Role and Function of a Conceptual Framework

According to NCATE's Professional Standards for the Accreditation of Schools, Colleges and Departments of Education, "the conceptual framework is the underlying structure of the unit that sets forth a vision of the unit and provides a theoretical and empirical foundation for the direction of programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, faculty scholarship and service and unit accountability" (NCATE, 2001, pp. 8-9 ). It is a declaration of what we value, and what we are trying to accomplish, in the formation of professional educators (teachers, educational leadership and administration) and educational professionals (school counseling, counseling, school and educational psychology). It therefore organizes the very mission of the institution. It provides a guidepost for program development and benchmarks for program evaluation. It reflects our shared vision of professional competence in education.

Moreover, the conceptual framework articulates how the graduates of our programs are to be distinguished from the graduates of other institutions. Indeed, the core themes of our conceptual framework should be woven into the very fabric of our instructional practices in such a way that professional educators and educational professionals who graduate from our programs will bear a distinctive mark of excellence.

We also commit to a conceptual framework because it is our conviction that professional education programs that are conceptually organized around well-attested themes provide a superior context for training educational professionals programs. Indeed, this is recognized by the NCATE accreditation standards when it asserts that a unit's conceptual framework must provide "a theoretical and empirical foundation for the direction of programs" (NCATE, 2001, p. 9).

Moreover, the unifying themes of a conceptual framework make it possible to describe the kind of educational professional the unit intends to graduate; it guides the development of curriculum; it guides the selection of instructional practices that will be used to prepare teachers; and it suggests indicators for program evaluation. Indeed, an explicit conceptual framework increases the probability that a core number of teaching abilities, qualities and dispositions can be adequately derived and made the basis of thematic program activity.

Hence a conceptual framework, organized around core themes, can function as an intervention in the process of building powerful, action-guiding schemata for the education professions, but only if these core themes are explicit, pervasive and evident within the instructional practices of the Unit. This thematic consistency is only possible when a clear conceptual framework guides instruction and preparation in the education professions. Believing, Behaving, Becoming

The conceptual framework for Ball State University's professional education Unit builds on the previous work of Associate Dean Thomas Schroeder and the Conceptual Framework Team. A consensus emerged in this group that the INTASC Principles should be the explicit focus of the conceptual framework. This decision accords with an NCATE indicator for conceptual frameworks that calls for an alignment of candidate proficiencies with professional, state and institutional standards.

The ten INTASC Principles are understood to summarize ten active dispositions of the competent professional educator. The first three dispositions (Principles) are active cognitive understandings or beliefs of the competent professional educator. Accordingly, the competent professional educator:

• Understands content
• Understands development
• Understands difference and diversity

The second set of dispositions (Principles) describes behavioral dispositions of the ideal professional educator. Accordingly, the competent professional educator:

• Evaluates
• Communicates
• Manages and motivates
• Designs instructional strategies
• Plans and integrates

The third sets of dispositions (Principles) are commitments to professional growth and development (becoming). Accordingly, the competent professional educator:

• Reflects on practice
• Participates in the professional community

The professional educator, then, believes, behaves, becomes.

Expert Engagement in Context

This nascent framework is helpful insofar as it explicitly binds professional education at Ball State University to INTASC Principles that are the basis of unit accreditation. In addition, it underscores the notion that competent professional educators are experts in relevant bodies of knowledge ("believes"), are actively engaged in competent, reflective professional practice in the school and clinic ("behaves") and in the professional community ("becomes"). Consequently, expert engagement in context is the foundational theme of the present conceptual framework.

The conceptual framework revolves around three themes, expertise, engagement, and context. These themes are mutually implicative, and form a thematic unity that will guide the preparation of training quality educational professionals. The concise formulation of the conceptual framework is this:

The mission of the professional education Unit at Ball State University is to prepare engaged educational experts who are sensitive and responsive to the contextual bases of teaching, learning and development.

Each theme entails a set of assumptions about teaching, learning and professional competence. Each theme implies a set of commitments for professional education at Ball State, and provides criteria for on-going assessment of our efforts.

Context

The Unit rejects the "pitch-and-catch" model of education that assumes that the instructional encounter is simply a matter of active teachers handing off knowledge ("pitch") to passive students ("catch"). It rejects the notion that education is something that happens to children; from the outside-in. Teachers as active transmitters of knowledge and children as passive recipient learners are metaphors common to this traditional notion of education, and to many preservice teachers.

