Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 195
PART V
Teacher Preparation
OCR for page 196
OCR for page 197
Biology Teacher Education
Panacea or Pitfall
.
JANE BUTLER KAHLE
Recent reports of international and national assessments of science
education (IEA, 1988; Humrich, 1988; Rothman, 1988) tell the same old
tale: most of our students are inadequately prepared to do science, to solve
science-related problems, or to resolve science-related social issues. For
example, results of the second International Association for the Evaluation
of Educational Achievement (IEA) science study show that, compared with
the science achievement levels of their peers in other countries, our fifth-
graders rank eighth of 15, our ninth-graders rank fifteenth of 16, and our
advanced students who have had 2 years of biology rank last in a field of
14. Increasingly, we are educating citizens who are scientifically illiterate.
Education in biology, among the sciences, is in a key and pivotal position
to alleviate the current situation key, because it is the only science studied
by the vast majority of our students, and pivotal, because study of biology
may provide the motivation, stimulation, skills, and interest that encourage
a child to elect optional science courses, such as those in chemistry and
physics. Therefore, biology teacher education may be the panacea or the
pitfall as we attempt to reform science education in our schools. My
remarks are intended to provide an overview of the current situation so
that we can formulate directions for change.
Jane Butler Kahle is Condit Professor of Science Education at Miami University and a former
president of the National Association of Biology Teachers. She has published numerous articles
on teaching secondary-school science and on women and minorities in science education.
197
OCR for page 198
198
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
The education of biology teachers is usually a two-part process: pre-
service (or undergraduate) education and in-service (or postgraduate) ed-
ucation. In the United States and most other countries, the preservice
education of biology teachers consists of two components: general under-
graduate education and specific professional training. The undergraduate
biology and related science education of prospective American teachers
varies greatly, depending on the type of institution they attend. For exam-
ple, at most liberal arts colleges, prospective biology teachers complete the
same courses as do all biology majors. In colleges specializing in teacher
training, the content courses may be special ones that are directed toward
specific teacher licensing requirements. The type of biology background
received at large universities varies according to the structure of the uni-
versity; that is, biology courses for teachers may be taught under the aegis
of the college of education or of the college of arts and sciences. Both
the type of course and the level of competition may be radically different,
depending on the organization of the teacher education program within
the university. Furthermore, biology teachers may be certified by religious
colleges and universities that do not recognize or teach evolution as the
unifying theme of biology.
While the median required number of hours in biology for teacher
certification in the United States is 24, 21% of biology classes are taught
by teachers who have had less than 18 hours in undergraduate biology
classes (Helgeson et al., 1977~. Generally, undergraduate courses taken
by preservice biology teachers are the same courses taken by students
preparing for professional or graduate schools. Large, impersonal lecture
courses with structured laboratories are the most common format, and
prospective teachers have few opportunities to participate in long-range
laboratory inquiries, to lead fruitful discussions, or to ask and respond to
penetrating questions. The infrequent use of creative inquiry teaching in
biology classrooms may be related to the fact that teachers rarely experience
it in their college preparation. Currently, the education of biology teachers
is considered by many to be a pitfall.
About 4 years ago, many professional societies and accreditation groups
examined the teacher education process in general and recommended
sweeping changes. Generally, the reform movement has focused on higher
standards of admission to teacher education programs. Although the situa-
tion is not as drastic in biology, generally prospective teachers have verbal
and quantitative Scholastic Aptitude Just scores 32 and 48 points, respec-
tively, below the scores of students choosing other careers. And the bright
students who indicate an interest in teaching are routinely discouraged from
it by professors of biology. In addition, an academic major in biology and a
subsequent professional internship are recommended. Teacher assessment,
including success on the national teacher examination, is another focus of
the reform movement.
OCR for page 199
BIOLOGY TEACHER EDUCATION
199
OCR for page 200
200
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
responsibility with increased competence (Darling-Hammond, 1984~. The
other views teaching as an art, which any educated person can practice. We
need to provide perspective and suggestions as we strive for ways th make
biology teacher education a model for science education.
REFERENCES
AACl ~ (American Association of Colleges for leacher Education). 1986. AACTE
Directory 198~1987. Washington, D.C.: AACl~.
Backman, C. 1986. Positions on Current Issues in Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.:
Teacher Education Council of State Colleges and Universities.
Daniels, L 1988. More minority teachem may quit. New York limes, October 7:B12.
Darling-Hammond, L. 1984. Beyond the Commission Reports. Series R-3177RC. Santa
Monica, Calif.: The Rand Corporation.
