CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

INTRODUCTION
THEME
MISSION
PHILOSOPHY
EVIDENCE OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
SUMMARY
REFERENCES

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
 

Introduction
The Conceptual Framework of the Department of Education (Appendix A) embodies a common vision (Fullan, 1993; Senge, 1990) for Teacher Education at the University of Saint Francis,  is based on the University’s Mission and Vision, and embraces the Core Values of the University. The Conceptual Framework gives meaning, purpose, and direction to the teacher training program (DuFour and Eaker, 1998). Initially developed in 1997, the Conceptual Framework has remained constant in significance, yet has evolved in response to current research findings (American Council on Education, 1999; Education Commission of the States, 2002), the Department’s focus on the application of best practice (Stronge, 2002; Schulman, 1992; Darling-Hammond, 1994; Murray, 1996), and the Department’s commitment to continuous improvement in program and candidate quality. The Framework was revised in 2002 to include dispositions, reduce redundancy, and improve clarity. A detailed timeline reporting the events responsible for the Conceptual Framework’s revision follows in Table CF.1.

The Conceptual Framework clearly delineates the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the Department giving direction to program development, instruction, and experiences, as well as to the evaluation of candidate performances and learning outcomes. This Framework takes into account diversity (Carter, 2002; Stronge, 2002), the societal and technological changes that influence the education profession (Robyler, 2000) and the population it serves. Paramount to the Framework’s initial design and revision was a commitment to prepare candidates to affect the learning process of all students.

The Conceptual Framework is illustrated by a means of interlocking hands representing the integration of knowledge bases among and appropriate to diverse populations. There is not a single beginning hand, yet as a whole, all hands contribute to achievement, which is represented by a star at the central point. Each hand symbolizes one of the knowledge bases deemed essential to the development of a quality educator (Schulman, 1986, 1987; Darling-Hammond, 1998). These bases are Knowledge of Self as an Individual, Knowledge of Content, Knowledge of the Learner, Knowledge of Pedagogy, Knowledge of Self as an Educator and Partner in a Learning Community, and Knowledge of Spiritual, Ethical, and Professional Self.

Timeline Demonstrating Changes related to the Development and Integration of the Conceptual Framework into the Teacher Education Program

Table CF.1

Theme
The Department’s Theme articulates a shared vision of the roles of professional educators. The Department envisions the educator as one who places the student at the center of the educational process, desires that all constituents meet and exceed standards of excellence, and is cognizant of the responsibility to prepare each individual to realize his or her future to the fullest. The Theme of the Department of Education is:

“Educators facilitating and advancing learning in a diverse, ever-changing society.”

Mission
The Department of Education primarily serves the population of the northeastern region of the State of Indiana through the professional preparation of educators at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The Department’s undergraduate programs lead to state licensing in elementary, secondary, and exceptional needs. The option of dual or triple licensing in a content area and Exceptional Needs is offered. Graduate programs prepare candidates for licensure in Exceptional Needs and School Counseling.

The Mission guides the Department in its preparation of candidates who will incorporate in their daily lives and professional endeavors the Franciscan Values that define the Mission of the University. In keeping with the Franciscan intellectual tradition, the Department prepares candidates to demonstrate confidence in their professional expertise through collaborative work at all levels of a diverse community – local, national, and global.

Philosophy

“Education is not a preparation for life: Education is life itself.”   
     John Dewey

The purpose of education at the University is to prepare its candidates to become highly effective professionals in the field of education. It is our firm belief that the educational programs offered must be purposefully designed to provide an extensive blend of liberal studies and professional education.

Throughout their University educational careers, candidates will be challenged to develop expertise in content as well as in the understanding and application of theories of development, behavior, learning, instruction and assessment. They will demonstrate their ability to apply these skills in a multitude of settings with candidates from diverse backgrounds who possess varying degrees of skills and strengths. Nurtured by effective supervision and collaborative relationships with practicing educators, candidates should and will experience a variety of opportunities to explore, practice, enhance, perfect, and reflect on the skills expected in their roles as professional educators.

The Department’s faculty will act as catalysts who model effective instructional practices and exemplary professional ethics. Faculty who are active learners in their own fields will model a quest for learning and growth to candidates, colleagues, and the broader community.

Collectively and collaboratively the faculty of the Department of Education will strive to move pre-service educators along a developmental continuum towards their emergence as individuals who are thoughtful and self-directed. The faculty prepares P-12 educators who will impact and inspire candidates, and contribute to the enhancement of learning of all candidates. The Department endeavors to develop educators who will advocate for social justice, manage and embrace far reaching societal changes, be recognized as educational leaders, and who will rise to the many opportunities and challenges posed in today’s and tomorrow’s world.

