3 / 11
24
Debates between content and pedagogy are ongoing between COE and college of arts and
sciences faculty who partner in preparing secondary education teachers (Brantley-Dias,
Calandra, Harmon, & Shoffner, 2006). Requirements for completing teaching degrees in
elementary and secondary education often vary in the amount and types of coursework and
clinical experience. These departmental divides create disconnect between theory and practice
(Darling-Hammond, 2006a). Studies illustrate that secondary education content majors have
lower in-service retention rates than those who graduate with elementary education degrees
(Scherff & Hahs-Vaughn, 2008), leading to a belief that secondary education majors need more
understanding of teaching and learning prior to entering the profession.
Opportunities for preservice teachers to apply theory in practice through field experience
and student teaching is also noted as problematic (Boyd et al., 2007; Zeichner, 2010). Working
with students considered diverse can alleviate assumptions preservice teachers hold and develop
confidence in their skills in working with students who are unlike themselves (Gomez, Strage,
Knutson-Miller, & Garcia-Nevarez, 2009). Increased hours in the field must also be
accompanied by opportunities to interact with all types of students to develop necessary
dispositions as well as knowledge and skills in areas such as assessment, collaboration, and
intervention planning (Darling-Hammond, 2006a). Hours spent in the field are another area of
disparity between secondary and elementary teacher preparation programs. When compared to
elementary education majors, secondary content majors experience less field experience
requirements (Blackwell, 2002). Blackwell (2002) suggests an increase in hours of structured
field experience for secondary majors, embedded in content pedagogy and/or through content
courses.
Amidst the aforementioned concerns in teacher preparation are problems in evaluating
the degree in which preparation impacts teacher outcomes. Citing an exhaustive review on
teacher education efficacy, prior to their own study on preparation pathways, Good, et al. (2006),
concluded, “Very little is known about if and how teacher education affects practice” (p. 411).
Though some universities use exit interviews and post-graduation surveys to attain useful data of
graduate perceptions and, at times, career outcomes, such measures can be misleading if certain
variables are not considered in the data collection and/or analysis process. Colleges of Education
(COEs) may miss valuable insight if information is neglected regarding candidate entry skills,
background, and in-service demographics. Paying attention to alumni perceptions of preservice
training and post-graduation outcomes provides insight to those seeking to impact teacher
retention and student achievement. Some COEs addressing teacher preparation concerns report
positive results in retaining early career teachers by revamping programs, emphasizing culturally
responsive teaching practices (Brayton, 2008). Though few in number, such studies are
promising and warrant consideration (Darling-Hammond, 2010).
To better understand why an early career teacher leaves the profession requires
examination of the individual’s past, present, and future. After teachers spend time fully
employed in the classroom, reflection on preservice training and in-service experiences, as well
as intention of career longevity, could provide insight to COEs focused on preparing competent
teachers who meet the needs of all students, including those from diverse backgrounds. As
important as it is to heed input from those employed as teachers, the voices of those leaving
teaching within the induction period and those not entering the profession at all could also be
revealing.