In contrast, the Unit endorses a contextual-ecological view of education that assumes that the context of education and development is not a simple stimulus environment to which children are merely reactive but instead consists of biological, psychological, social and cultural processes that dynamically interact throughout the life course. Children are deeply embedded within multiple ecological systems, and educational frameworks that attempt to influence child outcomes must contend with multiple sources of influence at different levels of organization. As Scales and Leffert (1999, p. 11) put it, children "live in multiple, overlapping ecologies and that helping them to create and maintain successful pathways to adulthood requires simultaneous attention to and marshaling of supports across all of those ecologies."

Consequently, educational planning that focuses only on "the child" without addressing "context" will likely fail. Educational planning that fails to address the multiplicity and diversity of developmental contexts represented students will fall short of its educational objectives. Organism and context are inextricably bound in dynamic interaction and cannot be separated.

Moreover, the contextual-ecological perspective also insists that children are active producers of their own development; that they are active agents in the construction of meaning and of their own learning environments; and are capable of inducing alterations in their own developmental trajectory by their own initiative. There is a dynamic, reciprocal interaction between the dispositions, interests, capacities, and potentialities of the child and the socializing structures of the learning or developmental context. Hence children are not captive of contexts; they are not merely reactive to "learning environments" but are instead active in the construction of their own learning and development. Consequently, educational planning that focuses only on "context," only on alterations to the "learning environment," will fall short of its educational objectives. Organism and context are inextricably bound in dynamic interaction and cannot be separated.

What implication does the contextual-ecological perspective have for teacher and for graduate education?

An ecological approach to education requires the preparation of educational professionals who are sensitive to the personal and contextual influences on student learning and development, and who are able to manipulate, influence and marshal the resources across ecological settings in order to promote successful matriculation or adjustment

Moreover, an ecological approach to education implies

• a commitment on the part of educational professionals to be active in their communities, in settings outside of the classroom, school building and clinic, in order to maximize the possibilities of positive youth development;
• a commitment on the part of schools to foster continuity among school, family, and community, and to organize the resources, assets and strengths of a community to support positive youth development;
• a commitment to create healthy communities for children and adolescents in order to maximize educational and adaptational objectives.

One hallmark, then, of a Ball State educational professional is a committed willingness to be actively engaged in all relevant settings that influence educational outcomes; to be engaged in collaborative partnerships with families, civic organizations, community structures and political entities to influence the ecology of youth development.

Indeed, the reality of ecological contextualism requires an engaged educational professional, one who is able to operate responsibly in diverse settings and be responsive to multiple contextual realities.

• This requires a teacher and graduate education program that encourages candidates to consider the interconnections between ecological settings, learning and development.
• It requires a teacher and graduate education program that encourages students to work in multiple contexts, with diverse students, communities, cultural values and allegiances (Brookfield, 1990).
• It requires a teacher and graduate education program that is concerned not only with preparing candidates in content and pedagogical content knowledge unique to particular licensure areas, but preparation as well in the cultivation of developmental assets whose sources lie in contexts outside of the schoolroom.

In short, the Ball State graduate is actively engaged in multiple, diverse ecological settings in order to promote successful educational and developmental outcomes.

Engagement

The theme of engagement directly follows from an ecological and contextual approach to education. It follows from a constructivist understanding of teaching and learning.

It is the mission of the teacher education Unit to prepare the engaged teacher and the engaged educational professional, and educational professionals so prepared will be distinguished by a singular set of commitments, dispositions and competencies. The preparation of engaged teachers and engaged graduate and doctoral candidates presupposes a commitment on the part of the University and Unit to the policy and practice of professional engagement

The Engaged University. The theme of engagement is part of an important trend in higher education towards articulating the special role of universities in the life of communities The university is a catalyzing agent in the social, economic and cultural sectors of society. The university, by virtue of its expert knowledge base, by virtue of its generative ability to produce creative and innovative ideas, is able to respond to the needs of its many constituencies, and to enhance the quality of civic life. In addition, a policy of engagement offers new opportunities to integrate the traditional research mission of the university with its teaching and service mission. Consequently an engaged university

• is responsive to the needs of diverse communities;
• provides mechanisms to enhance the lifelong learning of citizens;
• develops strategic partnerships with community organizations to improve the
• intellectual and social capital of stakeholders.