Helgeson, S. L., P. E. Blooser, and R. W. Howe, Eds. 1977. The Status of Precollege
Science, Mathematics, and Social Science Education: 1955-1975. Volumes I, II7 and
III. SE 78-73. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Humrich, I. 1988. Sex Differences in the Second IEA Science Study: U.S. Results in an
International Context. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in
Science Teaching, Lake of the Ozarks, April 10-13.
IEA (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement). 1988.
Science Achievement in Seventeen Countries: A Preliminary Report. New York:
Pergamon Press.
Olson, Lo 1986. Indiana University's status in Holmes group uncertain. Educ. Week
November 26.
Rothman, R. C. 1988. Science: Achievement levels on test "distressingly low." Educ. Week
September 28.
Warren, W. J. 1988. Alternative certificates: New paths to teaching. New York Times,
September 28:B10.
OCR for page 201
Professional Teachers for
High-Schoo} Biology
ALPHONSE BUCCINO
A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE
Programs for the education of teachers must be designed with a vision
of the results they are to achieve. I propose that our model program aspire
to a vision of a master teacher, which is a status achieved as a result
of a significant developmental process that extends over some period and
encompasses preservice preparation and subsequent professional practice
coupled with continuing professional development involving formal study.
This perspective suggests that we must be concerned not only with
what teachers should know and be able to do, but also with the context
in which they must practice their profession. Thus, as we move forward
with the design and improvement of our programs for the preparation and
continuing professional development of teachers, we should note that all
current proposals, including those of the Holmes Group (1986) and the
Disk Force on Caching as a Profession (1986), address twin goals: to
reform teacher education and to reform the teaching profession. Inclusion
of the latter goal indicates recognition that the quality of teaching in our
schools depends on several factors in addition to the intrinsic quality of
teacher preparation programs in our universities.
Alphonse Buccino is dean of the University of Georgia's College of Education and professor of
mathematics education. Before being named education dean, in April 1984, Dr. Buccino served
in several professional positions in science and engineering education at the National Science
Foundation. He received undergraduate and doctoral degrees from the University of Chicago.
201
OCR for page 202
202
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
This paper further extends the twin goals by separating each into
two others: teacher preparation programs comprise content and peda-
gogy, while the profession is affected by certification and influences on
professional identity. This paper emphasizes two of these four elements:
pedagogy and professional identity, especially as the latter is or was affected
by the National Science Foundation (Nap) teacher institutes. However, for
completeness of the perspective indicated here, remarks are presented
about content and certification.
CERTIFICATION
"Teacher certification" is the name given the licensing of teachers. A
license to teach is required by each of the 50 states, although the criteria and
standards for certification (licensure) may vary from state to state. Because
certification in all states requires higher education on the part of candidates,
the degree programs of colleges and universities strongly influence teacher
certification criteria and standards. However, certification also responds to
the perceived supply of and demand for teachers and to hiring practices
and needs. School managers (i.e., principals, superintendents, and their
designees, who are a powerful force as an informal lobby) want as much
flexibility as the managers of any organization. They want less regulation,
rather than more.
As a result, one sees a tension between the generalist approach and
the specialist approach to teacher preparation and certification. The trend
nationally in all states is to certify generalist science teachers-despite the
efforts of professional organizations, such as the National Science Teachers
Association (NSTA) and the National Association of Biology Teachers
(NABT), to develop standards for teachers who will specialize. In Georgia,
for example, certifying biology, physics, chemistry, or earth science specialist
teachers is possible, but the certification of the generalist science teacher
for all four subject areas is not only possible, but preferred by school
officials for reasons cited earlier. In fact, the generalist certification is
the more prevalent route for science teachers in Georgia and elsewhere.
However, there is no degree program in the university preparing the
generalist teacher, who is so certified by a special review by the state
department of education of his or her course record.
Another aspect of certification that should be mentioned is what I call
the "back door." Teaching is the one profession where quantity consider-
ations tend to take precedence over quality. 1b avoid the phenomenon of
the empty classroom, all but two of the 50 states have mechanisms that
provide substandard, limited, or emergency licenses to persons lacking the
qualifications for full professional certification. Clearly, these back-door
devices can lower the quality of persons who actually teach in the schools,
OCR for page 203
PROFESSIONAL TEACHERS FOR HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
203
independently of the quality of teacher preparation programs in colleges
and universities.
