Conceptual Framework
The faculty of the School of Education at Rider University identifies its task as “fostering committed, knowledgeable, reflective professionals” through carefully developed, expertly taught programs for its graduate and undergraduate students. To this end, course work and field experience offer multiple opportunities for beginning and experienced teachers and other school personnel-in-training to learn new skills while strengthening existing ones, to build habits of professional thought that enhance practice, to seek and understand the theoretical underpinnings of such practice, and to apply new learning in a variety of field-based experiences. Through this process, it is the intention of the School of Education to develop in its students the behaviors of committed teachers, the sound knowledge base which informs expert practice, and the habits of reflection which encourage professional growth, all leading to the development of the qualities of professional educators.
The School of Education recognizes that teaching is complex and challenging work which requires many years of active, thoughtful practice for mastery. Expert teachers and other professional school personnel are flexible, analytical, knowledgeable, committed individuals who spend decades acquiring their expertise. But they all begin with the need for tools and maps to help them on their career-long journeys. It is the goal of the School of Education to help each student develop tools and create personal maps for this journey. Commitment, knowledge, reflective practice, and professionalism are milestones along the road.
Fostering
The guiding principle of Rider University’s School of Education is “Fostering committed, knowledgeable, reflective professionals.” It is significant that the four key elements – commitment, knowledge, reflection, and professionalism – are introduced by the word fostering. It is the intention of the School of Education to produce expert teachers and other professional personnel with comprehensive understandings and fully developed skills. However, we acknowledge that these result from many years, even decades, of thoughtful practice, self-analysis, and constant formal and informal study. It is the faculty’s intention to send forth novice educators who have a beginning understanding of the processes required to grow into expert professionals. The acquisition of such understanding is evolutionary. At Rider University, the goal of the School of Education is to foster incremental growth by providing an environment in which it is safe to experiment, take risks, and make mistakes without sacrificing professional or academic rigor. How may this be done?
The Old English root of foster means “to nourish.” The School of Education nourishes its students by supporting their individual intellectual and personal development as they grow toward professional maturity. Undergraduates will begin to make the transition from students to teachers. Other students will make the same transition, although they may bring a variety of life and workplace experiences to Rider University’s classrooms. Graduate students may bring years of teaching experience to those same classrooms. Each group needs fostering, each in different ways. A clear strand in each element of the School of Education’s Mission Statement is the emphasis on staff modeling of behaviors which reflect commitment, knowledge, reflection in practice, and professionalism. The deliberate and overt modeling of such behaviors is a highly effective means of fostering unique student growth.
In addition, strong knowledge bases in both subject matter and pedagogy foster student growth. Each provides a foundation upon which students can build not only during their years in the School of Education, but also throughout their professional careers. A carefully planned and expertly taught sequence of course offerings at both the graduate and undergraduate levels in combination with a variety of field experiences help lay a coherent foundation for career-long growth as an educator.
In the progression from neophyte to expert professionalism, the exercise of frequent, thoughtful, analytical reflection is an essential component. While for some of us reflection may readily become a habit, for all of us its cultivation requires daily practice, the ability to analyze objectively, and the ability to find the strengths in planning and execution as well as the flaws. The fostering of professional reflection requires time, practice, supportive feedback, and the student’s belief that risk-taking and occasional stumbles are encouraged, not judged.
Moreover, fostering also entails the inculcation of attitudes of acceptance and caring for all learners. This is especially important in a diverse society where educators will encounter students from a variety of social, ethnic, racial, gender, and religious backgrounds as well as those who come to school with significant learning, emotional and physical disabilities. When educators commit themselves to the ethic of promoting the opportunity to learn for all students, this commitment entails certain obligations of understanding and action. Teachers must make a special effort to understand how culture influences the learner’s disposition to learn and preferred ways to learn. Teachers must also accept the disabled learner as a normal and welcome presence in the classroom. When teachers cherish and value differences they will be more likely to incorporate students’ cultural backgrounds as a resource for learning and to employ the adaptive and differentiated strategies that enable all learners to succeed.
