Teacher preparation programs tend to follow a standard developmental model: (i) foundation courses; (ii) methods courses, and (iii) culminating clinical practice. Many programs, including those in CEHS, include extensive field experiences that parallel methods courses with the goal of seeing theory in practice.
The landscape of P-12 education has changed dramatically in the past five years and the traditional models of teacher preparation no longer reflect the complexity of content and practice for elementary and secondary teachers. Calls from national accrediting bodies (CAEP), federal and state DOEs, and local districts, all involve rich and embedded partnerships between IHE’s and P-12 settings. The focus of this proposal is on teacher preparation, but leader preparation is facing similar reforms.
CEHS currently has strong teacher preparation programs, but if we remain as we are in content and delivery, we will produce less “effective” graduates within a short time frame. A teacher’s effectiveness, based on evolving requirements from districts and national accrediting bodies is tied to measured impact on student learning. We perceive student learning to be far more than test scores; content knowledge, transfer of knowledge, problem solving, real world applications, and social and emotional development. We have the capacity in people and resources to begin a major curriculum revision, but we will need support and buy-in from many colleagues and offices at Seton Hall and in our local p-12 community.
CEHS is not advocating this paradigm shift in curriculum and delivery because others tell us we have to. We advocate for it because we believe it will deepen and expand learning for our candidates and the children they serve in P-12 settings. We seek to “Be the change you wish to see in the world” (Ghandi) for the well-being of all learners.