Because the engaged university reaches outward to the community it emphasizes the communal and relational basis of learning, research and scholarship, and places a premium on collaboration, joint ventures and shared commitment. It embraces a "hands-on" pedagogy that includes

• collaborative inquiry
• experiential learning
• service learning
• project-based learning
• integrative learning

Moreover, a policy of engagement requires the Unit to work with diverse communities, insofar as joint ventures and a collaborative approach to inquiry and service will invariably require working with culturally diverse stakeholders and partners. Hence a hands-on approach to pedagogy will also insist on respect for cultural heterogeneity, and provide ways to educate for pluralism.

The educative activities of the engaged university are also foundational to its traditional mission of cultivating the dispositions required for effective participation in a liberal, democratic society. It is an educational imperative for the engaged university to cultivate the dispositions required for citizenship. The democratic citizen must engage in public discourse with toleration, fairness and respect for different perspectives and for the canons of civility. Civic engagement in a democratic society requires a disposition to listen with generosity, to compromise, to argue on the basis of factual evidence, to abide by outcomes, to affirm the validity of a democratic process even if it results in outcomes that are contrary to one's own preferences. Indeed, the democratic citizen must have hope and confidence in the value of deliberation, and be able to engage in adversarial discussion in a way that does not compromise civic friendship, mutual respect and sense of common purpose.

Yet these democratic dispositions are also constitutive and internal to the values of the engaged university. The dispositions required for scholarship and academic citizenship (the respect for evidence and the canons of inquiry, the toleration of diverse perspectives, the willingness to be persuaded, to keep an open mind, to put the best construction on things) are the same as those required for democratic citizenship beyond the academy. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the engaged academy to practice what we teach. It is inconceivable that the dispositions proper to democratic participation can be learned in an academic context that is authoritarian, dogmatic and hostile to the "conversational virtues" of toleration, respect and generosity.

Sets of policy guidelines are derived from a committed policy of university engagement. The departments, centers and programs of the engaged university are encouraged

• to provide opportunities for continuing professional development and life-long learning, including the provision of certificate programs, advanced degrees, continuing education credits, alternative licensure options, and other educational initiatives;
• to develop the technological resources that would enable the Unit to deliver educational opportunities to stakeholder communities beyond the immediate Ball State campus;
• to provide site-based and field-based practicum experiences, both to maximize the contextual-relevance and ecological competence of our students-in-training and to project university-based clinic services to the community;
• to encourage partnerships and collaboration with community organizations to address pressing public issues;
• to strengthen and extend partnerships with school corporations to improve academic achievement of P-12 students, promote professional development, and enhance the clinical components of preservice teacher education;
• to engage in joint venture and collaborative research that informs policy at any level within the ecological settings of education and development.
• to stage colloquia, workshops, panel discussions, conferences and other opportunities to share the results of research to stakeholder groups, to make visible the practices of scholarship and to model the "deliberative character" of academic citizenship;
• to encourage "hands-on" pedagogy in coursework, including collaborative inquiry, project based learning, experiential learning and service learning;
• to provide "education for pluralism" that treats cultural diversity as a resource.

We also commit to an internal discourse that models the "conversational virtues" required for participation in shared governance. We do not retreat from our responsibility to conduct our own administrative affairs with the moral decency befitting citizenship in the academy.

The Engaged Teacher. The theme of engagement characterizes not just the mission and orientation of the Unit with respect to its civic and community obligations, but to its approach to teacher education, and to what it requires of its graduates who represent the Unit in professional practice. The notion of engagement is derived from a contextual-ecological view of the child who is in dynamic interaction with intersecting and overlapping contextual systems; who is active in his or her own development; and who alters learning environments by his or her own initiative. From this perspective the Unit derives a commitment to constructivist principles of teaching and learning.

There is a core set of constructivist principles around which to fashion an orientation to teacher education. It is a central claim, for example, that knowledge is actively created, interpreted, situated and context-bound. It is a central claim that learning is mediated by the cognitive activity of students. It is a central claim that knowledge is constructed through social interaction, collaboration and negotiation. Moreover, there is a significant knowledge base that supports use of constructivist theories of learning and instruction as the centerpiece of a teacher education curriculum.