TEACHER KNOWLEDGE: CONTENT
Aside from the impact of certification standards on the content knowl-
edge of those actually teaching biology in the nation's classrooms, there are
other factors to consider. To begin with, the responsibility for content in
the preparation of biology teachers (in terms of both the major in biology
and the content courses that are part of general education) lies outside
the jurisdiction of the school or college of education, which generally has
the primary responsibility for teacher preparation. There is much room
for improvement in the colleges of arts and sciences of our universities as
regards their part of teacher education. Unintegrated programs in general
education, excessively narrow subject-area majors (depth of subject without
breadth of subject), and poor teaching role models abound. Moreover, the
school or college of education needs to have some impact and oversight,
which it may not now have, regarding the content experiences of future
teachers.
The content knowledge required for biology teaching is set forth in
many places, notably the aforementioned NSTA and NAB T standards.
As Shulman (1986) points out, the teacher's knowledge must go beyond
concepts and facts of a domain to an understanding of the structures of a
subject. For example, the biology teacher must understand that there are
a variety of ways of organizing the discipline, as is reflected by the yellow,
green, and blue versions of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study texts.
In addition to these considerations, the content base for biology teach-
ing is especially complex, owing to four factors. First is the need to
include basic mathematics, chemistry, physics, and earth and environmen-
tal sciences in the program. Students majoring in other subjects are less
dependent on the study of other disciplines. Second, biology is at the in-
terface between natural science and social science. This requires successful
teachers to have sophisticated knowledge of both. Third, there is pressure
to include medicine in biology education. Fourth, the controversial and
so-called science-technology-society issues are prominent in biology, such
as the ethical issues and societal problems associated with such phenomena
as in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering, and AIDS.
TEACHER KNOWLEDGE: PEDAGOGY
Pedagogical Knowledge of Teaching
Not long ago, a legislator asked me whether I might provide him
with some pointers and techniques for dealing with a class of fourth
OCR for page 204
204
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
graders that he was scheduled to visit With the help of facula members
in our college of-education, we produced a page or so of notes that
included such items as the following: fourth-graders have short attention
spans, so keep the interactions on a given topic brief; children of this age
are beginning to develop a sense of independence, but still have some
dependence characteristics, so they like being treated like "big" boys and
girls; and they love presents. The legislator followed the advice we gave
him, remembering also to bring a little gift for each student. He credited
the information we provided with the enormous success he later reported
of the visit.
The kind of information we provided the legislator might be called
"pedagogical knowledge of teaching" what Shulman (1986) refers to as
"generic principles of classroom organization and management and the
like." It is widely agreed that such knowledge is essential for effective
teaching and must be included in successful teacher preparation programs.
Moreover, this kind of knowledge is commonly recognized as the responsi-
bility of the school, college, or department of education- in contrast with
subject-matter content, which falls in the jurisdiction of the arts and sciences
components. Without meaning to minimize or diminish the importance of
this kind of knowledge on the part of teachers, I do want to emphasize
another kind of pedagogical knowledge.
Pedagogical Knowledge of Content
This other kind of pedagogical knowledge focuses on the question:
What does one need to know about a subject in order to teach it? Great
teachers from the beginning of history-have known that a special kind
of knowledge is associated with teaching a specific subject. Scientists,
especially, often speak of their desire to help students to grasp the power
and beauty of science, quite beyond facts and concepts. We owe a lot
to Shulman (1986) for successfully and pointedly calling our attention to
pedagogical knowledge of content as a fundamentally important element
of teaching and teacher preparation:
for the most regularly taught topics in one's subject area, the most useful
forms of representation of those ideas, the most powerful analogies, illustrations,
examples, explanations, and demonstrations in a word, the ways of representing
and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others. Since there
are no single most powerful forms of representation, the teacher must have at
hand a veritable armamentarium of alternative forms of representation, some of
which derive from research whereas others originate in the wisdom of practice.
Pedagogical content knowledge also includes an understanding of what makes the
learning of specific topics easy or difficult: the conceptions and preconceptions
that students of different ages and backgrounds bring with them to the learning
of those most frequently taught topics and lessons. If these preconceptions
are misconceptions, which they so often are, teachers need knowledge of the
OCR for page 205
PROFESSIONAL TEACHERS FOR HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
205
strategies most likely to be fruitful in reorganizing the understanding of learners,
because those learners are unlikely to appear before them as blank slates.
This kind of knowledge is a special form of content knowledge and
is, therefore, subject-specific. Once it is identified, it is immediately clear
that pedagogical knowledge of content is quite important for teachers and,
consequently. should have a central role in teacher Preparation. Unfor
1 J ' ~ 1
Innately, the opposite seems to be the case. By opposite l mean teat,
despite the preoccupation with subject matter in current concerns about
education, and despite the evident significance of pedagogical knowledge
of content for the teaching and learning of subject matter, the emphasis in
teacher education is on the generic, and not the subject-specific.
