For the Love of Learning

Volume III: The Educators

Chapter 12 - Section B: Teacher education

We turn now to the challenge of teacher education, which is actually several challenges: how to select candidates, how to prepare teachers, how to support their entry into teaching, and how to ensure on-going professional growth throughout their teaching careers.

Throughout the chapter, we use the terms "education" or "development" more often than the word "training." We believe that the phrase "teacher training," although commonly used, can be misleading, because it suggests that mastering technical teaching skills is sufficient. Although skill development is obviously important for educators, what is even more critical is that they develop professional judgment about when and how to use those skills.

After summarizing the key messages about teacher education in submissions made to us, we briefly describe teacher education in Ontario today, identify some of the key issues, and suggest directions for the future.

We believe that faculties of education, federations, and school boards should have considerable autonomy in developing programs to address priorities we have identified, but that this development should be carried out in collaboration with the College of Teachers.

The gist of our recommendations:

Pre-service

A longer and more substantive program for initial teacher preparation, delivered both by faculties of education and schools. Why? Because teaching is difficult and complex, and teachers cannot be well prepared for the challenges of today's schools in a one-year program. The second year should be somewhat like an internship, with increasing levels of responsibility in schools.

Support for beginning teachers

Using a variety of means, including workshops and assistance from experienced teachers or consultants. Why? Because the transition to full responsibility for teaching students is crucial, and in the long run, students and schools will benefit if new teachers get the best possible start to their careers.

Mandatory professional development

For educators, with educators themselves having considerable freedom to decide what form that professional development should take. Why? Because continual growth is an integral part of professional life, and teachers should have the responsibility for shaping their professional development. Much of this professional development should be integrated with the on-going work of the school, rather than be tacked on as an "extra."

What did we hear?

Many briefs to the Royal Commission alluded to teacher education or professional development. A number of presenters said that teacher preparation programs are too short to include everything that is necessary, and that student teachers should spend more time actually working in schools.

We heard that teachers, both new and experienced, need to know more about dealing with ethnic and cultural diversity and with students who have special needs. We also heard that they need more expertise in teaching early reading, mathematics, and science, as well as greater facility with electronic technology, in order to take advantage of new teaching possibilities.

Submissions from representatives of the Roman Catholic school system stressed the need for those preparing to teach in their schools to learn enough about the history, philosophical approach, and the system's curriculum. Representatives from French-language schools had similar concerns about preparation of teachers for their schools.

Teachers themselves expressed frustration about mandated changes, such as destreaming, being introduced without adequate resources for professional development. They were also concerned about problems resulting from funding cuts.

Other briefs expressed concern about the composition of the teaching force, or about criteria for admission to faculties of education. People wanted applicants selected less on the basis of academic standings, and more on the basis of personal qualities. Some called for changes in selection procedures to increase ethno-cultural and racial diversity.

Historical context

In Chapter 2 we alluded to the modest amount of training received by prospective teachers throughout the 19th and much of the 20th century. With compulsory schooling, and as the result of Egerton Ryerson's work, the importance of training teachers in pedagogy was increasingly accepted. The first "normal school" (teachers' college) opened in 1847, with more added throughout the next few decades for the training of elementary school teachers.

Secondary school teachers, who were expected to have university degrees, received their teacher training at a separate provincial college of education. The situation for training teachers for French-language schools was quite unsatisfactory: until 1927, when the Ottawa Ecole Normale was established, schools had to hire either poorly prepared Franco-Ontarian teachers, or teachers from Quebec. There appear to have been no French-language facilities in the province, prior to 1970, for training secondary school teachers.

In the 1970s, the provincial government gradually transferred teacher education to the universities, and from 1974 on, all teachers in the English-language system required an undergraduate degree and a Bachelor of Education degree. The same requirement became effective for teachers in the French-language system in 1986.

Although teachers are now better educated and receive more substantial preparation than in the past, the demands and complexities of teaching have also increased dramatically. We briefly describe the current situation in teacher education, and make recommendations about what we believe teachers will require by way of general education and professional preparation if they are to meet, effectively, the needs of students in Ontario schools of the future.

Current context for reforming teacher education

Although there have been a number of changes in both pre-service and in-service teacher education over the last five or six years, it seems to us that the process of reform has become somewhat stuck. Each of the parties continues to go its own way.

In 1987, a position paper on teacher education, commissioned by the Teacher Education Review group and written by Michael Fullan and Michael Connelly, both of whom were at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at that time, was circulated widely throughout the province.(14) A number of innovative proposals were put forward to improve teacher education.

The report made specific recommendations about pre-service programs, support of new teachers, and on-going professional development, as well as about rethinking the roles of faculties of education and the other "teacher education stakeholders" including the Ministry, school boards, and federations.

For example, in regard to beginning teachers, the report recommended a process by which they would have a period of internship and apprenticeship. During that time they would receive additional training and support. Although the paper had considerable influence on much of the thinking about teacher education in Ontario (and beyond: the document has been extensively referred to in publications in other provinces and other countries), very few of its recommendations were actually implemented in Ontario.

Other unsuccessful attempts have been made to create a more accountable system for organizing and operating teacher education. (We noted earlier that the proposal for a College of Teachers was dropped after being rejected by the teachers' federations.) The Teacher Education Council, Ontario (TECO), was set up in 1989, partly in response to the Fullan and Connelly position paper, with representatives from faculties, the Ministry, the federations, and school boards.

A review of several reports on issues of admissions, pre-service, induction, in-service, and faculty renewal(15) suggests that in spite of some good research and the best intentions, TECO had difficulty affecting policy and practice.(16) For example, TECO's reports to the Minister often made various recommendations that different stakeholders get together and discuss or review their plans and programs. However,no groups seemed willing to move beyond defending their own turf.

Similarly, one recommendation of a 1988 Task Force, set up to make suggestions about common pre-service courses to prepare science teachers, was that faculties review their science offerings. In other words, over and over again discussion seems to take the place of action. Although there are many examples of innovative and collaborative programs in Ontario, such initiatives remain the exception rather than the norm.

In the light of such a history, it is difficult not to conclude that the "teacher education stakeholders" are somewhat rigidly wedded to structures that may be anachronistic, and that vested interests and disinclination to change have held sway for too long. Faculties of education hold closely to the notion of university autonomy and, in the opinion of many observers, do only what they please; federations resist anything they see as intruding on collective bargaining and the exclusive role of teachers in the schools; and the Ministry maintains a system, which has been discontinued in other provinces, of controlling the content of various in-service courses.

In this context, coherent public policy is impossible. The Ministry's nominal control over teacher education is no guarantee of quality.

All these stakeholder groups have what seem to them good reasons for the positions they take. Collectively, however, they have prevented the reform of teacher education. We suggest what programs and directions make sense in terms of student learning and teacher growth, and only then look at the political barriers to implementation.

Pre-service teacher preparation in Ontario today

Current programs: Description and issues

All teachers trained in Ontario receive their initial training (referred to as "pre-service") through one of ten faculties of education (two of which have programs to prepare teachers for French-language schools). Close to 6,000 student teachers are enrolled in pre-service programs, most of which are one-year courses that follow a first undergraduate degree.

Teachers usually receive about 20 weeks of instruction at the faculty, and are required to spend at least 40 days in a school under the supervision of an experienced teacher (although there is considerable variation, with an increasing number of programs having student teachers spend as much as half their time in schools).

Successful candidates receive a B.Ed. from the university, and are then granted a permanent Ontario Teaching Certificate by the Ministry of Education and Training.

Pre-service programs in Ontario vary in terms of how professional teacher training is sequenced with general liberal arts or science education. In concurrent programs (offered in only some faculties, and involving a small proportion of students studying to become teachers), candidates study simultaneously for a B.A. or B.Sc. and a B.Ed., and tend to spend longer blocks of time practice-teaching in schools.