Finally, promoting the growth of professional attitudes and behaviors begins early in any educator’s career. Fostering such growth includes recognizing that becoming an expert, professional educator is a process, with identifiable stages and the need for years of experience. It requires recognition of the complexity and challenges of the work, as well as the sharing of strategies for managing the complexities and meeting the challenges.
Commitment
Commitment is a value highly prized by the faculty of the School of Education, serving as an essential cornerstone for our teaching and learning. The importance of commitment in a professional, or in a student preparing to enter a profession, seems so obvious as almost to go without saying. Surprisingly, however, the many research studies in this area do not bear this out (Benkhoff, 1997; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990). In a survey of this research, Mathieu and Zajac (1990) wrote that, although a connection between commitment and performance is generally assumed, “the present findings suggest that commitment has very little direct influence on performance in most instances” (p. 184). Seven years later, Benkhoff (1997) wrote that “after 30 years of research [on commitment] … there is no evidence of a systematic relationship between commitment and its presumed consequences” (p. 114). Not everyone agrees with this gloomy assessment (see, e.g., Baruch, 1998; Mowday, 1998; and Ostroff, 1992), but it does suggest that we should not glibly assume that commitment to a profession necessarily translates into superior performance. We therefore must take special care in how we think about commitment and its likely effects on student and professional performance.
One important distinction that has often been made in this area distinguishes between attitudinal and behavioral commitment (see Becker, 1996; Brown, 1974; Buchanan, 1974; and Frow, 2002). This distinction is foundational in the understanding of commitment taken by Rider University’s School of Education, which focuses on behavioral commitment. While future research may strengthen connections between attitudes and behaviors, and while it seems to us likely that “a resolution of the two approaches may lie in the recognition that both attitudes and behaviors play a role in development” (Brown, 1996), it is commitment behaviors that are our ultimate concern, rather than the often varying attitudes, beliefs, and values that may or may not lead to those behaviors.
The unresolved question of the connections between commitment attitudes and behaviors need not hinder us in pursuing our mission as a professional school. The behaviors of commitment are important in and of themselves, regardless of their possible connections to individual beliefs, attitudes, or values. When we speak of commitment, then, we are referring to a group of behaviors that we believe should be expected of committed professionals, and not of whatever values or belief those professionals may happen to endorse or hold dear. In other words, in the case of teaching, good intentions are not enough. Teachers must be capable of acting on their intentions in such a way that learning occurs for all students.
The School of Education seeks and attempts to develop in our students specific behaviors signifying commitment. The list of behaviors that we expect of committed professionals includes, but is not limited to:
1. Keeping informed of current research in one’s profession.
2. Endeavoring continuously to improve one’s professional knowledge and skills.
3. Exhibiting a concern for the welfare, education, and personal development of all students/clients.
4. Striving to meet the needs of all students/clients to the greatest possible extent.
5. Being willing frequently to volunteer extra time and effort beyond the minimum requirement to help students/clients and to achieve one’s professional goals.
6. Being willing to take on additional professional responsibilities as need arises.
7. Being willing to share knowledge and expertise with colleagues.
8. Working effectively without supervision or the expectation of evaluation.
9. Seeking feedback from colleagues, supervisors, and students/clients regarding professional performance; regularly evaluating one’s own professional performance; taking concrete action to improve performance based on these evaluations.
