The CAEP Standards and Research on Educator Preparation Programs: Linking Clinical Partnerships with Program Impact

Autor/inn/en	Heafner, Tina; McIntyre, Ellen; Spooner, Melba
Titel	The CAEP Standards and Research on Educator Preparation Programs: Linking Clinical Partnerships with Program Impact
Quelle	In: Peabody Journal of Education, 89 (2014) 4, S.516-532 (17 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0161-956X
DOI	10.1080/0161956X.2014.938998
Schlagwörter	Standards; Teacher Education Programs; Educational Research; Program Effectiveness; Partnerships in Education; Program Evaluation; Formative Evaluation; Summative Evaluation; Models; Decision Making; Program Design; Secondary Education; Professional Development Schools; Tutoring; Social Studies; Preservice Teachers; Student Teacher Supervisors; Teacher Educators; High School Students + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Standard; Bildungsforschung; Pädagogische Forschung; Hochschulpartnerschaft; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Analogiemodell; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Programme design; Programmaufbau; Programmplanung; Sekundarbereich; Förderkonzept; Nachhilfeunterricht; Gemeinschaftskunde; Teacher education; Education; Lehrerausbildung; Lehrerbildung; High school; High schools; Student; Students; Oberschule; Schüler; Schülerin; Studentin
Abstract	Responding to the challenge of more rigorous and outcome-oriented program evaluation criteria of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), authors take a critical look at the intersection of two standards: Clinical Partnerships and Practice (Standard 2) and Program Impact (Standard 4). Illustrating one aspect of a secondary education teacher preparation program, authors consider how clinical partnerships can be designed in light of these standards to have a positive impact on P-12 student learning. Focusing on the program evaluation framework, authors describe a spectrum of diverse formative and summative growth measures that document the scope of impact for all stakeholders, including students. In light of the Feuer, Floden, Chudowsky, and Ahn (2013) questioning framework, authors assess program outcomes. In closing, the authors (a) conclude that comprehensive evaluation models are needed to document complex outcomes, which will make program impact more visible and measureable; (b) recommend using the Feuer et al. decision-making framework to initiate and guide programmatic design and evaluation model development; and (c) affirm CAEP's expectations--clinical partnerships go beyond positive relationships, coselection of mentor teachers and candidates, and commitment to diverse settings to ensuring P-12 student achievement--as attainable goals for educator preparation accreditation. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10