These consensus principles recommend the following elements of a constructivist pedagogy:

• Create complex learning environments and ecologically valid tasks that mirror the "fuzzy," ill-structured nature of real-life problems. This would include the use of case-based instruction, authentic tasks, and situated learning strategies.
• Create learning environments that emphasize collaboration, social negotiation, and shared responsibility for learning.
• Provide multiple representations of content using analogies, examples, and metaphors.
• Help students understand their own role in constructing knowledge.
• Emphasize student-centered instruction, which includes inquiry and problem-based learning, ideally with cooperative learning groups.

A constructivist orientation to engaged learning envisions students who are self-motivated, self-regulated, goal-directed learners who engage in strategic collaborative problem solving. They encounter tasks that are authentic, complex, thematic, interdisciplinary and integrative. Engaged learning embraces performance assessment and instructional models that are interactive, constructive and generative. Collaborative, flexible heterogeneous groupings are preferred.

But we must practice what we teach. We intend to graduate the "engaged teacher" whose pedagogy reflects constructivist best practice, so we commit, in Teachers College, and throughout the professional education Unit, to use constructivist, engaged, cognitive-mediational instructional practices. It is inconceivable that the dispositions proper to constructivist teaching can be learned in an instructional context that does not practice them.

The empirical warrant for embracing constructivist approaches to teaching and learning is considerable. Constructivist theories now dominate the study of intellectual development, cognitive processes, memory, and information processing and learning, in literatures too vast to review here. Consequently, cognitive constructivist themes, and the empirical literatures of cognitive development and cognitive psychology, commonly serve as the knowledge base that anchors the conceptual frameworks of an increasing number of teacher education programs. Indeed, constructivist notions of teaching and learning are central to current conceptions of best practice.

Recent research has also shown that the more expert one is in a content area, the more likely one is to use constructivist processes. Indeed, constructivist learning places a high demand on subject matter knowledge and expertise. Hence it is critical for the engaged teacher to not only exemplify a commitment to constructivist best practice but to be expert in pedagogical content knowledge. Expertise is, of course, the third pillar of Ball State's conceptual framework, and is explicated later in the document.

The Engaged Educational Professional. The theme of engagement implies active involvement in teaching and learning. The ecological and contextualist approach suggests that the parameters of teacher engagement extend beyond the narrow focus on the child or classroom. Professional engagement is also directed towards the many ecological settings that influence the development of children and clients. Consequently, the Ball State educational professional

• is responsive to contextual factors that influence education;
• is an advocate for sound educational policy, and for the interests of children, in appropriate venues;
• actively cultivates, in collaboration with other stakeholders, the community assets required for positive youth development;
• and is otherwise involved in broader educational deliberations (Lesko, 1986).

Hence a hallmark of a Ball State educational professional is a committed willingness to be actively engaged in all relevant settings that influence educational outcomes; and to be engaged in collaborative partnerships with families, civic organizations, community structures and political entities to influence the ecology of youth development.

But a commitment to professional engagement also implies an on-going commitment to one's profession. It implies a commitment to be a reflective practitioner. It implies a commitment to on-going professional development. It is inconceivable for members of professions to be ignorant of advances in research in their respective fields. The graduate of Ball State professional education programs are similarly committed to engagement with advances in research and instructional practice, including the application of various educational technologies.

This commitment is manifested by subscription to relevant professional journals; by attendance at workshops, symposia, conferences and other professional forums; by filing professional growth plans; by pursuing advanced training, certificates and degrees; by engaging in action research in collaboration with other educational professionals; and by active participation in the clinical supervision, instruction, and mentorship of pre-service teaching majors and graduate practicum interns.

Expertise.
There is now mounting evidence that graduates of university-based teacher education programs enjoy numerous advantages over teachers admitted to the profession through alternate routes. The comparative advantage of university-based teacher education lies partly in the access that students have to disciplinary bodies of knowledge regarding subject matter knowledge, knowledge of pedagogy and pedagogical content knowledge, knowledge of developmental characteristics of learners and of learning, and knowledge of the purposes and ends of education more generally. The comparative advantage is also partly an outcome of the extended clinical practice that university-based education affords, but clinical practice alone, without access to relevant bodies of knowledge, is insufficient for training high quality educational professionals.

University-based teacher education provides a context for preservice and beginning teachers to develop the requisite expertise required for professional conduct in the classroom. Expertise is, of course, a relative matter. We do not expect beginning teachers to be experts. Indeed, it is our view that beginning teachers require a period of induction in order to make progress towards an acceptable degree of professional competence.