10. Endeavoring to improve one’s organization (school, agency, school system, et al.) and one’s profession.
Our faculty members facilitate student acquisition of these behaviors by:
1. Encouraging students to volunteer for community-based programs.
2. Serving as mentors and faculty advisors for student organizations.
3. Awarding certificates of professional development.
4. Modeling instructional strategies useful in diverse and inclusive classrooms.
5. Stressing the need for ethical conduct in course syllabi and class discussions.
6. Providing students the opportunity to “walk the extra mile” in classes.
7. Using technology to meet the present and future needs of the greatest number of students.
The School of Education agrees with the foundational beliefs of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards that accomplished teachers are committed to students and their learning (http.//www.nbpts.org), and our faculty members model the traits we expect all of our students to emulate. These include the beliefs that all students can learn and that students’ diverse needs require individual, yet equitable, treatment. Our students develop a deep commitment to fostering their students’ self-esteem, character, and civic responsibilities.
Rider University’s School of Education encourages and expects these behaviors of its students and graduates, and student progress toward meeting these expectations is assessed at benchmark points in all programs. Part of a student’s evaluation will reflect the degree to which these behaviors are evident in the student’s classroom and fieldwork performance. The School of Education also encourages, expects, evaluates, and rewards these same kinds of commitment-related behaviors by its faculty and administrators.
Knowledge
What does it take to be a good educator? Professional organizations such as the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the Teacher Accreditation Council (TEAC), the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), and the National Association of State Boards of Education all identify as their first criterion the importance of content knowledge. NCATE asserts, “Candidates must know the content of their field.” “Subject-matter knowledge” tops TEAC’s list. “The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches,” explains INTASC; and “Good teachers know their subject well” believes the NASBE (National Association of State Boards of Education Study Group, 2000). There seems to be a consensus that “content knowledge is integral to teaching” (Grossman, Wilson, and Shulman, 1989, p. 28), and content knowledge may even be, as its priority placement on the above lists suggests, the foundational base teachers need above all else.
In the School of Education at Rider University, knowledge refers to both specific subject content area and pedagogy. The ability to combine the two in practice is a key component of our professional education courses, all of which include field-based experiences. The transfer of theory and content knowledge into practice is crucial. Field-based experiences are pre-service opportunities for students to transfer knowledge into practice. At Rider University, all education majors are required to complete a “second major” in a liberal arts content area. Candidates must demonstrate their knowledge through inquiry, critical analysis, and synthesis of the subject. Each second major prescribes a framework of course offerings within which students must display content knowledge proficiency.
In addition to subject area content knowledge and pedagogy, students are expected to acquire a working knowledge of technology applicable to their teaching. All education majors are required to complete a minimum of three credit hours in technology, and students in their field sites are expected to make appropriate use of instructional technology.
Knowledge of pedagogy is acquired over a four-year sequence of professional education courses with field-work experiences. The INTASC Standards are introduced to all education majors during their first semester Cohort Seminar and are used as a basis for both growth and assessment for the duration of a student’s program. Student teaching visitation reports include the INTASC Standards, and the required Senior Professional Portfolios are constructed using the standards as a guide. Through this process, candidates for teaching are able to reflect a thorough understanding of the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Program focus is on understanding how students learn and how effective teachers make ideas and learning accessible to students.
These ideas are guided by a comprehensive or “triadic” view of teaching which articulates the relationships that exist among the teacher, the curriculum and the student. Unfortunately, many hold a more narrow and limited view of teaching. For example, some believe that a caring and loving attitude toward children is all that is necessary to become a good teacher. Others believe that good intentions and a good academic record are sufficient qualifications for teaching. Neither sentimental attitudes toward children nor simplistic notions about academic competence as the sole qualifications for teaching provides an adequate basis for designing a teacher education program. A more complete conception of teaching is needed.
First, teaching entails a relationship between teacher and student that enables the teacher to diagnose the learning and developmental needs of the student as well as to establish a rapport with each child and the group that makes classroom learning possible. Second, the teacher’s relationship with the curriculum is based on the assumption that the teacher has a command of the subject matter to be taught and is committed to the importance of what is being taught. Third, the teacher makes use of pedagogical content knowledge to employ instructional strategies that enable a meaningful and productive transaction between the learner and the curriculum. Thus, we believe that a sound teacher education program equips teachers to know the learner, to know the subject and to possess the pedagogical skills that enable the student to experience success in learning meaningful content (Anderson, 1967; Hyman, 1974).