For one thing, it is not clear whether primary responsibility for peda-
gogical knowledge of content in university teacher education programs lies
in the college of arts and sciences or in the school or college of education.
Both education and arts and sciences have a role, but the degree of em-
phasis may differ. On the arts and sciences side, this kind of knowledge
is often recognized. The physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, in his invited
address to the American Psychological Association (Oppenheimer, 1956),
discussed the role of analogy in the development of knowledge in physics.
He described five examples of the use of analogy in atomic physics to
illustrate his argument that "analogy is indeed an indispensable tool for
science."
If analogy is essential for the creation of new knowledge in science, it
surely is essential for the teaching and learning of it. Unfortunately,, the
use of analogy in this regard is of uneven effectiveness. Glynn et al. (1989)
studied the use of analogies in high-school physics textbooks. They found
that, while all texts used analogies, the use in some instances was much
more effective in pedagogical terms than in others.
On the school or college of education side, Shulman (1986) points out
that research paradigms on the study of teaching are characterized by the
omission of one central aspect of classroom life: the subject matter. In fact,
Shulman and his colleagues refer to the absence of focus on subject matter
among the various research paradigms for the study of teaching as the
"missing paradigm" problem. Thus, a premier issue in teacher education
today is subject-specific versus generic pedagogical knowledge of content.
For teacher education, the missing research paradigm translates into an
imperative to integrate content and pedagogy.
Unfortunately, as indicated earlier, the trend is in the opposite direc-
tion. There are two forces I would describe as spurious that are driving
schools and colleges of education to the generic at the expense of the
subject-specific. First and foremost is size and efficiency. Many teacher ed-
ucation programs are so small that they cannot afford to distinguish science
from mathematics, or even distinguish science from the humanities, such as
OCR for page 232
232
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
use of elbowroom management tech-
niques when teaching laboratory
activities, leading As discussions,
conducting field trips, and carrying
out dally Groom instruction in
science
P=para~don i" Rematch Skmn
The program should prepare pre-
service teachers to conduct or apply,
wKielstar~ and interpret science edu-
cation Arch and to communicate
information about such Ash to
others (ego students, teachers and
parents k
Satotsr In Relend Tcachlug
The program should require expe-
riences that develop the ability to
identify, establish, and maintain the
highest level of safety In classrooms,
stockrooms, laboratories. and other
areas used for science instruction.
Other Educational Experiences
Courses in other educational areas
including general curricula and
methods, educational psychology,
foundations and the special needs of
exceptional students, should be a part
of the program in order to comple-
ment the science education comply
nents described above
m Classroom E~penence
FIeld experience
Field experiences in secondary
school science eln~crooms are essen-
ffal for the thorough preparation of
preservice teachers of science. The
field experience of preservice teachers
should begin early with an emphasis
on observation. participation, and
tutoring, and should progress from
small to large group instruction.
Ihe Student Taming E~cricnce
The student teaching e~cpenence
should be full-time for a minimum of
10 weelcs The pram should require
student teaching at more than one
educational level (such as~unior high
school experience combined with that
of worldng in the high school) or in
more than one area of science (i.e.,
biology and chemistry) if certification
is sought in more than one area The
program should give prospective
teachers experience with a full range
of in-school activities and respon-
sibilities.
Day-to-day supervision of the stu-
dent teacher should be done by an
experienced, master science teacheris).
University supervision should be pro-
vided by a person having significant
secondary school science teaching
experience Responsibility for working
with student teachers should be given
only to highly quallfled. committed
individuals, and close and continuing
cooperation between school and uni-
versity is imperative.
IV. Supportive Preparation
in Mathem-`des,
stamps, ~d
Computer Use
The prog~n should require com-
petencies in
· mathematics as specified for each
discipline;
· scientific and educational use and
interpretation of statistics; and
· computer applications to science
teaching, emphasizing computer tools
such as: (a) computation, (b) inter-
facing with lab experiences and
equipment, (c) processing informa-
tion, (d) testing and creating models,
and (e) describing processes, proce-
dures, and algorithms.
NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION.
1742 CONNECTICUT AVENUE N.W.. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009
OCR for page 233
STANDARDS FOR BIOLOGY TEACHERS
Standards for Each Secondary Discipline
Biology
I. Me program in biology should re
quire broad study and emergences
with living organisms. These studies
should include use of experimental
methods of Inquiry in the laboratory
and field and applications of biology
to technology and society.
{L Me program would require a mini-
mum of 32 semester hours of study in
biology to include at least the equiva-
lent of thme semester hours In each of
the following: zoology, botany. ph:,siol-
ogy, gerKtics' ecology, mlerobiology. cell
biology/biochemistry, and evolution;
interrelationships among these areas
should be emphasized throughout.
