Abstract
The current policy stance in Australia which seeks to produce ‘classroom ready’ teachers requires that pre-service teachers (PSTs) be assessed against national professional standards that articulate minimum skills and knowledge required of beginning teachers. There is no mention within these standards of affective qualities (e.g. humour, passion, inspiration) or thinking dispositions (e.g. curiosity, reflection, creativity) that enable good teaching and professional learning and which capture the complexity that is inherent within good teaching. This study focuses on the research of a team of teacher educators in a regional Australian university who believe that a focus on dispositions is central to effective teacher education. They have embedded a ‘Dispositions for Teaching Framework’ within a Master of Teaching (Secondary) program to allow PSTs’ various thinking dispositions to be activated within carefully constructed professional learning contexts. The context in this study was a Classroom Intensive experience at a P-12 School in regional Victoria where PSTs participated in structured classroom observations over a two day period. The key research questions were: Did the Classroom Intensive experience activate the dispositions in the PSTs? Were some dispositions activated more than others? How could evidence be collected of these dispositions in action? A variety of research methods enabled a complex data-set to be collected. It was identified that the Classroom Intensive experience provided a rich professional learning context which activated all five of the thinking dispositions in the framework, and that these dispositions are not discrete but interconnect and rely upon each other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Argyris, C., & Schӧn, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Arnstine, D. (1967). Philosophy of education: Learning and schooling. New York: Harper & Row.
Barnett, R. (2000). University knowledge in an age of supercomplexity. Higher Education, 40, 409–422.
Barnett, R. (2007). A will to learn: Being a student in an age of uncertainty. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press and Society for Research into Higher Education.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). The unforgiving complexity of teaching: Avoiding simplicity in the age of accountability. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 3–5.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2000). Habits of mind: A developmental series. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Danielson, C. (2012). Observing classroom practice. Educational Leadership, 70(3), 32–37.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Modern Library.
Diez, M. (2007). Assessing dispositions: Context and questions. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 183–201). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Edwards, S., & Nuttall, J. (2015). Professional learning in pre-service and in-service teacher education: Contexts and issues. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 181–182.
Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Entwistle, N. (2012). The quality of learning at university: Integrative understanding and distinctive ways of thinking. In J. R. Kirby & M. J. Lawson (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning (pp. 15–31). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Entwistle, N. J., & McCune, V. (2009). The disposition to understand for oneself at university and beyond: Learning processes, the will to learn and sensitivity to context. In L. F. Zhang & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Perspectives on the nature of intellectual styles (pp. 29–62). New York: Springer.
Freeman, L. (2007). An overview of dispositions in teacher education. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 117–138). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Gannon, S. (2012). Changing lives and standardising teachers: The possibilities and limits of professional standards. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 11(3), 59–77.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Gore, J. (2015). Evidence of impact of teacher education programs: A focus on classroom observation. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.
Hoyt, K., & Terantino, J. (2015). Rethinking field observations: Strengthening teacher education through INFORM. Action in Teacher Education, 37(3), 209–222.
Kincheloe, J., & Berry, K. (2004). Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualizing the bricolage. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
McCrary Sullivan, A. S. (2000). Notes from a marine biologist’s daughter: On the art and science of attention. Harvard Educational Review, 70(2), 211–227.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2002). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges and departments of education. Washington, DC: NCATE.
O’Leary, M. (2014). Classroom observation: A guide to the effective observation of teaching and learning. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Perkins, D. N. (1995). Outsmarting IQ. New York: Free Press.
Perkins, D. N., & Ritchhart, R. (2004). When is good thinking? In D. Y. Dai & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 351–384). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pring, R. (2000). The ‘false dualism’ of educational research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 34(2), 247–260.
Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character: What it is, why it matters, and how to get it. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Riveros, A., Norris, S. P., Hayward, D. V., & Phillips, L. M. (2012). Dispositions and the quality of learning. In J. R. Kirby & M. J. Lawson (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning (pp. 32–50). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group. (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teachers. Canberra, Australia. http://www.studentsfirst.gov.au/teacher-education-ministerial-advisory-group. Accessed 15 Oct 2015.
Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. Berkshire, UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
Tishman, S. (1994). Thinking dispositions and intellectual character. Paper presented at the 1994 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Apr 4–8. New Orleans, LA.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by funds from the Faculty of Education and Arts Small Grants Scheme, Federation University Australia. The authors are grateful for this support and for the feedback from the reviewers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McGraw, A., McDonough, S., Wines, C., O’Loughlan, C. (2016). Activating Teaching Dispositions in Carefully Constructed Contexts: Examining the Impact of Classroom Intensives. In: Brandenburg, R., McDonough, S., Burke, J., White, S. (eds) Teacher Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0785-9_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0785-9_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0784-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0785-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)