By contrast, students in consecutive programs (offered in all faculties) enter a faculty of education for a one-year B.Ed. after receiving an undergraduate degree. Several universities have recently developed a "hybrid" program, with elements of each: undergraduate students in subjects where there is a high demand for teachers, such as French, mathematics and science, or early childhood education, take particular courses, and undertake some supervised field experiences; they are then guaranteed admission to the faculty of education one-year program.

Although program components are to some extent determined by Ministry regulations, faculties have considerable flexibility in delivery models and course content, and have recently developed a variety of program innovations. There is now significant diversity among the ten faculties, in mode of delivery and in program content.

Traditionally, faculties have assumed full responsibility for the programs, with the exception of the 40 days of practice teaching in schools. During those days, student teachers are supervised by associate teachers, who are regular teachers in the schools. The difficulty is the absence of a particular process for selecting associate teachers, who have rarely been given any special training or preparation. Expectations about their role are not clear, and the criteria on which they are to evaluate student teachers may be vague. Furthermore, the responsibility is not acknowledged in any significant way: the $7.50 per day allocated for supervising student teachers would seem more of an insult than a reward.

Pre-service programs are frequently criticized as being too academic and "theoretical," with little opportunity for student teachers in faculties of education to learn from their own experience. Student teachers, all of whom are university graduates (average age 30), report they are sometimes treated like adolescents, with trivial "make work" assignments that do not contribute to professional expertise.

Programs tend to be fragmented: because faculty courses are not linked to the school experience, there is little sense of coherent professional preparation. The program may be diffuse and superficial, trying to cover philosophical, technical, and content areas in a sometimes disconnected manner. Although an Ontario survey of recent graduates showed a relatively high degree of satisfaction,(17) further analysis revealed that participants find their experience in schools the most valuable aspect of the program. Comments about the faculty courses were often negative.

However, the winds of change have blown through at least some of the province's ten faculties of education. Increasingly, they are working more closely with school personnel to integrate the theoretical and practical elements of pre-service programs. For instance, some are now based entirely off-site, in schools where associate teachers play a much larger role in planning what and how student teachers should learn.

Many student teachers are spending more time in school classrooms, often working in small groups with fellow students. We have been told that with intensive school experiences and an emphasis on working together on various projects, student teachers are more likely to report that faculty programs prepared them well for teaching and to give these programs higher ratings. Such reaction from student teachers may suggest directions for reform, emphasizing the need for better integration between the theory and practice, with more solid grounding in the work of schools.

However, too many student teachers have no school experience beyond their formally required practice teaching sessions, and as we have noted, supervising associate teachers usually have little or no interaction with university faculty members.

Faculties of education have developed a variety of specialized programs, including one at York University that prepares people to be teachers of the deaf (at least one faculty member and several students are deaf). Several faculties, such as those at Nipissing, Queen's, and Lakehead, also offer special programs that prepare aboriginal teachers and aboriginal teaching assistants, often in programs located off campus, in or near aboriginal communities. Other programs prepare teachers, whether aboriginal or not, to teach in aboriginal schools.

The diversity of programs across the province is seen by the faculties of education as a strength in responding to local needs, as well as building on particular faculty expertise. But it also raises questions about the extent of commonality in the preparation of teachers for Ontario schools. Given that the province now has The Common Curriculum Grades 1-9, coupled with provincial standards in language and mathematics, we need to be certain that teachers, wherever they are trained, have the knowledge and skill to teach the common curriculum.

Those who teach teachers

What about those who teach the teachers? A report by Professor Laverne Smith for the Teacher Education Council, Ontario, provides a good overview.(18) As of 1992, there were slightly more than 500 full-time faculty members in all ten teacher education faculties, 87 percent of whom are in English-language programs, with the remainder in French-language programs.

Of the full-time faculty members, about 70 percent are permanent appointments (either probationary tenure stream or tenured appointments). These professors are hired on the basis of their qualifications as both researchers and teachers. Very few are appointed to these permanent positions without having completed a doctorate in education. Although most have considerable experience teaching in elementary or secondary schools, this is not universally so. Recent hiring patterns suggest that research expertise is becoming an increasingly important criterion.

In addition to the tenure-stream appointments, about 30 percent of faculty members are non-permanent appointments, either seconded from school boards or hired on contract. In either case, such temporary appointments are usually for one to three years.

About 36 percent of faculty members, but only about 21 percent of those with tenure, are female. At the time the data were gathered for the 1992 report, only 11 faculty members across the province were identified as being members of visible minorities.

There is an on-going tension in faculties of education (similar to that in all professional schools) between teaching and research, and between the demands of the university and the demands of the field. In some cases, this tension is productive, leading to more practical research, and teaching informed by research. Too often, however, it results in unproductive conflict that sees the two as incompatible.

One difficulty for faculties of education is that the public and, to some extent, the school system - is unaware or unappreciative of the need for research and scholarship as well as for teaching. In a paper written for this Commission, Patricia Allison of the University of Western Ontario reminds us that:

The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education is quite distinct from the ten faculties of education, having a different mandate and very different functions. As of this writing, it does not offer pre-service teacher education programs, and its 146 full-time faculty members teach only graduate programs, although they are expected, in addition, to be heavily involved in research and/or field development. Most students in graduate programs, particularly in M.Ed. programs, are practising teachers. Many of OISE's doctoral graduates go on to teach in faculties of education, either in Ontario or elsewhere. The proposed merger between OISE and the Faculty of Education of the University of Toronto, if successful, would no doubt alter OISE's programs.

Judging the effectiveness of programs

Very few teacher education programs, here or elsewhere, are evaluated on any basis other than satisfaction of student teachers or the success of graduates in finding teaching positions. In some cases, faculties of education survey school employers as well, to evaluate the level of satisfaction with graduates of their programs. There would seem to be no systematic assessment of the knowledge and skills of current Ontario graduates.(20)

If there are agreed-on expectations of beginning teachers, it makes sense to suggest some form of accountability for faculties of education. We believe that a more thorough and systematic evaluation and accreditation of pre-service programs should be developed in Ontario.

We suggest that teacher education programs be accredited, in a process similar to that often used with some other professional and graduate university programs, both in Ontario and elsewhere. In this process, an independent body assesses programs, considering, for instance, course content, resources, performance standards, delivery mechanisms, qualifications of faculty members, and in some cases quality of graduates.

The independent accrediting body might be a professional association or an accreditation board set up solely for that purpose. The process has apparently been effective in maintaining high standards, and because programs are accredited for a limited period (usually between three and seven years), there is a built-in safeguard against complacency or resistance to change.

In education faculties, information is usually gathered through site visits to the faculty of education and its associated partner schools, and through interviews with professors, students, and, presumably, also with the school board that employs graduates.

It is crucial that the process have substance: there must be consequences for faculties whose programs do not measure up to accepted standards. The usual procedure would be to put such faculties on notice, with a period of two to three years for improvement. Should improvement not take place, programs would be no longer be accredited. This would mean that graduates would not be eligible for the Ontario Teaching Certificate.

Given the principle of having teachers take responsibility for governing their profession, we suggest that responsibility for accrediting teacher preparation programs be assigned to the College of Teachers. Although the process to be used would then be determined by the College, the accreditation or review teams might include members of the College of Teachers, representatives from Ontario faculties of education, and outstanding teacher educators from outside Ontario and even, perhaps, outside Canada. This would ensure that the process had credibility with the public and with professionals. We assume that the College, in developing the process and criteria for the accreditation reviews, would be sensitive to the university culture, to current research and scholarly work in teacher education, and to Ministry of Education and Training policy directions.