Field placement experiences permit teacher candidates to assess student learning, to meet individual student needs, to understand the need to be resourceful and flexible, and to make appropriate adjustments in their teaching strategies and methods. Reflection, another key component of our Conceptual Framework, is a requirement of all field placement experiences. Prospective teachers are required to share their reflections with staff, exchange ideas with them, and examine their effectiveness. The School of Education shares a passionate belief in the value of knowledge acquired through field experience.
Student performance and progress are measured against unit and state standards, while personal disposition is examined and supported by a unit Professional Development Program. This process supports the development of a candidate to the Proficient Level of Performance of the INTASC process. We expect the progress of students in our teacher education programs to be measured against the INTASC Standards and the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards.
Students in the several different graduate programs offered in the School of Education are also assessed using multiple indicators that reflect the knowledge, dispositions and performance indicators identified in various state, national, and professional standards. These standards both inform and frame education and experience for students preparing for other professional school roles. Instruction and application are parts of a synergistic learning experience in which knowledge and best practices are identified, expected, and applied in the classroom and practicum experience. Translating best theory into practice is understood as a cooperative effort between faculty and students that actualizes the Mission Statement and Philosophy of the School of Education for future teachers and all other school personnel. This philosophical orientation again demonstrates the practicality of theory as a problem solving methodology essential to the educative process (Dewey, 1929).
Each prospective teacher experiences a variety of field placements in diverse settings. These experiences afford students the opportunity to work with varied populations, learning styles, learning problems, cultures, and communities. Students preparing for roles as other professional school personnel experience their clinical internships in accordance with the recommendations of the standards of the specialty area organizations. All students are expected to study the political, economic, and sociological problems of our nation and the world and to begin to understand how these complex and often interconnected problems affect students, families, and communities.
Reflective Practice
The School of Education defines reflection as the process of thinking clearly and deliberately to promote understanding and to actively foster the exercise of critical thinking regarding teaching and learning. Reflective practice may be considered from two philosophical perspectives. The first regards reflection from an experiential and artistic orientation (Dewey, 1933; Loughran, 2002; Schon, 1987). The second views reflective practice behaviorally as a series of steps and activities that serve to enhance the quality of teaching and learning (Wileman, Magliano, Niles, and McLaughlin, 1988). Both perspectives are important and operate synergistically.
John Dewey (1933) was one of the first contemporary educators to consider the concept of reflective practice. Dewey defined reflective practice from an abstract and philosophical perspective as the process of “transforming a situation in which there is experienced obscurity, doubt, conflict, disturbance of some sort, into a situation that is clear, coherent, settled, harmonious” (Dewey, 1933). From this angle, reflection is fostered when an individual experiences perplexity within a situation and then adjusts as necessary. This experience of cognitive dissonance, in turn, leads to the inherent reflective practice of inquiry, hypothesis development, and then problem resolution (Grimmett, 1988). In this model, reflective practice arises from a dilemma the student encounters and the actions the student takes to resolve it. The actions may involve on-the-spot experimenting and improvisation toward the goal of problem solving and the improvement of professional practice (Shon, 1983, 1987, 1991).
This orientation does not offer a codified approach or series of steps to reflective practice, claiming that such procedures are not useful and may even be constraining (Richardson, 1990). Instead, reflective practice is viewed both experientially and artistically. In the same way that it is difficult to teach a student how a master painter creates a portrait or a virtuoso plays the violin, it is difficult to prescribe the necessary steps for reflective practice (Shon, 1987). Rather, reflective practice results from active experience, much in the way an athlete learns a new skill from his or her coach. Prospective teachers and educators preparing for other professional positions observe their more experienced mentors engaging in the art of reflective practice as teachers, counselors, and administrators. These professionals make careful, sensitive observations, reflect on the meaning of these observations, and then decide to act appropriately. Students learn to emulate these behaviors. Reflective practice is regarded as spontaneous, allowing for improvisation in the moment. This spontaneity and improvisation are thought to enhance student learning and promote professional development (Ferraro, 2000; Gillis, 1988; Shon, 1987).