III. The program should require a
minimum of 16 semester hours of
study in chemistry, physics, and earth
science emphasizing their relation-
ships to biology.
IV. The program should require the
study of mathematics, at lent to the
pre calculus level.
V. The program of study for preser-
vice biology teachers should provide
opportunities for studying the tnter-
action of biology and technology and
the ethical and human Implications
of such developments as genetic
screening and engineering. cdoning,
and human organ t~nsplantaffor~
VI. bile program should require ex-
periences in desigrdng developers and
evaluating laboratory and field in-
structional activities, and in using
special slcills and techniques with
equipment, facilities. and specimens
that support and enhance curricula
and Instruction In biology.
NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOeCLATION,
1742 CONNECTICUT AVENUE. N.W.. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009
233
OCR for page 234
26
Current Issues in Biology Education
for Teachers
EXYIE C. RYDER
Biology education currently faces several critical issues, particularly in
the area of teacher preparation. Like other programs in education, biology
education will most probably be affected by recent calls for reform in
the teaching profession by the Holmes Group, the Carnegie Disk Force on
Caching as a Profession, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher
Education (NCATE), the National Science Board, and others.
It is the purpose of this paper to discuss two current major issues in
biology education for teachers. The first is the biology-content component
within the undergraduate teacher-education curriculum, and the second is
the Holmes Group report and its potential effects on the recruitment of
teachers from minority groups.
THE BIOLOGY-CONTENT COMPONENT OF THE
TEACHER-EDUCATION CURRICULUM
The preparation of quality biology teachers must include a solid foun-
dation in biology content. Prescribed courses of study should provide
breadth of the basic concepts and principles on which the discipline of
biology is built, but must also concentrate on the depth of knowledge
Exyie C. Ryder is professor of biological sciences at Southern University in Louisiana. Her pri-
ma~y interest is in biological science education. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Michi-
gan.
234
OCR for page 235
ISSUES IN BIOLOGY EDUCATION FOR TEACHERS
235
available in the subject-matter field. For many years, the academic subject-
matter component of teacher-education programs has come under scrutiny;
however, recent outcries for improving the quality of teaching and the
teaching profession have raised new concerns over this issue. These reports
call for teachers to demonstrate competence in academic subjects and for
institutions of higher learning to "make the education of teachers more
intellectually solid" (Holmes Group, 1986~.
It has been stated by Cadenhead that teaching as an intellectual aceiv-
ity should include knowledge, linking content and methodology, and sen-
tences (Cadenhead, 1985~. This statement suggests that a quality teacher-
education program in biology should include courses in biology content,
scientific methods, general education, and liberal studies. There is no con-
sensus on the proportion of the curriculum or the number of credit hours
that should account for each of these four areas. Consequently, there are
wide variations in courses required in different curricula. A primary reason
for the inconsistencies is the fact that the teacher-education curricula are
usually developed around each state's unique certification requirements.
Since most states' requirements for certification lean heavily toward the
professional-education component, rather than the subject-matter compo-
nent, the result is that teacher-education programs tend to be long on
professional education, including pedagogy, and short on subject-matter
content. This condition has prompted critics of the teaching profession and
those involved in the current reform movement to recommend that prospec-
tive teachers earn a baccalaureate degree in their subject-matter area before
being allowed to enter a professional teacher-education program (Holmes
Group, 1986; Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy, 1986~.
It is important that a teacher thoroughly understand a subject in order
to teach it effectively. This idea is aptly expressed by Murray (1986), who
states:
The teacher's role is to find and present the most powerful and generative
ideas of a discipline in a way that preserves its integrity and leads to student
understanding. This implies that a teacher comprehends the structure of the
discipline, its key points and their origins, and the criteria by which one
distinguishes the important from the trivial. This kind of understanding, slighted
in traditional programs, is of fundamental importance to the teacher and must
have a central place in the teacher's education.
He further states that "the traditional major often does not confer a level
of understanding that empowers the teacher (or even the typical college
graduate) to understand" (Murray, 1986~.
Breadth and Depth of Content
Within the biology departments of colleges and universities, a prospec-
tive teacher of biology should acquire a thorough, up-to-date grasp of the
OCR for page 236
236
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
subject matter. This can be achieved by following a curriculum that provides
state-of-the-art content, state-of-the-art laboratory skills, and state-of-the-
art biological research techniques that are acquired only in a research
laboratory setting. The combined experiences offered the students in the
lecture, the laboratory, and the research environment will enable preservice
teachers to gain confidence in their ability to "do and perform the subject
matter, and not just talk about it" (Murray, 1986~.