Recommendation 59

*We recommend that the College of Teachers, in close co-operation with faculties of education, develop a framework for accrediting teacher preparation programs offered by Ontario faculties of education, and that the College be responsible for carrying out such accreditation processes.

Teacher education for the future

Our recommendations about teacher education for a strengthened schooling system begin with several basic assumptions about teacher education, based on recent research about how teachers learn. We are guided by the principles of learning and teaching outlined earlier in Chapters 5 and 6.

We accept five dimensions (developed in Chapter 6) as defining good teaching and offer guidance for planning the focus and direction of pre-service programs and professional development initiatives. That is, we hold that good teachers:

• care about students, and are committed to students' learning;
• know their subjects and how to teach them;
• organize and monitor student learning;
• work effectively with others, including other teachers, students, parents, and community;
• critically examine their practice, and continue to learn throughout their careers.

Although these principles do not provide a blueprint for designing teacher education, they are a starting point. The implications are clear: if teaching is difficult and complex, teacher education cannot be dealt with as an afterthought. We also make two further assumptions about teacher education:

• First, pre-service training cannot produce fully finished expert teachers, but it should give graduates the skills and knowledge necessary for a successful entry into teaching, and provide them with a solid foundation on which to build throughout their careers.
• Second, educational reform and teacher education must go together. Because changes in schools will not take place without the involvement of teachers, teacher development is part and parcel of school improvement, with benefits for schools and for students.

Becoming competent as a teacher requires more than technical skills or subject knowledge: it requires drawing on these skills and knowledge to meet the special demands of many different situations and problems. For example, a teacher not only needs to know how to manage the behaviour of a class of six-year-olds, but may need to do this while teaching them to read, adjusting questions and content to suit the different levels of understanding in a class that may include recent immigrants, aboriginal children, and children from a range of socio-economic backgrounds.

Although it is neither feasible nor reasonable for us to make specific recommendations about all the content areas of pre-service programs, several key priorities need to be addressed if our recommendations in other areas are to be implemented. We would expect the College of Teachers to make more specific recommendations, but to leave flexibility for faculties of education.

Although we have not developed separate lists of requirements, arrangements may differ, depending on whether student teachers are preparing for careers in elementary or secondary schools.

Selection: Who should become a teacher?

As we have already noted, the issue of admission to faculties of education is a thorny one, primarily because faculties of education operate as the first gatekeepers to teaching. Concerns focus on two factors: first, there is a belief that admission is too dependent on academic background, specifically undergraduate grades, rather than on personal qualities; second, there is the fact that too few candidates from minority groups are admitted.

Since faculties have many more qualified applicants than they can accept, there will always be dissatisfied people. According to faculties of education, although academic background is an important criterion, other factors are also significant, particularly relevant experience with children and adolescents. Special attention is also given to ensuring places for candidates from previously under-represented groups, such as aboriginal candidates, those from ethno-cultural and racial minorities, and those who have physical disabilities.

Personal qualities:
Many people believe that personal qualities of character should be the most important criteria for admission to teaching. We agree in principle: the difficulty is that these personal qualities, which are not easily influenced by training, are notoriously difficult to assess in the admissions process.

Judgments about candidates' academic backgrounds can be made with relative ease, but judgments about their character are more difficult. Furthermore, efforts to do so through the use of reference letters, interviews, or aptitude tests have been largely unsuccessful. In addition, the numbers of applicants and the number admitted in several faculties are so large, interviews are impractical. The Faculty of Education at the University of Toronto, for instance, admits approximately 1,000 students each year, out of several thousand applicants. In her paper for our Commission, Patricia Allison cites evidence that demonstrates "that interviews are inherently unreliable."(21)

Selection as a process:
However, because we agree that personal qualities are critical, we suggest that selection be seen as a process rather than as an event. Faculties can make initial judgments based on academic criteria and experience (plus the way the candidate reflects in writing on that experience), but may not be able to make adequate appraisals of personal qualities until the candidate is in the program. At that time, however, judgments can and should be made.

Faculty members and associate teachers in schools have been hesitant to exercise their authority as gatekeepers to the profession, apparently being more comfortable with supporting rather than evaluating student teachers. We agree that student teachers who are having difficulty should be helped by professors and by school staff. If such assistance does not improve performance, however, unsuccessful student teachers should be directed to other career possibilities, and not be recommended for teacher certification. We believe that the right of children to a good education is the most important consideration.(22)

Judgments about suitability should be based on clear understandings about teachers and teaching, and should be acknowledged as a responsibility to be shared by faculty and by the schools where student teachers do their field work.(23) We recognize that both faculty members and teachers find it difficult to make such judgments when student teachers are proving unsuitable. We believe, however, that it is crucial for them to recognize their obligation to future generations of elementary and secondary school students.

Recommendation 60

*We recommend that faculties of education and school staff who supervise student teachers be accountable for ensuring that those recommended for Ontario Teaching Certificates have the personal qualities required for admission to the teaching profession, and that those candidates who do not show such qualities be advised to leave teacher preparation programs.

We assume criteria would include evidence that the prospective teacher cares for students, is committed to student learning, and supports generally accepted professional ethical standards. Teachers intending to teach in Catholic and francophone schools should be assessed by the faculty and by the schools as to their recognition and support of the goals and traditions of these education communities.

Encouraging minority group members to become teachers:
We have noted the under-representation of teachers from various ethno-cultural and racial minority backgrounds, as well as those who have physical disabilities. Increasing the number of teachers from diverse backgrounds is important for several reasons. Minority youth benefit from having visible role models in their schools, but beyond this, all students in a multicultural society benefit from schools in which staff come from a variety of backgrounds: it ensures that diverse viewpoints are recognized and included in school life.

Efforts to increase the diversity of the student teacher group have taken place in most faculties, and have been given a boost by the Ministry's recent policy initiatives in the area of anti-racism. Implementation of these should lead to more minority teacher candidates being admitted. An initial list of pilot projects shows that considerable progress has been made, at least on paper. Whether the changes will be substantial enough is another question.

The recently enacted Employment Equity Act will require school boards, as employers, to develop and implement plans to increase the representation of target group members (racial minorities, aboriginal peoples, women, and persons with disabilities). Ensuring a pool of qualified teachers from a range of backgrounds will be essential to meeting such requirements.

However, increasing diversity is a recruitment as well as a selection issue, and requires that all education partners work together. In addition to continuing current initiatives in faculties of education and school boards, more needs to be done to expand the pool of qualified applicants from minority backgrounds, and to ensure that more of them are well prepared to enter teaching. Such efforts are already under way in a few instances, but need to be much stronger and more widespread.

Faculties of education, school boards, and teachers' federations can and should actively encourage young members of minority groups to consider teaching as a career. One strategy in secondary schools is to establish "Future Teachers Clubs," through which students find out about teaching as a career, visit faculties of education, and have opportunities to gain the kind of experience with children that will be necessary for later admission to faculties of education.

Schools can set up cross-age tutoring programs that help all students - both those who tutor and those who are tutored learn. Schools can also assist students who are considering teaching to apply for relevant summer jobs, such as day-camp counselling or assisting in summer school programs, to give them a chance to develop their skills and assess their interest in teaching as a career. TVOntario/La Chaine might produce videos that could be used to highlight the attractions of a career in education.

Such initiatives should also be extended to allow adults from minority groups, who are interested in a career change, to gain experience relevant to teaching.

The francophone community may also find such attempts worthwhile, because there have been fewer applicants for each position in French-language faculties of education than in English-language institutions.

Recommendations 61, 62

*We recommend that faculties expand their efforts to admit more student teachers from previously under-represented groups, including ethno-cultural and racial minorities, aboriginal communities, and those who are disabled, and that they be accountable to the College of Teachers for demonstrating significant progress toward achieving this objective.