While there is certainly value in appreciating the experiential and artistic qualities of reflective practice, it is also important to delineate steps toward becoming a better reflective practitioner (Freiburg & Waxman, 1990). Neither approach to reflection is better than the other; rather, the two complement one another and one without the other makes the process less complete (Richardson, 1990).
There are steps students should be encouraged to take in their efforts to improve reflective practice. As students learn a process for reflection, however, it is important that they also remain aware of the value of spontaneous and improvisational problem-solving. There is value in the process as well as in its outcomes. The approach to reflective practice involves planning, monitoring, and evaluation, which might be achieved through responding to the following questions (Barrell, 1991): How will I know if I am successful? How well am I actually doing? How well did I do? What might I do differently? Why? In addition, there are specific technical activities, both introspective and interactive, that will foster reflective practice (Freiburg & Waxman, 1990). Engagement in each activity is considered critical to the student’s professional development and maturation (Freiburg & Waxman, 1990). The activities include systematic observation of other, more experienced professionals; continuous self-assessment; journal writing; and simulated role-play or practice in teaching or counseling. There are, of course, other activities which may be included.
Overall, an effective model of reflective practice incorporates both an experiential and artistic perspective as well as behaviorally oriented approaches that prescribe steps and activities for reflective practice. Both operate synergistically to promote student learning, professional development, and maturation.
In addition to its benefits in improving professional practice, reflection has value as a tool for personal growth and self-awareness. As educators examine their own and others’ life views and become more aware of cultural and familial influences, they become more skilled decision-makers and more responsive to the differences among themselves, their students, and their colleagues. Reflection also has value as a tool for connecting personal experience, existing knowledge and skills, and new information. Reflective thinking is a critical component in helping educators and their students grow and develop, and assessment of this reflective thinking occurs in every course.
Professionalism
Education is a highly complex profession because it has multiple dimensions pertaining to the dynamics of brain-mind systems, social relationships, organizational systems, and sociopolitical, economic, and ethical pressures from the larger society. Expert, professional practice demands specific dispositions, extensive breadth of knowledge, and exceptional levels of skill while entailing the implicit invitation to develop these skills to very high levels of proficiency. The required breadth of knowledge and high level of skills derives from the multifaceted nature of educators’ work and the diversity of their professional roles. For example, a teacher is responsible for short and long range planning, diagnosis of student development levels and learning differences, motivation, discipline, counseling, the implementation of diverse, complex instructional strategies, accurate assessment, artful problem-solving, and public relations. An expert teacher deftly handles all of this while also mastering the content knowledge of one or more academic disciplines.
Professionals who are willing to explore the intricacies of their work find that they peel away familiar surface layers to reveal even more complexity beneath. For the adventurous who strive for professional growth, these deeper discoveries represent compelling invitations for long-term creative development of self and students. In contrast, educators who cannot tolerate ambiguity tend to strip away complexity from their classroom systems, thereby avoiding opportunities for development toward higher levels of professionalism.
Becoming an expert, professional educator requires a career-long commitment to reflective experimentation and skill building. Those unwilling or unable to engage in such exploration remain at a low level of professional development, not much beyond the novice level. According to expert-novice research, novices in a domain focus on superficial detail while inflexibly and inefficiently applying algorithmic rules to problems requiring much more nuanced judgment. In contrast, experts see broad patterns and underlying structures in problems while generating their own flexible heuristics for problem solution (Carter, Doyle, & Riney, 1995; Pelletier & Shore, 2002). Consequently, novice educators and practitioners preparing for other professional roles, such as those we serve and prepare in the School of Education, are at the beginning of a life-long path toward professionalism. In no way should we consider them to be, or expect them to be, experienced professionals upon graduation.