Before any attempts to reform the subject-matter component of the
biology teacher-education program are made, several questions regarding
the nature of such changes must be asked. For example: Is it really
necessary, as some advocates feel, to earn a bachelor's degree in biology
before being admitted to a biology teaching program? Who should decide
what content and experiences within the biology department will be most
meaningful for students majoring in biology education? Should there be
increased breadth or increased depth in the coverage of the content? Who
should determine whether a teacher has acquired adequate mastery of the
discipline?
Ideally, the answers to these questions should be derived from the
collaborative efforts of the faculty in education and the faculty in the
biological sciences, for the responsibility for preparing high-school biology
teachers should be shared by the two groups. For too long, cooperation and
collaboration between the subject-matter faculty and the education faculty,
with respect to teacher training, have been minimal. What is needed now is
a biology faculty that is sensitive to the problems and needs of high-school
biology teachers, particularly since the high-school biology teachers prepare
the next generation of college biology majors.
The biology department faculty can contribute its subject-matter exper-
tise, its knowledge of the structure of the discipline, and its knowledge and
understanding of contemporary topics of research and investigation. The
biology faculty can also assist in the identification of a core of courses that
will provide the necessary breadth and depth of content in the biological
sciences and can recommend a sequence of advanced-level courses that
will expand prospective teachers' knowledge base and simultaneously offer
enough depth in biology to give the students a high degree of proficiency in
biology content and in laboratory skills and techniques. The biology faculty
should encourage biology-education majors to develop research skills as
an integral part of their training. This could easily be accomplished if the
faculty engaged in research projects would use education majors as research
assistants in the same way that they use noneducation science majors. In
summary, the biology departments must be more responsive to the needs
of teacher-education majors, and they must develop greater respect for the
role that high-school biology teachers play in preparing students to pursue
careers in biology, medicine, allied health, and related fields.
OCR for page 237
ISSUES IN BIOLOGY EDUCATION FOR TEACHERS
The "Content" Issue and the Curriculum
237
Since the present 4-year teacher-preparation curriculum is already
crowded, how can the content component of the program be strengthened?
Proponents of curriculum reforms in the teaching profession favor moving
teacher education to postbaccalaureate status and leaving the 4-year under-
graduate program for content specialization, general education, and liberal
studies. On the other hand, there are those who recommend reorganizing
the present 4-year baccalaureate teacher-education program, with a view
to eliminating the redundancy in professional-education courses, thereby
leaving space in the curriculum to augment the subject-matter area. Alan
~m, a proponent of redesigning the 4-year curriculum, argues against
establishing a postbaccalaureate professional school of education, for he
feels that doing so "tends to artificially separate the academic and the
professional aspects of teaching" (~m, 1986~.
In the revised NCATE-approved curriculum guidelines for biology
teacher-education programs, prepared by the National Science Teachers
Association (NSTA), it is recommended that high-school biology teachers
complete a minimum of 32 semester-hours in biology, with the neces-
sary support courses in other sciences, mathematics, and computer science
(NSTA, 1987~. The guidelines specify the biology courses that should be
included and point out that the approved curriculum gives the biology
teacher-education major the content "preparation equivalent to the bach-
elor's level" (NSTA, 1987~. The revised NCATE-approved guidelines for
high-school teachers are as follows:
II.
I. The program in biology should require broad study and experi
ences with living organisms. These studies should include use of
experimental methods of inquiry in the laboratory and field and
applications of biology to technology and society.
The program would require a minimum of 32 semester hours
of study in biology to include at least the equivalent of three
semester hours in each of the following: zoology, botany, physi
ology, genetics, ecology, microbiology, cell biology/biochemistry,
and evolution; interrelationships among these areas should be
emphasized throughout.
III. The program should require a minimum of 16 semester hours of
study in chemistry, physics, and earth science emphasizing their
relationships to biology.
IV. The program should require the study of mathematics, at least
to the precalculus level.
The program of study should provide opportunities for studying
the interaction of biology and technology and the ethical and
OCR for page 238
238
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
human implications of such developments as genetic screening
and engineering, cloning, and human organ transplantation.
VI. The program should require experiences in designing, develop-
ing, and evaluating laboratory and field instructional activities,
and in using special skills and techniques that support and en-
hance curricula and instruction in biology.