*We recommend that faculties of education, school boards, and teachers' federations develop joint programs to encourage more young people from minority groups to consider teaching as a career, and to ensure that minority youth and adults interested in teaching have opportunities to gain the necessary experience with children and adolescents.

Pre-service preparation

Pre-service preparation, including the content and organization of programs, should be guided in general by the concepts of teaching we propose, and by common understandings about professional skill and knowledge. We discuss and make recommendations about the control and location of programs, their length, and their content.

Control and location of programs:
We have noted that Ontario faculties of education have recently increased the involvement of schools in pre-service programs, having student teachers actually working in classrooms over long blocks of time, and being more involved in the entire life of the school. It has been suggested that perhaps this concept might be taken even further, and that initial teacher preparation be based entirely in schools rather than in universities; in this model, school board staff would take primary responsibility for delivery of the program.(24) Student teachers, the argument goes, have already spent four years in universities doing their undergraduate degrees. To prepare for teaching, they should become apprentices, learning their craft by watching experienced teachers, acquiring the necessary skills and techniques, and practising those skills in the real setting of classrooms.

Although we believe that schools should, indeed, play a larger role in initial teacher preparation (and we will outline just how we think this should happen), we also believe that such apprenticeship programs, if run entirely by schools and school systems, would have serious limitations in pre-service preparation of teachers.

There are certainly many practical skills and routines that student teachers can and do learn from observing experienced practitioners. However, learning the essential "nuts and bolts" is not enough. Teachers also need to understand why they are doing what they do, and be able to explain why they have chosen certain content or methods. They must learn how to teach their subjects. They must be familiar with research on child development and how children learn. They must understand how learning is affected by social and emotional factors.

Specific skills related to classroom management or lesson planning must be seen in the broader context of professional knowledge and practice. "Cookbook" learning is not enough. As part of their preparation, student teachers should begin to understand the organizational, political, legal, and ethical contexts in which they will work, and discuss competing ideas about the nature and purpose of education. Although schools can do some of this, they are unlikely to provide sustained support for thoughtful consideration of issues. As well, the top priority of schools is (and should remain) to teach students and help them learn. If schools were given responsibility for training teachers, it could create conflicting priorities - teach teachers or teach students? - and add another burden for our schools.

Apprenticeship models really only make sense if the goal is to reproduce the current realities of schools and teaching - in other words, to prepare teachers for schools as they exist at present. But, as we have argued, this is not enough. Although there are many pockets of excellence in schools throughout Ontario, there could be improvements to the status quo.

What universities can bring to professional preparation, in addition to a solid understanding of the knowledge base for teaching, is their commitment to scrutinizing and questioning accepted practices and ideas. The challenge, of course, is to ensure that universities actually do so, but this challenge will not be met by bypassing these institutions.

At the same time, we believe that the responsibility for both planning and implementing the program should be shared with schools. Faculties of education have no monopoly on ideas to improve teacher preparation.

Professional development schools:
We believe that partnerships in teacher education between faculties of education and school boards must become the norm rather than the exception. We suggest that each faculty of education develop partnership agreements with school boards, through which some schools can be designated as "professional development schools." Such schools would operate much like teaching hospitals, combining the best of theory and practice to create learning communities for the children, the teachers, and the student teachers.(25)

In professional development schools, university faculty and practising teachers would work together in planning and implementing a program, through which student teachers were guided to professional competence. Although teacher preparation would be based in the university, much of the program would be delivered through these school settings, with the involvement of both faculty members and practising teachers.

Student teachers would be assigned in small groups to these selected schools for significant blocks of time, perhaps two days each week during the year, or for a month or more. Not only would this provide opportunities for sustained and thoughtful interaction with school staff, it would also encourage student teachers to work together as they learn about teaching. Such experiences go a long way to break down the walls of isolation that have kept teachers cut off from rich sources of collegial stimulation. Student teachers would thus learn to work collegially rather than in isolation.

Professional development schools would be located in the public, Roman Catholic, and French-language systems, to provide adequate opportunities for teachers to be prepared to teach in all Ontario schools.

In such a partnership arrangement, the school and the school board would share in the responsibility to guide the professional socialization of student teachers, with the participation of the majority of teachers in the school. We would expect that one teacher (or the vice-principal) would agree to take the lead in co-ordinating teacher preparation efforts, and deployment of the student teachers in the professional-development school. This co-ordinating role would be recognized as part of the person's responsibilities for that year.

Groups of approximately seven or eight student teachers would be assigned to each school on a continuing basis. Although scheduling arrangements should be flexible, we would expect student teachers to spend significant blocks of time in the school.

The learning objectives for each block of time would be jointly defined by university faculty members and teachers in the school. The expectation is that school experience would be explicitly linked to concepts discussed in the university courses, so that student teachers could relate what they see in classrooms and schools to theoretical frameworks.

Recommendations 63, 64, 65

*We recommend that faculties of education establish partnership arrangements with selected school boards and schools in the public, Roman Catholic, and French-language systems that agree to work with faculties in preparing student teachers. In such designated "professional development schools," staff from faculties and from the schools would be jointly responsible for planning the program, and for guiding student teachers through their learning.

*We recommend that school staff with responsibility for student teachers be selected jointly by the faculty of education and the school principal, and that they participate in a significant and well-designed preparation program themselves, to ensure that they have a fully developed understanding of the process of learning to teach, and a shared understanding of the skills, knowledge, competencies, and values that beginning teachers should have.

*We recommend that school staff supervising student teachers have significant input into recommendations for certification.

Length of pre-service programs

We have noted that the purpose of pre-service is not to produce a "finished professional" but to ensure that teachers are prepared for a good start in their profession, and have a foundation for continued professional growth. Nonetheless, given the vision of teaching we propose and the kinds of skill and knowledge teachers require, we do not believe that a one-year program, from September to April, is sufficient to provide student teachers with a solid foundation on which to begin teaching. This conclusion is supported by many presenters to the Commission, as well as by many teachers, teacher educators, researchers, and practitioners.

How might the program be extended? There are three different strategies: going back into undergraduate programs, lengthening the time in pre-service, and moving some learning forward into the first year or more of teaching. Our recommendations involve all three strategies.

The first suggestion for relieving the pressure of a one-year program is to require more prerequisites for entry into faculties of education, thus moving some of the necessary learning back into the regular undergraduate program. Queen's University, for instance, now requires all applicants to its faculty of education to have some background in mathematics and science, but most other faculties do not.

Faculties have resisted suggestions that prerequisites be standard across the province, on the grounds that it is up to each university to set its own admission requirements. Although we recognize this concern, we believe that it is reasonable to require some common undergraduate preparation prior to the teacher training program.

The issue is different for elementary than for secondary preparation programs. It seems more reasonable to require a variety of subject prerequisites for elementary school teachers, who are expected to teach a broad range of topics. On the other hand, secondary school teachers are generally expected to teach two subjects in considerable depth; broad prerequisites might be difficult for them, and perhaps unnecessary.

Areas that might be considered essential for elementary teachers, in particular, include mathematics, science, English (or French for French-language schools), and the arts. For all teachers, reasonable prerequisites would include developmental psychology, competence with computer technology, and perhaps sociology. Although such prerequisites may make it difficult for older candidates switching to teaching from another career, we believe that such difficulties are substantially outweighed by the need for some common undergraduate background. Increasing the prerequisites is not a full solution to the problem of an overcrowded pre-service curriculum, but it will help.

Some of the courses that aspiring teachers might be asked to take do not exist in all universities. Courses exploring key concepts in mathematics or science, for instance, or on the sociology of schooling, could be developed by faculties of arts and science in collaboration with faculties of education. In fact, some are already being developed; York University, for instance, has one in mathematics, and is developing at least one in science.

