Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160373
Marilyn Cochran-Smith
This article is a rejoinder, some 20 years later, to a JTE editorial, titled “The Problem of Teacher Education.” The previous piece suggested that in response to unprecedented attention by high-level policy makers to “fixing” the “broken” system of teacher education, teacher education was treated as what I called a “policy problem” during the late 1990s and 2000s From this perspective, the goal was to identify which of the broad aspects of teacher education that could be controlled by policymakers was most likely to have a positive impact on teacher quality, defined primarily in terms of teachers’ effectiveness at producing a strong workforce for the new economy. In this new article, the author argues that now—during the 2020s—teacher education should be constructed as an “equity problem.” This means acknowledging that, despite many important and powerful multicultural and other initiatives over the last two decades, dominant educational and social policies, practices, and frames coupled with deeply institutionalized and intransigent racism, linguicism, and homophobia continue to produce educational inequality and inequity and continue to impede the recognition and representation of minoritized groups in determining shared educational values and purposes. A short list of contemporary scholarship and preparation programs/projects that construct teacher education as an “equity problem” is included.
{"title":"What’s the “Problem of Teacher Education” in the 2020s?","authors":"Marilyn Cochran-Smith","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160373","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160373","url":null,"abstract":"This article is a rejoinder, some 20 years later, to a JTE editorial, titled “The Problem of Teacher Education.” The previous piece suggested that in response to unprecedented attention by high-level policy makers to “fixing” the “broken” system of teacher education, teacher education was treated as what I called a “policy problem” during the late 1990s and 2000s From this perspective, the goal was to identify which of the broad aspects of teacher education that could be controlled by policymakers was most likely to have a positive impact on teacher quality, defined primarily in terms of teachers’ effectiveness at producing a strong workforce for the new economy. In this new article, the author argues that now—during the 2020s—teacher education should be constructed as an “equity problem.” This means acknowledging that, despite many important and powerful multicultural and other initiatives over the last two decades, dominant educational and social policies, practices, and frames coupled with deeply institutionalized and intransigent racism, linguicism, and homophobia continue to produce educational inequality and inequity and continue to impede the recognition and representation of minoritized groups in determining shared educational values and purposes. A short list of contemporary scholarship and preparation programs/projects that construct teacher education as an “equity problem” is included.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"127 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45531147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160377
L. Orland‐Barak
In this article I describe and reflect on my evolving undestandings of the study of mentoring since the publication of the 2005 article in the Journal of Teacher Education. My reflective journey suggests stressing two assertions to the study of mentoring. One, that there is a need to develop a more multidimensional and integrated conception of mentoring which draws on integrated models of mentoring and focuses on mentor-mentee/s dyadic and collaborative interactions as units of analyis and interpretation. Two, that we should go deeper into how mentors’ sense-making of being ‘lost or found in translation’ as agents of change operates within complex fields of interaction, at multiple policy, personal and interpersonal levels. Thus. a curriculum for learning to mentor should also include contents related to policy learning. I elaborate on these undestandings throughout the paper.
{"title":"Lost in Translation in the Study of Mentoring 17 Years Later","authors":"L. Orland‐Barak","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160377","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160377","url":null,"abstract":"In this article I describe and reflect on my evolving undestandings of the study of mentoring since the publication of the 2005 article in the Journal of Teacher Education. My reflective journey suggests stressing two assertions to the study of mentoring. One, that there is a need to develop a more multidimensional and integrated conception of mentoring which draws on integrated models of mentoring and focuses on mentor-mentee/s dyadic and collaborative interactions as units of analyis and interpretation. Two, that we should go deeper into how mentors’ sense-making of being ‘lost or found in translation’ as agents of change operates within complex fields of interaction, at multiple policy, personal and interpersonal levels. Thus. a curriculum for learning to mentor should also include contents related to policy learning. I elaborate on these undestandings throughout the paper.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"140 - 143"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41849457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231161452
A. Goodwin
This paper describes the work of a nine-college consortium that aimed to address the minority teacher shortage. First, the consortium's beginnings, aims, and activities are presented. Then the collaborative process is analyzed in terms of nine factors that have been identified in the literature as contributors to effective collaboration: (a) commitment of institutional officials, (b) mutual needs and interests, (c) clarity about goals, roles, and control, (d) sufficient time, (e) energy, (f) effective communication, (g) resources, (h) leadership, and (i) ongoing evaluation. The analysis resulted in the identification of three additional factors that support successful collaboration: (a) levels of collaboration, (b) continual redefinition, and (c) avoidance of interinstitutional conflicts.