Expert, professional educators exhibit strong contextual intelligences and the ability to navigate polarized perspectives on complex issues. Contextual intelligence includes three abilities (Sternberg, 1990) that are pertinent here. Contextually intelligent educators can recognize the demands and nuances of their context and strive to adapt. They can also attempt to shape the context, making it adapt to their abilities and preferences. Finally, if the first two adaptations fail, they can leave in search of a more compatible environment.
Contextual pressures can vary significantly at the school and district levels, ranging from visionary, supportive organizational climates for innovation to confining, suppressive environments. At the large-scale societal levels, highly prescriptive, mandated reforms and raucous conflicts between influential pressure groups with opposing philosophies force many teachers to become reactive technocrats, mindlessly and mechanically implementing the latest top-down curricular initiative. As in many fields, philosophical and methodological conflicts in education often derive from dogmatic adherence to deeply ingrained, tacit philosophical assumptions about the world (Ambrose, 1996, 1998 a & b, 2000, 2002; Cohen & Ambrose, 1993; Cohen, Ambrose, & Powell, 2000; Gillespie, 1992). In large part, it is this dogmatic entrapment within tacit world views that makes the paradigm wars in education such a powerful force for suppression of teacher creativity and its attendant professional growth.
But for teachers with creative inclinations, the dynamic tension between polarized positions represents interesting opportunities for dialectical thinking, which can in turn lead to the creative synthesis of opposing views. Teachers who wrestle with inherent conflicts and seek to find resolutions embodying synthesis of opposing views deepen the level of their professional growth (Ambrose, 2002; Bohm, 1994; Sternberg, 1999, 2001; Yan & Arlin, 1999). In view of these powerful contextual and tacit influences on teachers’ thought and behavior, we believe that the highest levels of professionalism can only be attained when the educator develops some awareness of, and facility with, synthetic, dialectical thought. Those who develop these capacities are likely to sustain their own creative, reflective professional development throughout their careers while maximizing the growth of their students. Those who lack such capacities are likely to become proficient technocrats who fall into habitual work patterns that demand less than full engagement from themselves and their students.
These complex dimensions of the educators’ work environment make the career-long evolution from novice to expert particularly challenging and arduous, yet inviting to purposeful, reflective, creative development. Perspectives on teacher expertise vary. Some claim that teaching demands the development of craft-like skills, as opposed to mastery of a coherent body of professional knowledge as in the case of “elite” professions such as medicine (e.g., Pratte & Rury, 1991). Others outline the cognitive and behavioral characteristics of experts.
While recognizing the craft dimension of teachers’ expertise, we believe that expert teaching also demands a large body of professional knowledge, albeit an eclectic and loosely defined one, composed of an interdisciplinary collection of research findings, concepts, generalizations, principles, and theories. The highly complex influences on the work of all educators make craft necessary, but not sufficient for the highest levels of professionalism. Consequently, we believe the educator’s professionalism entails long-term reflective development of dispositions, knowledge, and skills through a series of stages from neophyte to expert professional (Carter et al., 1995; Pelletier & Shore, 2002). It is the role of the School of Education to help neophytes begin the acquisition of craft and knowledge as they undertake a career-long journey toward expert professionalism.
Professionalism has an ethical dimension. A variety of important ethical principles pervade the work of those in the helping and education professions. Commitments to equal opportunity, due process, democratic decision making, freedom of expression, and diversity all rest on the fundamental belief in and respect for the dignity and integrity of each individual. Although the School of Education does not seek to impose or prescribe particular ethical solutions to ethical dilemmas, we nevertheless seek to stimulate the moral imagination of our students so that they are sensitized to this dimension of their work. By familiarizing our students with the various codes of ethics that govern work in teaching, counseling or administration we hope to increase ethical awareness and commitments. By posing ethical problems and dilemmas we intend to sharpen students’ skills in ethical reasoning and to enable them to make defensible decisions ( Schulte & Cochrane, 1995; Segiovanni, 1992; Strike, Haller & Soltis, 1998; Strike & Soltis, 1985). Candidates’ dispositions and professionalism are continually monitored and assessed against the appropriate standards by faculty and professionals in
the field.
