Robert C. Thomas
Geosciences
UM-Western
The times they are a-changin'? Not with regard to teacher education in Montana, but in many other states teacher education programs have fundamentally changed. According to the NASDTEC manual (1994) on certification and the preparation of educational personnel in the United States, colleges and universities in more than twenty-five states have eliminated baccalaureate degrees in elementary and secondary education. Instead, these institutions now require that prospective teachers obtain a liberal arts and sciences degree in a content area, followed or accompanied by courses in education. Several education departments in the Montana University System have adopted content-centered programs at the secondary level, but pedagogy-centered programs are still the norm.
What has motivated education departments in other states to implement these changes? The answer is undoubtedly complex; however, critics of baccalaureate degrees in education consistently cite the lack of depth in a specific content area as the primary problem with pedagogy-centered education for prospective teachers. They argue that an increased knowledge base results in a teacher who is more confident and enthusiastic about the subject area(s) that s/he is required to teach (Grika, 1993; Fessler, 1994).
During the 1993/94 academic year, the topic of teacher-education renewal was vigorously debated at Western Montana College. I learned from these discussions that politics, financial concerns, and other variables of little importance to the students in teacher education programs play key roles in the process of teacher-education renewal. A poignant example came from a colleague who explained that "it is great to dream, but... " and proceeded to point out the realities of the world. Please permit me to ignore those realities for a short time, and discuss why I believe prospective elementary and secondary teachers will benefit from a content-centered, liberal arts and sciences approach to teacher education. Since I believe in exposing my warts, I should point out that I have limited experience working with the pre-college system, and I have never taken a course in education. However, I have taken the time to talk and listen to numerous students, in-service teachers, and teacher educators in the process of formulating this commentary.
In my opinion, the most important benefit of a content-centered approach to teacher education is the ability for prospective teachers to explore and develop a passion for a subject area of their choice. In my experience, in-service teachers who have been afforded this opportunity are highly motivated, confident, scholarly, and passionate about their field of study. This observation is supported by educational research in states that have made the change to content-centered education for pre-college teachers (Grika, 1993). Some teacher educators argue that prospective teachers develop a passion for a subject area through the existing education programs. This is probably true for many of the non-broadfield programs in secondary education.
However, I am skeptical that an elementary education major who has taken three introductory courses in science can teach a science course with confidence and passion for the subject. Yet I hear from my education colleagues that elementary-trained teachers are preferred in the middle schools because they are "child centered." Does this imply that we have given up on the idea that pre-college teachers should be scholars and facilitators of scholarly learning?
Teachers can most definitely be scholars if given the background which enables them to practice their passion. I have observed that teachers with content-area degrees are more likely to stay academically active in their field of study because they know what journals to read, what meetings to attend, and who their colleagues are for academic interaction. This type of academic activity is essential for professional development and it may help prevent hard-working teachers from burning out. Most importantly, these instructors have the knowledge base to provide quality experiential learning for their students, and they tend to rely less on textbook teaching. Is there a better way to motivate kids than to have them involved in the academic activities of their teacher? If my anecdotal evidence sounds pretentious, ask a statistically-significant number of in-service teachers how they view the relative importance of content and education courses in the development of their careers.
Some of my education colleagues argue that content-centered education for teachers results in specialists who cannot handle the many teaching requirements that are placed on them by the public schools (especially elementary and middle schools). This is a valid concern, but I doubt that our elementary education majors obtain breadth of knowledge by taking numerous introductory courses in "all the subjects commonly found in elementary education schools" (WMC catalog, 1993/95). However, if we encourage our future teachers to develop their passion for a subject area, many will find that they want to develop a broader knowledge base in order to better understand their own fields of study (e.g., recognizing the relevance of economics in the geosciences). This seems like a great way to produce generalists who can work with integrated themes (a hot topic in education), without distorting or diminishing any of the disciplines involved (Roth, 1994). All of this aside, a review of the education degrees offered by the Montana University System shows that many of the broadfield degrees (e.g., general science) are no broader than the content degrees (e.g., geology), so there should be little concern that a content-centered approach produces specialists.
My final comment concerns academic and job flexibility. It appears that students with education degrees have greater difficulty getting into non-education graduate programs because they are deficient in their content area. This is particularly true of elementary education majors, because they commonly have no area of concentration. In addition, many businesses prefer to hire people with an appropriate content-area degree. To test this hypothesis, I called approximately twelve geological consulting firms and asked if they would prefer to hire a person with a baccalaureate degree in geology or a person with a baccalaureate degree in earth science education. Not one firm chose to hire the person with the education background!
Why is this relevant to teacher education? Well, I have a hunch that many teachers who experience burnout early in their careers would choose to leave teaching if more options were available to them with their education degrees. Conversely, the content-centered approach can make it easier for non-education students and professionals to enter the teaching profession, because the number of education courses is usually reduced. These "late deciders" can bring a tremendous wealth of knowledge and experience into the classroom, but too often they are discouraged away from teaching because of the number and quality of education courses.
In retrospect, the intent of my commentary was not to denounce pedagogy. I understand that incommunicable knowledge has no worth, but I wonder if we place too much emphasis on pedagogy? I am concerned that pedagogy-centered education inhibits creativity and independence by teaching students to follow accepted teaching methodology. This is a trade-school approach to teacher education, and I question its validity in a liberal, educational environment. Maybe creative and independent teaching actually comes from experience and knowledge in the subject area being taught? In my experience, creative and enthusiastic teachers have stories to tell their students that come from personal experience, not from textbooks.
In the final analysis, I do not advocate changing the system of teacher education just to keep pace with national trends. However, we cannot afford to ignore these changes, and system-wide dialogue on this issue should be a high priority. Unfortunately, I have experienced resistance and disinterest from education and non-education faculty on the issue of teacher-education renewal. Nonetheless, I implore all faculty members in the Montana University System to take an active role in the process of teacher education. What other educational issue could possibly be of more importance to the university community? Indeed, the process of teacher education should be of great concern to every Montanan.
References
Fessler, Ralph (1994). Proposal for Redesigning Teacher Education in Maryland Through School-University Partnerships. Handout presented at the American Educational Research Association Meeting, New Orleans, LA.
Grika, Gayle (1993). The Education of a Teacher. (Minnesota) Alumni Association Magazine, 40-41.
NASDTEC (1994). Manual on Certification and Preparation of Educational Personnel in the United States (2nd Edition). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall-Hunt Publishing.
Roth, Kathleen J. (1994). Second Thoughts About Interdisciplinary Studies. American Educator, 18, 44-48.
Western Montana College of the University of Montana Catalog (1993-95). Program Description for the Bachelor of Science degree in Elementary Education (p. 31). Dillon, Montana.