Moreover, Ball State's teacher education Unit recognizes levels of expertise in its assessment of preservice teachers. It is evident, for example, in the four decision points that mark the progress of students through the program (aspirant, pre-candidate, candidate, educator, see Table 5). It is evident, too, in the levels of expertise (basic, proficient, accomplished) that is indicated in the rubric for evaluating student teaching by field-based clinical teaching supervisors. It is evident in the one (and possibly two) year post-graduate induction period of internship for beginning teachers. A developmental approach, then, is provided for the cultivation of knowledge; dispositions and skills required by candidates to competently influence student learning, adjustment and development. Moreover, we assert that preservice teacher education results in more significant levels of expertise than certain alternate route programs, and that graduates of Ball State professional education programs will bear the distinctive mark of expertise in relevant bodies of knowledge.

Experts differ from novices in significant ways. In contrast to novices, experts have more and better-organized content knowledge, which are more easily accessed and more responsive to situational cues. Experts have a greater degree of procedural knowledge, and tend to develop automatized sub-routines. The automaticity of expert information processing permits active problem solving, at higher levels of abstraction, along a number of fronts simultaneously. Indeed, experts approach problems differently than do novices. Experts focus on abstractions, general principles and patterns. They focus on the organization, "syntactical" structure of events, its underlying grammar or causal pattern. Experts also notice key features of domain-relevant activity that novices miss.

Expert Teachers. Research on the differences between experts and novices have also been applied to teaching. There is now considerable evidence demonstrating important differences between novice and expert teachers. For example, compared to expert teachers, novice teachers show more deficiencies in planning, less ability to improvise when encountering problems or when called from a scripted lesson, and less inclination to engage in reflective practice, presumably because their cognitive schemata are less elaborate, less interconnected and less accessible than are the schemata of expert teachers.

In contrast expert teachers better-scripted instructional routines, rely more upon procedural knowledge and are better able to adapt instruction to match the learning needs of individual students. Expert teachers are more determined to reject student or background characteristics as an explanation for learning failures, and, hence have a greater sense of general and personal teaching efficacy than do novice teachers. Expert teachers demonstrate more sophisticated instructional decision-making, and design better instructional plans. They are better able to monitor on-going classroom interactions and to conduct transformative classroom discussions. They are better able to diagnose student-learning problems and are more planful in their approach to classroom discipline. Finally, expert teachers adopt "problem-solving" approaches to core pedagogical problems, whereas novices adopt "problem-minimizing" approaches.

Implications for Teacher Education. The goal of the professional education Unit is to produce the engaged teacher who is committed to developing expertise in subject matter content and pedagogical content knowledge. It does so by organizing preservice coursework and instructional experiences to encourage the characteristic features of expertise. The Unit endeavors to prepare preservice teachers in relevant bodies of knowledge using instructional practices likely to encourage mastery and expertise. But it also expects graduates of its teaching programs to adopt similar tactics in their own approach to best-practice pedagogy.

The Unit, in its instructional practices, desires to graduate teaching professionals who have a strong sense of personal and teacher efficacy; that is able to coach meta-cognitive skills, encourage a mastery learning orientation, and otherwise engage in best practice pedagogy for producing conceptual change. The Unit, in its instructional practices, wishes to produce teaching professionals who adopt problem-solving and not problem-minimizing strategies for teaching. And it does so by insuring that professional education courses throughout the Unit are similarly taught in this way. It does so by insuring that teacher education faculty has sufficient expertise in order to encourage the development of expert teaching in preservice teaching majors. In this way the Unit faculty model best professional practices in teaching, a requirement of Standard 5 of NCATE's Professional Standards for Accreditation of Schools, Colleges and Departments of Education (NCATE, 2001).

The expertise of Unit teacher education faculty is also exemplified in matters of research competence. It is the research competence of Unit faculty that permits it to address the "syntactic" elements of a discipline, its core concepts, and its procedures for resolving disputes, attesting educational claims. It is the ability of the Unit to engage the deep questions of subject matter disciplines and of pedagogical content knowledge that conveys the comparative advantage of university-based teacher education, for it is here where engaged expertise is most vividly on display. In this way Unit faculty model best professional practices in scholarship, a requirement of Standard 5 of NCATE's Professional Standards for Accreditation of Schools, Colleges and Departments of Education (NCATE, 2001).

Unit Assessment
The conceptual framework stakes out a vision of the prototypic graduate of Ball State University professional education programs. We intend to prepare students who become engaged experts in the educational professions. The Unit commits to systematic assessment of its efforts to reach this goal.