Although teacher education is often seen as the purview of faculties of education, it should be a priority for the rest of the university as well. Faculties of arts and science have a role to play in strengthening the undergraduate education of prospective teachers, and should be seen as partners of faculties of education.

Recommendations 66, 67

*We recommend that common undergraduate prerequisites be established for entry to pre-service teacher preparation programs, with decisions about specific prerequisites to be made by the College of Teachers, with input from faculties of education and school boards.

*We recommend that faculties of arts and science be encouraged to work with faculties of education to develop suitable undergraduate courses, where these do not exist, in subjects that are prerequisites for entry to faculties of education.

There is little doubt, however, that a longer pre-service program is necessary. The current period is too brief to provide sufficient opportunity for developing all the skills and knowledge teachers need for teaching in today's schools, let alone those of the future.

Preparation for teaching should be as rigorous as for any other profession. Not only do prospective teachers need to build knowledge and skill, they must develop enough expertise, comfort, and understanding of the educational system to move from being students to becoming independent professional teachers. We believe that the consecutive program should be substantially restructured and extended to two years, while the concurrent programs should be similarly extended by one year.

Lengthening the program, of course, substantially raises the costs of teacher preparation for candidates, and the per-student cost for the government. Unless faculties of education are expanded, which we do not suggest, it also decreases the supply of new teachers. We are aware of these problems, but believe they are outweighed by the benefits of a two-year program.(26) The decreased supply of new teachers is not likely to be an immediate problem, since only about half of the graduates actually find teaching positions each year. We recognize, however, that in the future the demand for teachers may increase as educators retire. Should this occur, the province would have to be ready to make arrangements to meet the demand, perhaps through temporary increases in the numbers admitted to faculties of education.

Although the increased cost might act as a disincentive for low-income applicants, we suggest that this should be addressed through strategies for providing financial support, for example by extending the Ontario Student Assistance Program.

We believe there should be considerable flexibility in the way the teacher preparation program is organized, but that throughout the two years, student teachers should take on increasing levels of responsibility in schools. The second year would be somewhat like an internship, in which student teachers are able to work in schools as "fledgling teachers." They would contribute to the work of the school, allowing more flexibility in teacher scheduling, but be under the guidance of experienced teachers, who, backed by specific training, have responsibilities for continuing development of novice teachers.

We have recommended that professional development schools, in partnership with faculties of education, work with small groups of student teachers. It is likely that most of the first year of the program would be based at the faculty of education, while much of the second year would be in the school, with regular seminars led by faculty members and teachers. The Bachelor of Education degree would be awarded by the university on successful completion of the second year. Presumably, in concurrent programs, the B.Ed. would be awarded after the sixth year of combined arts and education.

The Ontario Teaching Certificate is currently awarded to teachers when they complete the B.Ed. degree. Faculties of education recommend candidates to the Ministry of Education, which awards the certificate. Under the system we propose, faculties would recommend certification to the College of Teachers. We believe, however, that the initial certificate should be provisional, being made permanent on completion of one year's successful teaching in an Ontario school. Our reason responds to concerns expressed about ensuring the highest calibre of teaching in our schools. It makes little sense to give a permanent teaching certificate to someone who has never been employed as a teacher. The certification process would be quite distinct from the employing board's decision concerning probationary and permanent contracts.

Recommendations 68, 69, 70, 71

*We recommend that the consecutive program for teacher education be extended to two years, and that one year be added to the concurrent program. We recommend that the Bachelor of Education degree be awarded on successful completion of the two-year program or, in the case of the concurrent program, on completion of the equivalent of the two-year education program.

*We recommend that the current practice-teaching requisite of 40 days be replaced by a requirement that student teachers spend at least that much time observing and working in designated professional development schools during the first year of the B.Ed. program, and that they spend a substantial portion (at least three months) of the second year working in schools, under the supervision of school staff. We recommend a similar requirement for students in concurrent programs, over the length of the pre-service program.

*We recommend that faculties of education recommend to the College of Teachers that those who have been awarded B.Ed. degrees be given a provisional Ontario Teaching Certificate.

*We recommend that the Ontario Teaching Certificate be made permanent on completion of one year's teaching in Ontario, on the recommendation of a qualified principal or supervisory officer. However, this certification process would be quite distinct from the employing board's decision concerning probationary and permanent contracts.

Teachers who have been prepared and certified in programs outside Ontario should be required to satisfy the College of Teachers that their qualifications are comparable. Once they had done that, they would then be granted a provisional Ontario Teaching Certificate, which would be made permanent after one year's successful teaching in an Ontario school.

Content of program:
The program priorities that we believe are most important are grouped according to the five principles that define our image of good teaching:

1. Caring about students, and being committed to students' learning
Critical as this area is, it does not easily lend itself to inclusion in a formal program of study. Although faculty and school placements can and should strengthen a student teacher's commitment to students, it is not simply a matter of explicitly increasing knowledge and skills.

Nonetheless, a good pre-service program will help student teachers build effectively on the concern and commitment to young people, which probably attracted them to teaching in the first place.

We stress again that faculties of education and the schools in which student teachers work have a responsibility to counsel those who lack the necessary commitment to reconsider their choice of career.

Student teachers should

• learn to be mentors and advisors to their students, and understand the importance of respect and care in working with students;
• understand and appreciate the linguistic, religious, cultural, and social differences among students, and become aware of how to build on the strengths students from different backgrounds bring to school;
• become sensitive to the effects of the hidden curriculum, and be willing and able to question their own attitudes and modify their own practice accordingly;
• understand the importance of teachers having high expectations of all students.

2. Knowledge of subjects and how to teach them
Student teachers should

• understand the subjects they are expected to teach; for elementary school teachers in particular, this requires the development of courses that focus on the methodology and key concepts in areas such as mathematics and science. For secondary school teachers, who have considerable knowledge of the subjects they expect to teach, courses should lead to an understanding of key principles and concepts in their subjects in ways that help students understand them;
• become familiar with recent research on learning and teaching, in order to make judgments about how best to teach their students;
• understand how students develop literacy, in the broad sense in which we use the term, and the importance of oral language development, particularly in a minority-language environment;
• understand enough about first- and second-language learning, and how cognitive development relates to language learning, to appropriately support students who come to school not being able to speak English or French;
• be well equipped to teach children to read;
• develop skill in using various teaching methods appropriately, capitalizing on the advantages of each approach while minimizing the disadvantages;
• be able to relate the teaching of various subjects to the Canadian context, recognizing Canada as a bilingual country; acknowledging the history, culture, traditions, and contribution of aboriginal people to Canadian society; as well as the contribution of the groups originally from other countries who have enriched Canadian culture over the past 300 years;
• develop skill in using electronic technology to support student learning, including using the most common software packages, and facilitating students use of telecommunications for access to information.

3. Organizing and monitoring student learning
This encompasses planning the curriculum (the year's work), setting learning objectives for groups and for individual students, managing the classroom, monitoring student learning, and intervening appropriately when students need additional help or have to be challenged.

To do so, student teachers should

• understand the process of children's cognitive, emotional, and social development, in order to plan programs and set reasonable expectations for students;
• understand the sequence of curriculum, to know what has gone before, and what will follow;
• learn to encourage positive behaviour in students, and know and be skilled in using strategies to deal effectively with inappropriate behaviour;
• be aware of the normal range of behaviour and ability, and learn to recognize academic, emotional, and social developmental difficulties among youngsters, being familiar enough with available resources to get assistance for them when it's needed;
• develop understanding and skill in assessing student learning using a variety of strategies, developing skill in selecting, using, and interpreting different methods to meet different purposes;
• learn to communicate effectively about student learning to students and parents; explaining objectives, indicating what has been learned, and making suggestions for further learning, with input from students and parents.