In concluding the discussion of the first major issue, I strongly suggest
that each institution that prepares biology teachers consider establishing
a biology teacher-education council consisting of faculty from precessional
education, science education, and the biological sciences. The council would
be responsible for periodically reviewing the biology teacher-education
curriculum to ensure a solid foundation in biology content.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE HOLMES GROUP REPORT ON THE
RECRUITMENT OF TEACHERS FROM MINORITY GROUPS
Overview of the Holmes Group Proposals
The Holmes Group report, Tomorrow's Teachers (Holmes Group,
1986), is one of several recent reports that propose major reforms in
teaching and in teacher preparation. Among the recommendations in the
report for improving the teaching profession are the following:
· 1b abolish the undergraduate-degree program in education and
institute a 5- or 6-year program of study as a prerequisite for certification,
licensing, and entry into the profession.
· 1b establish a three-tier system within the profession that would
identify and recognize differences in levels of knowledge, skills, and com-
mitment among teachers.
fession.
1b create standards of certification to monitor entry into the pro
There is widespread feeling among minority groups, and nonminority
groups as well, that the reform agenda, if implemented, would decrease
the number of minority-group members entering teaching and teacher-
education programs.
Implications of the Recommendations
The recommendations of the Holmes Group come at a time when
the teaching profession is becoming less and less attractive. For years,
women and minority-group members staffed the nation's classrooms when
opportunities for higher-paying, more attractive positions were unavailable
to them. Since many of the barriers to other occupations have been
OCR for page 239
ISSUES IN BIOLOGY EDUCATION FOR TEACHERS
239
removed, minority-group members and women are opting for careers other
than teaching.
The minority-group teaching force in the United States is dwindling-
ironically, at a time when the number of minority-group students in the
schools is increasing significantly. By the year 1990, members of minority
groups could constitute 30% of the American school population. According
to Shirley Malcom, of the Office of Opportunity in Science of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, blacks "are projected to
account for only 5 percent of the teaching force by 1990" (Jacobson,
1986~. Hispanics and members of other minority groups are expected to
account for approximately 3% of the teaching force (Haberman, 1988~.
It is estimated that the nation will need more than 200,000 new teachers
by the year 2000. Many of these teachers will be needed in the areas of
science and mathematics, where the shortage is predicted to be very acute.
The Holmes Group report recommends extending the period of study
for persons entering teacher-education programs. The impact of this rec-
ommendation on minority-group teacher recruitment would be devastating,
for lengthening the period of schooling would add substantially to the cost
of a college- education and could result in severe financial setbacks for most
minority-group students and their families. Clearly, the implementation of
a 5- or 6-year curriculum model would be a deterrent to many minority-
group students who might be contemplating teaching, and their reluctance
to commit themselves to a career that offers little financial reward is un-
derstandable. In short, the prolonged study period would severely hamper
the recruitment of minority-group members into the teaching profession.
On the other hand, the extended programs could be made attractive to
minority groups if assistance in the form of stipends, grants, fellowships,
scholarships, and loan-forgiveness programs were made available.
With teacher shortages at a crucial level and expected to rise contin-
uously, it could be argued that the diminishing pool of qualified teachers
could be offset if steps were taken to identify a larger body of prospective
teachers and provide the necessary academic and financial support for their
education and training. ~ the contrary, it is felt that reforms outlined
by the Holmes Group and other commissions will create a very narrow
pool of prospective teachers who can afford to elevate themselves (through
additional education and training) to the top of the profession.
The Holmes Group's recommendation regarding the establishment
of a three-tier system within the teaching profession is also expected to
have a negative impact on minority-group teacher recruitment. Minority
groups view with skepticism the career ladder with its built-in "hurdles" for
advancement. In particular, the vagueness of the phrasing in the report is
a matter of concern to many. For example, Beverly Gordon, in referring to
the Holmes Group recommendation '`to recognize differences in teachers'
OCR for page 240
240
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
knowledge, skills, and commitment in their education, certification, and
work," points out that minority groups must, in fact, be sure that the
so-called differences do not "translate into deficiencies" (Gordon, 1988~.
Another critic of the career-development proposal calls attention to the
fact that "race is a critical variable in any career development scheme"
(Oliver, 1988) and notes that the increased emphasis on examination, the
extended study period required, and the higher standards for certification
all tend to discourage minority-group members from entering the teaching
profession.
The Holmes Group also proposes the creation of standards of entry
into the teaching profession. While higher standards are desirable and
necessary, there is apprehension among minority groups with respect to the
standards that are to be created and how they will be applied. Over the
last few years, the nation has witnessed the effects of competence testing
on minority groups. The result has been the elimination of large numbers
of members of those groups from teaching and from entering the teaching
profession. An alarming example of the impact of extensive testing is that
which has occurred in Florida and 18 other states where testing is apparently
the primary reason for the reduction in the minority-group teaching force
since the early 1980s (Smith, 1988~.