{"title":"Reprint: Problems, Process, and Promise: Reflections on a Collaborative Approach to the Solution of the Minority Teacher Shortage","authors":"A. Goodwin","doi":"10.1177/00224871231161452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231161452","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes the work of a nine-college consortium that aimed to address the minority teacher shortage. First, the consortium's beginnings, aims, and activities are presented. Then the collaborative process is analyzed in terms of nine factors that have been identified in the literature as contributors to effective collaboration: (a) commitment of institutional officials, (b) mutual needs and interests, (c) clarity about goals, roles, and control, (d) sufficient time, (e) energy, (f) effective communication, (g) resources, (h) leadership, and (i) ongoing evaluation. The analysis resulted in the identification of three additional factors that support successful collaboration: (a) levels of collaboration, (b) continual redefinition, and (c) avoidance of interinstitutional conflicts.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"160 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46144535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160376
Gretchen McAllister
After 20 years, the research on empathy in teacher education has grown tremendously. This concept originally explored in our article 20 years ago, raised questions regarding the type of empathy and its potential implications for preparing culturally responsive teachers. Though research on empathy has increased 3-fold, teacher educators still struggle in our preparation of effective teachers for all children. One positive step forward in this recent line of research has been the centering of empathy in a more critical frame cautioning us against the concept of inauthentic or false empathy, as well as questioning whether empathy is enough.
{"title":"Rejoinder to The Role of Empathy in Teaching Culturally Diverse Students: A Qualitative Study of Teachers’ Beliefs","authors":"Gretchen McAllister","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160376","url":null,"abstract":"After 20 years, the research on empathy in teacher education has grown tremendously. This concept originally explored in our article 20 years ago, raised questions regarding the type of empathy and its potential implications for preparing culturally responsive teachers. Though research on empathy has increased 3-fold, teacher educators still struggle in our preparation of effective teachers for all children. One positive step forward in this recent line of research has been the centering of empathy in a more critical frame cautioning us against the concept of inauthentic or false empathy, as well as questioning whether empathy is enough.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"200 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45465381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160401
Kenneth M. Zeichner
This paper provides an analysis of how work on practice-based teacher education has evolved and remained the same since 2012.
本文分析了自2012年以来，基于实践的教师教育工作是如何演变和保持不变的。
{"title":"The “Turn Once Again Toward Practice-Based Teacher Education” Revisited","authors":"Kenneth M. Zeichner","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160401","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides an analysis of how work on practice-based teacher education has evolved and remained the same since 2012.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"178 - 180"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44534098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231155830
David Blazar, Cynthia Pollard
The pursuit of multiple educational outcomes makes teaching a complex craft subject to potential conflicts and competing commitments. Using a data set in which teachers were randomly assigned to classes paired with videotaped lessons, we both document and unpack such a tradeoff. Upper-elementary teachers who excel at raising students’ math test scores often are less successful at improving student-reported engagement in class (and vice versa). Furthermore, teaching practices that improve test scores (e.g., cognitively demanding content) can simultaneously decrease engagement. At the same time, paired quantitative and qualitative analyses reveal two areas of practice that support both outcomes: active mathematics with opportunities for hands-on participation, physical movement, and peer interaction; and established routines and procedures to proactively organize the classroom. In addition to guiding practice-based teacher education, our sequential, explanatory mixed-methods analysis can serve as a model for rigorously studying and identifying dimensions of “good” teaching that promote multidimensional student development.