4. Working effectively with others, including other teachers, students, parents, and members of the community
Building a more collaborative professional culture begins with student teachers.

They should, therefore,

• learn and be prepared to use strategies for increasing and maintaining the kind of parental involvement that supports student learning;
• become accustomed to working not only alone with students, but also in team situations with other teachers, to set priorities, identify needs, plan curriculum, and initiate other action in their schools;
• become acquainted with parents and others in the community, and be ready to use those resource people to strengthen student learning.

5. Critically examining teaching practice and continuing to learn throughout their careers
Because on-going professional growth and continuous improvement are integral to professional work, these norms should be reinforced in the preparation programs for teachers.

Student teachers should

• develop the habit of examining and learning from their own experience;
• understand that as teachers, they themselves must be lifelong learners who will build on and extend their initial learning as they move into teaching careers;
• become critical consumers of research so they can choose knowledgeably among options to ensure optimal learning for all their students;
• understand the changing social and economic contexts of education, and the role of educators in debates about educational issues.

In addition to these general requirements, student teachers who hope to teach in particular settings have a number of more-specific needs. Faculties of education must ensure that candidates are adequately prepared, with both content knowledge and significant experience in appropriate school settings. We look specifically at Catholic schools, French- language schools, aboriginal schools, adult education, and technological studies.

Student teachers planning to teach in the Catholic separate school system need a knowledge of its distinctive features, history, philosophy, values, and some familiarity with pedagogy and educational methods of religious education programs in these schools.

In addition to strong French-language skills, student teachers preparing to teach in French-language schools need an understanding and appreciation of the minority-language context of Ontario's francophone community.

Student teachers preparing to teach in aboriginal schools must have an appreciation and knowledge of aboriginal culture and traditions, and should have at least some facility with an aboriginal language.

Student teachers interested in adult education need knowledge about and experience with adult learning settings, and with the ways adult learning needs differ from those of younger students.

Prospective teachers of technological studies may not have all the technical skills required. Therefore, teacher education programs may need to develop both substantive technical expertise as well as teaching strategies.

There are two further issues in relation to pre-service programs: preparing to teach early childhood education programs, and preparing to teach diverse student populations.

Teachers for early childhood education:
A key recommendation in our report is for enhanced and expanded early childhood education programs for young children. We recommend that the publicly funded schools move toward offering full-day programs for children beginning at age 3. At the moment, there are two separate systems for preparing child-care workers and teachers, and persons licensed in one system are not recognized by the other.

In order to provide fully trained and qualified teachers for these programs, therefore, changes will have to be made in the current preparation and certification process. A proposal made to the Deputy Minister of Education and Training in 1993 provides a model that is a good starting point for considering what a new program might involve.(27)

The proposal is for a program to be collaboratively delivered by a college of applied arts and technology, a university, and a faculty of education. The program would stress the "interdependence of care and education in the lives of young children."

Although it may need some revision in the light of our early childhood recommendations, the proposal offers one possible long-term solution for the problem of how best to prepare teachers for very young children. In the early stages of implementation of the school readiness program, however, we need a different framework. Our main concerns are, first, the status of those currently licensed as Early Childhood Educators, and those currently certified as primary teachers; and, second, the need for retraining either of these groups might have in light of changed programs.

The details would need to be worked out and approved by the College of Teachers, working closely with college and university faculty members, and with representatives from both the early childhood and primary teaching groups. However, we assume that teachers currently qualified to teach kindergarten would be able to teach the three-year-olds, as would those currently qualified to teach in early childhood programs - although it is likely that both groups might require some additional professional development.

We suggest that they be deemed to be qualified to teach in the school readiness programs for three- and four-year-olds, contingent on their participation in appropriate professional development programs, as defined by the College of Teachers in consultation with university and college staff and with representatives of early childhood educators and primary teachers.

Recommendations 72, 73

*We recommend that the College of Teachers develop a set of criteria for certifying staff for school readiness programs, and that whatever preparation and certification requirements are adopted, teachers in early childhood education programs have qualifications equivalent to other teachers, and be equal in status.

*We recommend that the College of Teachers consider how to recognize staff members who are currently licensed as early childhood educators or certified primary teachers and who will be affected by the establishment of school readiness programs for three-year-olds in publicly funded schools.

Teaching diverse student populations:
Although all student teachers must learn about teaching diverse student populations, this is particularly true of those who expect to teach in urban areas characterized by diversity in race, culture, language, and religion. A great deal is known about ways to enhance the success of culturally and linguistically diverse students, but teachers may lack this information. As noted by Geneva Gay, an African-American writer:

Fortunately, there are many effective approaches for all students, including building trust, using a variety of different teaching strategies, giving effective feedback, maintaining high expectations, using curriculum or examples that relate to various backgrounds and experiences, and establishing good relationships with parents.(29)

Professional development and lifelong learning

In-service programs today

The training or continuing education of practising teachers, usually referred to as professional development or teacher in-service, is characterized by such scope and diversity that it is almost impossible to describe briefly. There is no provincial mandatory professional development requirement for Ontario teachers. Local school boards or schools, however, may mandate in-service programs in relation to provincial or board priorities.

Additional Qualifications (AQ) courses for teachers have been perhaps the most popular and well-known form of professional development in Ontario. These, provided for in provincial legislation and leading to salary increases (through category changes) or to promotional opportunities, were formerly funded largely by provincial grants to universities, although most were actually taught by school personnel hired on a part-time basis by faculties of education. In 1993, the Ministry announced that funding would be phased out over three years, not only as a way of reducing government expenditures, but as part of a shift toward user fees for many government services and programs. The government action has resulted in both higher fees and lower enrolment and, in at least one university, the cancelling of AQ courses.

Although courses were usually well rated by participants, most observers felt the program was of variable quality and not linked to school improvement. Tying professional development to salary increases fosters the sense that teachers are motivated more by financial rewards than by an interest in upgrading. In other words, it was time for change, and the government's funding decision might well be seen as an opportunity for developing a new and better provincial framework for teacher professional development - one that takes into account the complex world of teaching as well as research findings about effective professional development.

For the past year a committee, comprising representatives of faculties of education, teachers' federations, and the Ministry, has been meeting; as yet no agreement has been reached on a co-ordinating framework for professional development for the province. It is interesting to note that in contrast to Ontario's AQ courses, in most other provinces, graduate study programs alone are recognized for salary and promotion purposes.

School boards provide a wide range of professional development activities, although these vary tremendously according to the board's size and resources. "One-shot" information sessions are still common, although there is abundant evidence that these are of limited value.

However, schools and school boards are beginning to draw on research findings about how to make professional development more effective. As a result, programs focus on priorities that have been identified as important for student learning; teachers participate in school teams rather than as individuals; and workshops are supported by follow-up activities in the schools. With the financial crisis, and particularly because of the Ontario Social Contract provisions, time and money for such professional development have been reduced, perhaps a reflection of the importance they are perceived to have.

A variety of workshops, brief courses, summer institutes, and professional conferences are offered by teachers' federations and other agencies. Some are of general interest, while others may be more specialized. The Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association, for instance, offers a religion course for those in Catholic schools. Regional consortia, usually involving school boards and universities, have increasingly played a major role in offering a variety of programs. Such professional development activities are usually made available to educators on a cost-recovery basis, although federations may subsidize members for their programs.

Subject councils (e.g., provincial associations of teachers of mathematics or of history) make substantial contributions to the on-going development of their members, through conferences, newsletters or journals, and through professional development programs. This is particularly true for secondary school teachers.

