Click for next page ( 196


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 195

OCR for page 195
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 195
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 195
BIOLOGY TEACHER EDUCATION 199

OCR for page 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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 195
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.