Concluding Statement
From freshman year through field service experiences for undergraduates and throughout the various graduate programs, the School of Education at Rider University encourages and supports the intellectual, emotional, and professional development of (its) students through deliberate, careful course planning, instruction, modeling, and coaching. Fostering our students’ commitment, knowledge acquisition, reflection, professionalism, and growth are the fundamental goals of the faculty of the School of Education.
REFERENCES
Ambrose, D. (1996). Unifying theories of creativity: Metaphorical thought and the
unification process. New Ideas in Psychology, 14, 257-267.
Ambrose, D. (1998a). Comprehensiveness of conceptual foundations for gifted
education: A world-view analysis. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 452-70.
Ambrose, D. (1998b).A model for clarification and expansion of conceptual foundations.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 77-86.
Ambrose, D. (2000). World-view entrapment: Moral-ethical implications for gifted
education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 159-86.
Ambrose, D. (2002). Theoretic scope, dynamic tensions, and dialectical processes:
A model for discovery of creative intelligence. In D. Ambrose, L.M. Cohen, and
A.J. Tannenbaum (eds.): Creative Intelligence: Toward Theoretic Integration,
325-45. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Anderson, R. H. (1967). Supervision as teaching: An analog. In W. H. Lucio (ed.): Supervision: Persepctives and propositions. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Barell, J. (1991). Teaching for thoughtfulness: Classroom strategies to enhance
intellectual development. New York: Longman.
Baruch, Y. (1998). The rise and fall of organizational commitment. Human Systems
Management, 17, 135-143.
Becker, H.S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of
Sociology, 66, 32-40.
Benkhoff, B. Disentangling organizational commitment: The dangers of OCQ for
research ad policy. Personnel Review, 26, 114-131.
Bohm, D. (1994). Thought as a system. London: Routledge.
Brown, R.B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Clarifying the concept and simplifying
the existing construct typology. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 230-251.
Buchanan, B. (1974). Building organizational commitment: The socialization of
managers in work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546.
Calder, B.J. and Ross, M. (1973). Attitudes and behavior. Morristown, NJ: General
Learning Press.
Carter, K., Doyle, W., and Riney, M. (1995). Expert-novice differences in teaching.
In A.C. Ornstein (ed.): Teaching: Theory into practice, 259-72. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Cohen, L.M. and Ambrose, D. (1993). Theories and practices for differentiated education
for the gifted and talented. In K.A. Heller, F.J. Monks, and A.H. Passow (eds.):
International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent, 339-363.
Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.
Cohen, L.M., Ambrose, D., and Powell, W.N. (2000). Conceptual foundations and
theoretical lenses for the diversity of giftedness and talent. In K.A. Heller, F.J. Monks,
R.J. Sternberg, and R. Subotnik (eds.): International handbook of giftedness and talent,
331-44. Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.
Corey, G.C., Corey, M.S., and Callanan, P. (1998). Issues and ethics in the helping
profession. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Dewey, J. (1929). The Sources of a science of education. New York: Liverright.
Fazio, R.H. and Zanna, M.P. (1978). On the predictive validity of attitudes: The roles of
direct experience and confidence. Journal of Personality, 46, 228-243.
Ferraro, J.M. (2000). Reflective practice and professional development. ERIC
Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.: American
Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
Festinger, L. (1964). Behavioral support for opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly,
28, 404-417.
Fishbein, M. (1967). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior. In M. Fishbein (ed.),
Readings in attitude theory and measurement. New York: Wiley.