TVOntario/La Chaine has taken a role in teacher professional development, with programs devoted to a variety of educational issues. TVOntario/La Chaine provides an electronic bulletin board for education, where teachers and others can raise questions, share ideas, and debate issues of importance to them, in either French or English.

Regional offices of the Ministry of Education and Training also play a role in providing on-going support and professional development for English- and French-language schools, particularly in the North, as do OISE field centres (although these have been cut back recently for financial reasons). Such resources are particularly important for smaller or isolated boards. OISE's Centre de recherches en education franco-ontarienne (CREFO) and the Centre de recherches en education du Nouvel-Ontario (CRENO) offer support to the French-language educational community.

The other major form of professional development is graduate studies, either in subject areas (such as history or mathematics), or in education. Graduate degrees in education are offered through faculties of education and through OISE. All faculties now offer M.Ed. programs, and some offer M.A. programs as well. Currently, however, doctorates are available only through OISE and the University of Ottawa.

French-language doctoral students can complete their programs in French at either OISE or at the University of Ottawa. A few universities offer courses by distance education, both through teleconferencing and computer networks. These programs have proved to be particularly valuable for the francophone community, because they overcome difficulties associated with small numbers of people, often in somewhat isolated pockets spread over vast distances.

Continuing professional development: present issues

Although many teachers are engaged in professional learning, others are not. There are no professional development requirements for teachers (other than the professional development days that are part of collective agreements). We believe, however, that professional development should not be an option: it is essential.

Second, while some programs are of high calibre, others are not. It is not clear what standards are being used to judge professional development activities, or even whether they are always systematically evaluated.

Third, withdrawing funds from the AQ courses has further destabilized the situation. But it has created an opportunity to move away from a system based largely on paper credentials, and to rethink how best to support teachers' career-long professional growth.

Finally, and as indicated earlier, teachers are feeling overloaded - a situation made worse by recent financial cutbacks. There is little time available for professional development, and little or no money available for supply teachers to cover classes so that colleagues can participate in professional development. That means much of it has to be done after school, on weekends, or during the summer. Although many teachers are willing to give up their time, others are not, or, because of personal responsibilities, cannot. The issue continues to cause problems for federations and for school boards.

Professional development policy and programs (continuing education for practising teachers) should be guided by the same principles of good teaching, and the same understanding of how teachers and other adults learn, as outlined in our discussion of initial teacher preparation.

Good professional development keeps people up to date, revitalizes them, and encourages them to reassess their own practice in the light of changing circumstances in society and in their schools. This is particularly important when many teachers are middle-aged, and may have been trained years earlier.(30)

Our description of current professional development programs is an indication of the rich but somewhat chaotic state of the field. Although some degree of co-ordination would probably be helpful, we are concerned that the imposition of bureaucratic control is more likely to stifle than to stimulate provision of professional development.

The experience with Additional Qualifications courses suggests the danger of building bureaucratic structures that cannot respond quickly to changing circumstances. For instance, continuing to tie AQs to category changes and pay increases constrains the development of more meaningful alternatives.

Professional development for the future

How do teachers learn to teach better? It is extremely difficult for teachers to go beyond their implicit understandings of teaching (usually based on their own experiences as students). In other words, the most powerful determinant of how teachers teach is their own experience as students over a period of 15 to 20 years. Such a finding suggests caution about any "quick fixes."

Teachers need to reflect on school experiences. We referred earlier to the "hidden curriculum" - what schools teach without necessarily intending to. We want teachers to become aware of, and critically consider, the unintended hidden curriculum in their schools.

Research also shows the limitations of mandating change in teaching practices.(31) Unless teachers see good reasons for change, and unless they get support for the change in their schools, few make substantial alterations to their teaching. If we are asking teachers to perform new tasks, to perform old ones differently, to work together with their colleagues and others, and to understand how each change in practice is likely to affect many other aspects of the school, it is clear that a radical new approach to professional development is required.

We make recommendations around supportive beginning teachers, ensuring adequate professional development, and encouraging opportunities for personal and professional renewal. We then briefly discuss how professional development might be organized, the importance of school-based professional development, and the role of graduate studies programs as vehicles for professional development.

Supporting beginning teachers:
Beginning teachers are faced with difficult challenges. All too often they are forced to learn to swim by being thrown into the water. That is not good enough. In addition to experiencing uncertainty about how to actually put into practice all that they have learned, they may be given the most difficult classes, or the teaching assignments no-one else wants. In their eagerness to participate fully, they often end up with heavy extra-curricular responsibilities as well. Schools and school systems need to be sensitive to such difficulties, and avoid exploiting new teachers.

In the past few years, most school boards in Ontario began offering more support to their new teachers, usually through what are termed "induction programs."(32) Brief orientation sessions are increasingly supplemented by a series of workshops on issues such as classroom management, report cards, and meeting with parents. A few boards have gone further, setting up "mentoring programs" in which beginning teachers work with selected experienced teachers who agree to act as mentors or guides. Some assign a consultant to work with beginning teachers, usually visiting them in their schools. Some beginning teacher programs may provide up to three or four days release time for participants, while others do not.

Evaluations of support programs for beginning teachers generally show benefits to both the novices and the experienced teachers who participate.(33) Unfortunately, these are the programs that are vulnerable to cutbacks in the current context of financial constraint. We believe it is time to reconsider priorities, because the first year of teaching is crucial in determining later commitment and expertise.

We believe that with flexibility and good will, it is possible to develop and operate a program that has significant benefits for beginning teachers, schools, and students. First-year teachers could be provided with a program in August; there would be some additional costs to the system, but we do not anticipate these would be great. Even informal support eases the transition into professional life, yet requires few additional funds, and can be provided with little or no change to formal responsibilities.

Teachers will be much better prepared following a two-year pre-service program, particularly when the second year is similar to an internship in having significant school responsibilities. It is still important, however, to build appropriately on this foundation of pre-service preparation.

Recommendation 74

*We recommend that school boards be required to provide appropriate and sustained professional support to all first-year teachers, to ease their entry into full-time teaching.

Although many boards already have such programs, it is time for support to be available to all teachers. Materials could be collaboratively developed, with a core or common part developed by the Ministry and faculties of education, and local materials developed by school boards, based on their particular circumstances. Small boards could work in consortia, and perhaps use distance-learning technology to supplement what schools can provide to new teachers in remote locations.

Where possible, first-year teachers should be provided with support from mentor teachers or consultants, who have received appropriate preparation. It is critical that the responsibility of helping to socialize a beginner into the profession be seen as the serious and challenging responsibility it is. All too often, such work is somewhat demeaned and seen as less important than many other school functions.

Continuing professional development:
We suggest the continued expansion of a full range of professional development options, with the participation of teachers' federations, school boards, faculties of education, TVOntario, and teachers' subject associations, but with others as well: colleges, other university departments, community organizations, student groups, social agencies, and perhaps business and industry. These programs would serve different purposes, including providing information and networking, developing expertise in a particular area of knowledge, changing instructional practice, or supporting school reform. Types of programs that are effective for one purpose will not necessarily work for another.

We also suggest that there be a distinction between recognized professional development programs and what might be termed professional renewal, which is a more personal and individual notion. The latter is critically important for educators, but is difficult, if not impossible, to incorporate into any kind of framework for regulating and recognizing programs.

The situation with regard to more formal professional development is somewhat different. We have already said that we do not support linking professional upgrading to category changes and salary increases. At the moment, teaching certificates, once granted, are permanent, with no requirement for upgrading or renewal of certification. This situation is unlike that in some other jurisdictions, where some kind of evidence of professional growth is required for on-going certification as a teacher.

There is little doubt that involvement in professional development should be expected of teachers as professionals, and we believe that, on a mandatory basis, all teachers should engage in significant professional development.