This assessment takes place at two levels. First, the Unit assesses candidate performance at the level of individual classes and coursework in accordance with the content and developmental performance standards articulated by the Indiana Professional Standards Board (which are based on INTASC Principles), and, at the unit level, in terms of "decision points" criteria. Second, the Unit commits to ongoing assessment of the Unit's ability to prepare competent professional educators by means of a "unit assessment protocol," which is systematically administered to graduates of Unit programs. This dual-level unit assessment system reflects a commitment to continuous improvement of our ability to prepare competent, engaged educational professionals who have the knowledge, skills and dispositions to promote student learning and positive developmental outcomes.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary......................................................1
   Role and Function of a Conceptual Framework.........................1
   Believing, Behaving, Becoming.......................................2
   Expert Engagement in Context........................................2
   Context.............................................................3
   Engagement..........................................................5
      The Engaged University...........................................5
      The Engaged Teacher..............................................7
      The Engaged Educational Professional.............................9
   Expertise..........................................................10
      Expert Teachers.................................................11
      Implications for Teacher Education..............................11
   Unit Assessment....................................................12


Introduction to the Ball State Conceptual Framework...................13
    A Structure and Vision for the Unit...............................13
    Accreditation Indicators for Conceptual Frameworks................13
    A Thematic Approach...............................................14
       Thematic Approach as Intervention..............................15
       Evidence for Thematic Programs.................................16
    Believing, Behaving, Becoming.....................................16
    Other Design Considerations.......................................17
       Unifying Rationale for Unit Activities.........................17
       Shared Mission.................................................18
       Conceptual Themes in Praxis....................................18
Articulation of Framework Themes......................................18
   Context............................................................19
      Pitch-and-Catch Model of Education..............................19
      The Agentic Learner.............................................19
      Dynamic Interactions............................................20
      Ecology of Learning and Development.............................20
      Implications for Teacher and Graduate Education.................21
      Hallmark of Ball State Graduates................................21
      Contextualism, Engagement, Diversity............................22
   Engagement.........................................................22
      The Engaged University..........................................23
         Hands-On Pedagogy............................................24
         Education for Pluralism......................................24
         Civic Engagement.............................................24
         Values and Democratic Citizenship............................25
         Examples of Ball State Engagement............................27
         Policy Guidelines............................................30
      The Engaged Teacher.............................................31
         Constructivist Orientation...................................31
         Constructivist Pedagogy......................................32
         Constructivist Pedagogy and Engaged Learning.................32
         Practice What We Teach Revisited.............................33
         Knowledge Base...............................................34
      The Engaged Educational Professional............................35
         Reprise of Ecological Themes.................................35
         Implications for the Educational Professional................36
         Reflective Practice..........................................36
   Expertise..........................................................36
      Advantages of University-Based Teacher Education................36
      Access to Knowledge and Clinical Practice.......................37
      Development of Expertise........................................37
      Decision Points and Expertise...................................37
   Categories of Knowledge............................................38
      Expert Teachers in a Subject vs. Subject Area Experts...........39
      Sequence of Study Aligned With Standards........................39
   Nature of Expertise................................................39
      General Features................................................39
      The Expert Teacher..............................................40
      Expertise and Conceptions of Teaching...........................40
   Implications for Teacher Education.................................41
      Practice What We Teach Revisited-Again..........................41
      Modeling Best Practice Instruction..............................42
      Modeling Best Practice Scholarship..............................42
Unit Assessment.......................................................42
   Unit Assessment System: Courses and Decision Points................42
       Courses........................................................43
       Decision Points................................................46
   Unit Assessment Protocol...........................................47
References............................................................49
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)......................................55

List of Tables

Table 1  NCATE Indicators for Conceptual Frameworks...................14
Table 2  The Engaged University: Teachers College Outreach Services,
         Programs and Initiatives Provided to Schools and School
         Professionals................................................27
Table 3  The Engaged University: Teachers College Outreach Services,
         Programs and Initiatives Provided to the Community...........28
Table 4  Thematic Unity Between Pedagogical Practices of the Engaged 
         University and Constructivist Best Practices of the Engaged
         Teacher......................................................33
Table 5  Program Decision Points......................................37
Table 6  General Differences Between Experts and Novices..............43
Table 7  Differences Between Expert and Novice Teachers for Four 
         Conceptions of Teaching......................................44