Freiburg, H.J. and Waxman, H.C. (1990). Reflection and the acquisition of technical
teaching skills. In R.T. Clift, W.R. Houston, and M.C. Pugach (eds.): Encouraging
Reflective Practice in Education. New York: Teacher College Press.
Frow, P. (2002). The meaning of commitment in professional service relationships:
Issues in relating theory to practice. Retrieved October 29, 2002, from the University
of Bath web site (http:www.bath.ac.uk/imp/pdf
Gillespie, D. (1992). The mind’s we: Contextualism in cognitive psychology.
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Gillis, G. (1988). Schon’s reflective practitioner: A model for teachers? In P.P. Grimmet
and G.L. Erickson (eds.): Reflection in education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hyman, R. T. (1974). Ways of teaching, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co.
Jevne, R.F. and Williams, D.R. (1998). When dreams don’t work: Professional
caregivers and burnout. Amityville, NY: Baywood.
Kiesler, C.A. (1971). The psychology of commitment: Experiments linking behavior to
belief. London: Academic Press.
Kottler, J.A. (1993). On being a therapist (rev. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kraus, S.J. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the
empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 58-75.
Loughran, J.L. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning
about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33-43.
Mathieu, J.E. and Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin,
108, 171-194.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research and
application. London: Sage.
Mowday, R.T. (1998). Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational
commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 8, 387-401.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., and Steers, R. (1982). Organizational linkages:
The Psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Myers, D.G. (1995). Psychology (4th ed.). New York: Worth.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. http://www.nbpts.org/.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance:
An organizational-level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77, 963-974.
Pelletier, S. and Shore, B.M. (2002). The gifted learner, the novice, and the expert:
Sharpening emerging views of giftedness. In D. Ambrose, L.M. Cohen, and A.J.
Tannenbaum (eds.): Creative intelligence: Toward theoretic integration, 237-81.
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Pratte & Rury. (1991). Teachers, professionalism, and craft. Teachers Colllege Record,
93(1), 59-72.
Reichers, A.E. (1985). A review and reconceptualization of organizational commitment.
Academy of Management Review, 10, 465-476.
Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
Richardson, V. (1990). The evolution of reflective teaching and teacher education. In
R.T. Clift, W.R. Houston, and M.C. Pugach (eds.): Encouraging reflective practice in
education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Rogers, C.R. (1951). Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Salancik, G.R. (1977). Commitment and the control of organizational behavior and belief.
In Staw, M.B. and G.R. Salancik (eds.), New directions in organizational
behavior, 1-53. Chicago: St. Clair Press.
Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schulte, J. M. & Cochrane, D. B. eds. (1995). Ethics in school counseling. New York: Teachers College Press.
Sergiovanni, T. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Sternberg, R.J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R.J. (1999). A dialectical basis for understanding the study of cognition. In
R.J. Sternberg (ed.): The nature of cognition, 51-78. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sternberg, R.J. (2001). What is the common thread of creativity? Its dialectical relation
to intelligence and wisdom. American Psychologist, 56, 360-62.
Strike, K. A., Haller, E. J., and Soltis, J. F. (1998). The ethics of school administration, 2n ed. New York: Teachers College Press.
Strike, K. A. & Soltis, J. F. (1985). The ethics of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
Swartz, R., and Perkins, D. (1989). Teaching thinking – issues and approaches. Pacific
Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Wicker, A.W. (1969). Attitudes vs. actions: The relationship of verbal and overt
behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 41-78.
Wicker, A.W. (1971). An examination of the “other variable” explanation of attitude-
behavior inconsistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19, 18-30.
Wileman, T.M., Magliano, B.G., Niles, J.R., and McLaughlin, R.R. (1988). In
P.P. Grimmett and G.L. Erickson (eds.): Reflection in education. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Yan, B. and Arlin, P. (1999). Dialectical thinking: Implications for creative thinking.
In M.A. Runco and S.R. Pritzker (eds.): Encyclopedia of creativity, Vol. I, 547-52.
New York: Academic Press.
April 2003