The Department of Education Conceptual Framework
(See Appendix A for the comprehensive Conceptual Framework)

I. Knowledge of Self as an Individual

• Communication Skills
• Commitment to Wellness
• Projection of Self
• Development of Self
• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of Self as an Individual

II. Knowledge of Content

• Subject Matter Fluency
• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of Content

III. Knowledge of the Learner

• Developmental Needs
• Student Diversity
• Guiding Student Behavior
• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of the Learner

IV. Knowledge of Pedagogy

• Planning
• Implementation
• Assessment
• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of Pedagogy

V. Knowledge of Self as an Educator and Partner in a Learning Community

• Home and Community Involvement
• Interpersonal/School/Community Based Relations
• Collaboration
• Application of Research
• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of Self as an Educator and Partner in a Learning Community

VI. Knowledge of Spiritual and Professional Self

• Dispositions of Educators to be Developed and Modeled Relative to Knowledge of Spiritual and Professional Self

Evidence of the Conceptual Framework

Shared Vision
Faculty, candidates, and P-12 educators collaboratively designed the Conceptual Framework of the Department in its initial conception. As noted above in the Timeline (Table CF.1), the evolvement of the shared vision was accomplished with the participation and endorsement of all constituencies, including the Department and Arts and Science Faculty, graduate and undergraduate candidates, and professional educators from the community. Official sanction was given from the Teacher Education Committee, the Teacher Education Advisory Council, and the University President and Vice-President for Academic Affairs. The 2002 Conceptual Framework informed the redesign of education programs and the submission of these programs to the Indiana Professional Standards Board in 2002.
 

Coherence
For two years, the faculty has been involved in a comprehensive process to ensure consistency and cohesiveness within and across programs. The Program Alignment Matrix, the Course Linkage Charts (examples of each are provided in Appendix E and F), field evaluations, and portfolio assessments substantiate that there is coherence among and between state defined proficiencies and the Department’s goals in the realms of curriculum, instruction, field experiences and clinical practice, assessment of candidate competencies, and program design and evaluation.
 

Professional Commitments and Dispositions
The Conceptual Framework delineates professional commitments to knowledge, instructional competence and student learning. The Conceptual Framework is grounded in professional education theory and practice, and reflects the University’s Mission and Core Values. It is performance-assessed and concisely identifies the dispositions expected of pre-service and practicing educators as well as professional education faculty.  
 

Commitment to Diversity
Guided by the Theme, “Educators facilitating and advancing learning in a diverse, ever-changing society,” the Department is committed to the preparation of candidates who support the total development of all students. This commitment is substantiated by curricular design, instructional methods and events, diverse field placements, co-curricular opportunities, such as service learning, and through diagnostic, assessment and evaluation processes, which include the portfolio.
 

Commitment to Technology
The Department’s commitment to technology is evidenced by its goal of preparing educators to use technology as a tool that will enhance the instructional process. Commitment to technology is evidenced in facility upgrade, the availability and use of technology in the campus classroom, and the training of faculty in BLACKBOARD, Jenzabar Registration Module, electronic UAS and ICAN (Individual Curricular Assessment Notebook).
Candidate Proficiencies Aligned With Professional and State Standards

In order to ensure excellence in the preparation of its candidates, the Conceptual Framework has been fully aligned with national and state standards. The Department is committed to the preparation of teachers and counselors who display superior abilities and characteristics. In addition to accomplishing performances delineated in the Conceptual Framework, candidates engaged in advanced programs are expected to:

1. Know the content of their disciplines, including their central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures.
2. Meet professional standards for the subjects they plan to teach.
3. Demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to provide learning opportunities supporting candidates’ development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.
4. Create learning environments encouraging positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
5. Foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom.
6. Plan instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students’ academic achievement as well as their social and physical development and uses the results to maximize students’ motivation and learning.
7. Reflect on and continually evaluate the effects of choices and actions on others and actively seek out opportunities to grow professionally.
8. Foster relationships with school colleagues, parents and families, and agencies in the larger community to support students’ learning and well- being.
9. Understand learning with a sound professional base as well as from the context of schools, families, and communities.
10. Understand and be able to apply knowledge related to the social, historical, and philosophical foundations of education, professional ethics, law and policy.
11. Know the ways children and adolescents learn and develop including their cognitive and affective development and the relationship of those to learning.
12. Understand language acquisition, cultural influences on learning; exceptionalities; diversity of student populations, families, and communities; and inclusion and equity in classrooms and schools.
13. Integrate, appropriately and effectively, technology and information literacy in instruction to support student learning.
14. Understand the importance of using research in teaching and other professional roles.
15. Know the roles and responsibilities of the educational profession.
16. Develop and model dispositions that are expected of educators (Adapted from NCATE Professional Standards 2002 Edition, p. 18).

