kaye, E. A. (2003). Requirements for certification of teachers, counselors, librarians, and administrators of elementary and secondary schools. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 11). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Kessels, J. P. A. M. & Korthagen, F. a. J. (1996). The relationship between theory and practice: Back to the classics. Educational Researcher, 25 , 17-22.

Korthagen, F. A. & Kessels, J. P. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education, Educational Researcher, 28 , 4-17.

Littleton, D. (2000). Preparing teachers for hard-to-staff schools. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15-16). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Loschert, K. (2003). Are you ready? In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Mirel, J. (2011). Bridging the "widest street in the world" reflections on the history of teacher education. American Educator, 35, 6-12. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=62252523&site=ehost-live

Ornstein, A. C. & Levine, D. U. (2006). Foundations of education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Parker, F. (1990). Teacher education USA: Western Carolina University centennial in national perspective. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 360253)

Risko, V. J. Vukelich, C. & Roskos, K. (2000). Preparing teachers for reflective practice. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Roche, J. (1986). The colonial colleges in the war for American independence. Millwood: Associated Faculty Press, Inc.

Royster, P. M. & Chernay, G. J. (1981). Teacher education: The impact of federal policy. Springfield: Banister Press.

Selwyn, D. (2007). Highly quantified teachers: NCLB and teacher education. (No Child Left Behind).Journal of Teacher Education 58 , 124-137.

Smith, G. P. (1998). Common sense about uncommon knowledge. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 16). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Stewart, D. K. (1994). Reflective teaching in preservice teacher education. In A.C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Strawderman, C. & Lindsey, P. (1995). Keeping up with the times. In A.C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15-16). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Swanson, J. (1995). Systemic reform in the professionalism of educators. In A.C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 14-15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Walsh, K. (2013). 21st-century teacher education. Education Next, 13, 18-24. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87934932&site=ehost-live

Wilson, S., & Youngs, P. (2005). Research on accountability processes in teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education. (pp. 549-590). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Yost, D. S., Sentner, S. M. & Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000). An examination of the construct of critical reflection. In A. C. Ornstein & D.U. Levine (Eds.), Foundations of education. (9th ed., p. 15). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Suggested Reading

Allen, M. (2003). Eight questions on teacher preparation: What does the research say? Denver: Education Commission of the States.

Bales, B. (2002). Strange bedfellow? Title I funding, alternative certification programs, and state teacher standards. In Paper presented at the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York City.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationship of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-306.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Executive summary: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 1-36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Conant, J. B. (1964). The education of American teachers. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hanushek, E. (2002). Teacher quality. In L. Izumi & W. Evers (Eds.), Teacher quality (pp. 1-12). Palo Alto, CA: Hoover Institution.

Hollins, E., & Torres Guzman, M. (2005). Research on preparing teachers for diverse populations. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 477-548). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Murray, F. (1996). The teacher educator's handbook: Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Spillane, J. P. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment, Journal of Curriculum Studies 31 , 143-175.

Wilson, S., Floden, R. & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2002). Teacher preparation research: An insiders' view from the outside, Journal of Teacher Education 53 , 190-204.