The most effective way of monitoring this may be to recertify teachers, perhaps every five years, on the basis of their having completed some recognized professional development activities. This would be best organized through the new College of Teachers, and could then be monitored by school boards, which would, in turn, report results to the College.

Recommendation 75

*We recommend mandatory professional development for all educators in the publicly funded school system, with continuing certification every five years, dependent on both satisfactory performance and participation in professional development recognized by the College of Teachers.

The regulatory framework and detailed provisions would be worked out by the College of Teachers, with participation by federations, subject councils, school boards, the Ministry, and faculties of education. The College would decide on requirements and criteria for continuing certification or re-certification, with consideration given to maintaining high standards with maximum flexibility.

Those who teach in private schools would also have to meet the criteria for continuing certification. We assume the College of Teachers would decide how the regulatory framework would apply to private schools.

Although we want to encourage flexibility, we do not suggest a laissez-faire approach: rather, we suggest that professional development be required, but that educators have considerable autonomy in deciding what form of professional development would best serve their needs and those of their schools.

We believe that school board/employers should be responsible for supporting and monitoring mandatory professional development. In effect, many boards do this already, by developing school improvement plans and providing professional development to support them, or through programs in which teachers set improvement objectives related to their classroom practices.

Although the details would be worked out by the College, we suggest that there be some framework through which the College would either recognize particular programs or perhaps particular providers of programs, such as universities, teachers' federations, school boards, or private consortia.

There would be no automatic salary increments associated with completion of programs, nor would there be any particular qualification the Ministry (or the College) would require teachers to have. Employing boards would have the responsibility of judging whether applicants for particular positions had the training and expertise to do the job.(34) There might be a variety of possible kinds of qualification for such positions as teaching Special Education, perhaps an M.Ed. or some combination of courses given by recognized providers. In other words, rather than relying on paper qualifications to "pre-sort" applicants, employing school boards would be expected to make judgments about whether applicants had the knowledge and skills required for a particular position. As part of that evaluation, they would assess applicants' training and experience in the light of the skills and knowledge required for the job.

Other professional renewal initiatives:
Throughout our report, we have repeatedly demonstrated that teaching is a difficult, demanding, and complex job. The frequent professional isolation, the sense of overload, the barrage of competing and often incompatible demands, the pace of change all these make it difficult for teachers to continue month after month, year after year, without suffering from stress and fatigue. It is critical that teachers have as many opportunities as possible for professional and personal renewal.

A variety of activities beyond traditional course work or workshops might be powerful influences in professional renewal. Teaching in another country, working for a time in a business setting, taking on a study project in another jurisdiction, participating in a graduate studies program, teaching a different age range or in a different school - all these bring fresh ideas and perspectives to educators, and can enrich subsequent classroom teaching.

Such experiences should be encouraged, although it would be difficult to have some of them recognized as official professional development activities to meet the requirements of the College of Teachers. Instead, we would hope that the Ministry and school boards would set policies to encourage such flexible professional renewal initiatives. We are convinced that such initiatives will be of benefit not only to teachers, but also to the school system as a whole.

In some cases, teachers may benefit from a variety of short-term leaves or mini-sabbaticals. If all attempts at professional renewal were unsuccessful, pre-retirement offers might be considered.

Other enabling policies to support professional renewal would include provision for self-funded leaves, support of exchange programs of various sorts, and workload flexibility to accommodate professional commitments and opportunities, such as making presentations at conferences, editing professional newsletters, or being involved in research or professional writing. Such opportunities should be available to teachers and administrators in all school boards.

Recommendation 76

*We recommend that the Ministry of Education and Training, school boards, and federations, in collaboration with the College of Teachers, investigate and encourage various ways of providing opportunities for professional renewal for teachers and school administrators.

Guidelines with regard to organization and coordination:
We do not specify in detail how professional development should be organized, believing that arrangements should be flexibly developed between providers and participants. However, we identify a number of suggestions that should be noted.

Because it can be assumed that both employers and teachers would benefit, we believe that costs should be shared between them, with arrangements to be worked out through the College of Teachers.

The current move to consortia and partnerships should be expanded and strengthened. School boards, faculties, federations, and other groups bring particular strengths and insights; if they work together, the result is likely to be innovative and high-quality programs.

Electronic technology should be utilized far more than is currently the case. The use of interactive video and electronic conferencing, for instance, can help overcome difficulties of distance and scheduling.

Given the plethora of opportunities and providers, some agency probably the Ministry and the federations - should provide information to all schools about the range of options. This might be done through circulars, via computer networks, in regular publications, and by highlighting particularly noteworthy programs.

School-based professional development:
Earlier in this chapter, we discussed the culture of teaching, and stressed the importance of teachers having time to collectively plan, discuss, and evaluate with their colleagues. We emphasize again here that the most valuable professional development is embedded in the on-going life of the school. Teachers' active involvement in a vital professional community, with on-going discussion of curriculum, teaching methods, and student assessment: this is the professional development that will make the most significant difference to student learning. As teachers collectively examine their own school's current practice, they are motivated to seek ever-better ways of meeting student needs. As Andy Hargreaves and Lorna Earl point out when reporting on their recent research in Ontario schools,

In many school boards, all schools are required to develop "school growth plans," setting out their school plan for the coming year or several years. Such school growth plans would be based both on the stated priorities of the school board, and on staff assessment of the local school context. Teachers and principals agree on school priorities, and then plan staff action and professional development accordingly. In most cases, schools decide to focus on instruction or student assessment. The chosen topics would provide direction for planning both individual and whole-staff professional development, drawing on resources outside the school as well as the knowledge of staff members. The expectation would be that teachers would be applying their new learning in classrooms on a regular basis, and would continue to learn from their own experiences and those of their colleagues in the school. A critical mass is created with the involvement of many teachers in the school, greatly increasing the effectiveness of the improvement efforts.

Graduate studies:
AQ courses will no longer be the main vehicle for officially recognized professional development. Given this change, we suggest that faculties, with input from federations, school boards, and the Ministry, consider how M.Ed. programs might be more closely related to school and teacher priorities. Some faculties of education are beginning to move in this direction, but have been constrained by a variety of factors, including rather cumbersome regulations governing additional certification arrangements for experienced teachers (which we recommend be eliminated).

In most other provinces graduate studies provide a variety of flexible specialization programs. Teachers can pursue graduate degrees related to their specific professional interests and needs, but also upgrade their qualifications in a way that strengthens the links between theory and practice.

Graduate programs provide particularly good opportunities for teachers to take time out to research, reflect, and pursue topics in depth. If they were developed in collaboration with school systems and federations, there would be greater opportunities for teachers, perhaps collaborating with colleagues, to work with university faculty on issues that would have real benefits for schools and students. One example is an M.Ed. program at York University in which teachers can focus on issues related to urban education. The program is linked to a partnership with the North York Board of Education.

Teacher education: Summary

In our recommendations about teacher education, we see pre-service preparation, transition to teaching, and lifelong professional learning as a continuum. This means that pre-service programs should provide the foundation on which teachers continue to build, first as novice teachers, and then throughout their careers. Through lengthened and strengthened preparation, as well as through closer alliances between faculties of education and professional development schools, student teachers will not only learn the skills required for effective teaching, but will also develop the professional judgment necessary to teach in the demanding and complex world of today's schools. On-going professional development, in our view, is absolutely essential for all educators, and we have thus recommended mandatory professional development, but with maximum flexibility about how such requirements can be met.

Only teachers for whom continuous learning has become a way of life are likely to create the kind of stimulating and supportive classrooms we want for all of Ontario's students.

__________
Endnotes (Chapter 12, Section B)

ISBN 0-7778-3577-0
©Copyright 1994, Queens Printer for Ontario