It is estimated that if the Holmes Group proposal to create standards
of entry into the teaching profession is adopted and implemented on a
national level, 50-85% of minority-group members will be eliminated from
teaching. These-eliminations will occur through testing, assessment of
on-thejob performance, and other forms of evaluations, if the evaluation
instruments are developed and validated using the same procedures that
have been used previously and if minority groups are not involved in the
test development and validation processes (Smith, 1988~. Clearly, this trend
must be reversed, as ways are sought to attract and retain minority-group
teachers.
Minority-Group Teacher Recruitment: The Need and
Some Proposed Solutions
The most important reason why minority-group teachers must be re-
cruited is that they are needed in the classrooms as role models for
minority-group students. As cited previously, minority-group enrollment
in the schools is rapidly increasing, while the supply of minority-group
teachers is steadily declining. This situation has resulted in fewer role
models for minority-group students, who now account for more than 50%
of the enrollment in most of the largest school districts in the country and
who are expected to account for more than 38% of the school population in
OCR for page 241
ISSUES IN BIOLOGY EDUG4TION FOR TEACHERS
241
the United States by the year 2000. The presence of minority-group role
models is important, because they provide a psychological support system
in the schools for minority-group youth and because they are important in
the development of those students' self-esteem.
Minority-group teachers are needed in the schools for yet another
reason: they contribute to the diversity of the teaching profession. Diversity
is a factor that is valued in America's "melting pot," because it allows people
of various backgrounds and cultures to interact and learn to appreciate and
respect each other and their differences.
~ offset the potential effects of the Holmes Group recommendations
on the recruitment of minority-group teachers, I propose several solutions:
· Provide incentives to attract minority-group students into the teach-
ing profession. Monetary incentives such as scholarships, stipends, assis-
tantships, grants, fellowships, and loan-forgiveness programs would be
most desirable.
· Identify a pool of prospective, talented, minority-group teaching
candidates and involve them in an academic intervention program that will
enable them to enhance their academic skills and improve their test-taking
skills.
· Involve more minority-group institutions in the planning for the
reforms in teacher education.
· Involve minority groups in the construction and validation of
teacher-evaluation instruments.
· Raise the salaries of teachers.
The need for minority-group science teachers is as important as the
need for minority-group teachers in general, for minority-group science
teachers serve as scientist role models for minority-group students. There-
fore, efforts must be made to recruit minority-group members into science
teaching.
The recruitment of minority-group members into science teaching
must begin with attracting youth to the sciences and then attract them into
science teaching. This should be initiated as early as middle school and
junior high school, when minority-group youngsters should be encouraged
and challenged to enroll in science and mathematics courses beyond those
which are required for everyone. An early start will enable the students to
develop interest in the sciences and at the same time obtain the prerequisites
necessary for success in higher-level science courses.
I strongly suggest that the Holmes Group report and its potential
effects on minority-group teachers in general and minority-group science
teachers in particular be critically examined.
.
OCR for page 242
242
HIGH-SCHOOL BIOLOGY
REFERENCES
Cadenhead, K 1985. Is substantive change in teacher education possible? J. Teach. Educ.
36~4~:17-21.
Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. 1986. A Nation Prepared: Teachers for
the 21st Century. The Report of the Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. New
York: Carnegie Corp.
Gordon, B. 1988. Implicit assumptions of the Holmes and Carnegie reports: A view from
an African-American perspective. J. Neg. Educ. 57:141-158.
Haberman, M. 1988. Proposals for recruiting minority teachers: Promising practices and
attractive detours. J. Teach. Educ. 39~4~:38-41.
Holmes Group. 1986. Tomorrow's Teachers: A Report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing,
Mich.: Holmes Group, Inc.
Jacobson, R. 1986. Carnegie school-reform goals hailed: Achieving them called tall order.
Chron. High. Educ. 32:1-23.
Murray, F. B. 1986. Teacher education: Words of caution about popular reforms. Change
18:16-25.
NSTA (National Science Teachers Association). 1987. NCATE-Approved Curriculum
Guidelines for Biology Teacher Education Programs. Washington, D.C: NSTA.
Oliver, B. 1988. Structuring the teaching force: Gill minority teachers suffer? J. Neg.
Educ. 57:159-165.
Smith, G. P. 1988. Tomorrow's white teachers: A response to the Holmes Group. J. Neg.
Educ. 57:178-194.
Tom, A. 1986. The Case for Maintaining Teacher Education at the Undergraduate Level.
Paper prepared for the Coalition of Teacher Education Programs. St. Louis, Mo.:
Washington University.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
teacher education