The alignment charts located in Appendix B and C illustrate the alignment of the Department’s Conceptual Framework with state and national standards. Appendix B, Table CF.2 demonstrates the alignment of the Framework with the Indiana Professional Standards Board Developmental Standards along with the INTASC Standards. Table Appendix C, CF.3 demonstrates the alignment of the Framework, Departmental endeavors to support the Framework, NCATE Standards, NBPTS Standards, and the INTASC Standards. This chart illustrates the correlation between the University of Saint Francis’ Conceptual Framework, the developmental standards as delineated by the Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB), and the standards as set forth by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC).

Summary – Impact of Conceptual Framework on the Preparation of Educators
The Conceptual Framework has influenced and given direction to all program components. Candidates and faculty alike are given multiple opportunities to demonstrate and reflect upon their advancement toward excellence in the profession as, “Educators facilitating and advancing learning in a diverse, ever-changing society.”

The Conceptual Framework has had a significant impact on curricula, courses and experiences within programs at the University. Collaborative efforts from University and community constituents have identified the essential elements of preparation which have been integrated into the Conceptual Framework. The Department firmly believes that four components identified in the Conceptual Framework are critical to the development of quality educators:

1. Common Theme of Excellence. The Conceptual Framework is well articulated and evident in and across undergraduate and graduate programs for both initial and advanced licensing and between the Arts and Science and Education.
2. Strong Core Program. Assurance is given that candidates receive a strong foundation of essential and current knowledge of content, technology, human growth and development patterns, including knowledge of how today’s student best learns. Additionally, candidates receive experiences in the design of effective learning environments to assure optimal learning conditions for all schoolchildren and youth. High expectations are held for all candidates in their ongoing development of crucial and critical knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
3. Comprehensive Field Experiences. Diverse experiences in collaboration with community schools and institutions are a vital component of each program within the Department of Education. Candidates develop skill and expertise as teachers and counselors in both on-campus and field based experiences. Through those experiences, candidates interact with student populations from diverse cultural, linguistic, emotional, economic, and academic backgrounds. Candidates are monitored, supported and mentored by faculty throughout their experiences. By means of partnerships developed with educational institutions and through a variety of service-learning endeavors, candidates develop their capacities, strengthen values, and involve themselves in service for the common good.
4. Standards of Good Practice. Candidates as members of learning communities develop clear understandings of self expectations and the expectations for students. These expectations are delineated in the form of standards by the University, by the Department within the Conceptual Framework, by INTASC, NCATE, NBPTS, and by the Indiana Professional Standards Board. All standards and specified performances are well defined, demonstrated, monitored, and assessed by candidates themselves, by a faculty committed to excellence in Teacher Education, and with shared responsibility and support from professional educators and counselors in the community. All standards and specified knowledge, dispositions, and performances are well defined.

References

American Council on Education (1999). To touch the future: Transforming the way teachers are taught. Washington, D.C.

Blackwell, P.J. (2003). Student learning: Education’s field of dreams. Phi Delta Kappan, 84 (5), January, pp 362-367.

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. Carnegie Foundation, NJ: Carnegie Foundation.

Carter, G.R. (2002). Is it good for the kids? Content knowledge without pedagogy shortchanges students. http://www.ascd.org/educationnews/kids082002.html.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Reinventing our schools: A conversation with Linda Darling-Hammond. http://www.ed.psu.edu/insys/ESD/darling/PromPrac.html.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1994, September). Will 21st century schools really be different? The Education Digest, 60, 4-8.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston, D.C: Health.

Dottin, E.S. (2001). The development of a conceptual framework: The stimulation for coherence and continuous improvement in Teacher Education. New York: University Press of America.

DuFour, R. and Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work; Best practices for enhancing student achievement (pp. 58). Best Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Education Commission of the States (2002). In pursuit of teaching quality; Five key strategies for policy makers. Denver, CO.

Fullan, M. (1993). Changing forces: Probing the depths of educational reform (pp.13). London: The Falmer Press.

INTIME (2002). Integrating new technologies into the methods of education teacher’s in-depth content knowledge. http://www.intime.uni.
 

Schulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching; foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1-22.

Schulman, L. (1986). Those who understand; Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.

Schulman, L. (1992 September-October). Ways of seeing, ways of knowing, ways of teaching, ways of learning about teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, 393-396.