{"title":"Challenges and Tradeoffs of “Good” Teaching: The Pursuit of Multiple Educational Outcomes","authors":"David Blazar, Cynthia Pollard","doi":"10.1177/00224871231155830","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231155830","url":null,"abstract":"The pursuit of multiple educational outcomes makes teaching a complex craft subject to potential conflicts and competing commitments. Using a data set in which teachers were randomly assigned to classes paired with videotaped lessons, we both document and unpack such a tradeoff. Upper-elementary teachers who excel at raising students’ math test scores often are less successful at improving student-reported engagement in class (and vice versa). Furthermore, teaching practices that improve test scores (e.g., cognitively demanding content) can simultaneously decrease engagement. At the same time, paired quantitative and qualitative analyses reveal two areas of practice that support both outcomes: active mathematics with opportunities for hands-on participation, physical movement, and peer interaction; and established routines and procedures to proactively organize the classroom. In addition to guiding practice-based teacher education, our sequential, explanatory mixed-methods analysis can serve as a model for rigorously studying and identifying dimensions of “good” teaching that promote multidimensional student development.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"229 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42000393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231161446
Marilyn Cochran-Smith
{"title":"Reprint: The Problem of Teacher Education","authors":"Marilyn Cochran-Smith","doi":"10.1177/00224871231161446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231161446","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"123 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41582118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160378
L. Darling-Hammond
This response to “How Teacher Education Matters” (2000) notes that the evidence base about the features of teacher education that matter for teacher effectiveness was substantial at that time and has grown stronger since. However, federal policy over the last two decades has reduced support for both preservice teacher education programs and for candidates’ financial assistance, while increasing support for alternative certification pathways that generally omit student teaching and often truncate coursework as well. One-third of teachers in recent years have entered without having completed preparation and are disproportionately assigned to schools serving low-income students and students of color. Meanwhile, recent research emphasizes the critical importance of well-designed clinical experiences with strong mentoring in high-quality settings, connected to applied coursework, as key to effectiveness. Residency programs are one emerging model that combines such experiences with financial supports, showing promise for recruiting and retaining a diverse, well-prepared set of candidates in high need fields and locations. High-performing countries like Finland and Singapore make these kinds of investments in teacher education routinely and shed light on the policy strategies needed to create a universally strong teacher education system.
{"title":"Response to How Teacher Education Matters","authors":"L. Darling-Hammond","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160378","url":null,"abstract":"This response to “How Teacher Education Matters” (2000) notes that the evidence base about the features of teacher education that matter for teacher effectiveness was substantial at that time and has grown stronger since. However, federal policy over the last two decades has reduced support for both preservice teacher education programs and for candidates’ financial assistance, while increasing support for alternative certification pathways that generally omit student teaching and often truncate coursework as well. One-third of teachers in recent years have entered without having completed preparation and are disproportionately assigned to schools serving low-income students and students of color. Meanwhile, recent research emphasizes the critical importance of well-designed clinical experiences with strong mentoring in high-quality settings, connected to applied coursework, as key to effectiveness. Residency programs are one emerging model that combines such experiences with financial supports, showing promise for recruiting and retaining a diverse, well-prepared set of candidates in high need fields and locations. High-performing countries like Finland and Singapore make these kinds of investments in teacher education routinely and shed light on the policy strategies needed to create a universally strong teacher education system.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"157 - 159"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47743098","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231161457
L. Shulman
What kind of research on teaching is of most worth? To what extent should researchers in this field be conducting highly functional investigations that attempt to identify the key elements of accomplished teaching or the most important components of teacher preparation programs or experiences? Should we be asking whether teacher education programs significantly improve the likelihood that someone will teach effectively? Should we instead be conducting inquiries that explore the rich complexities of teaching, learning, schooling, and development and the contexts that support them? What genres of research are worth undertaking? The tacit dialogue between the present articles by Wilson, Floden, and Ferrini-Mundy (2002 [this issue]) and by Florio-Ruane (2002 [this issue]) is nostalgically familiar. We designed the Institute for Research on Teaching (IRT) in 1975 on the basis of our critique of the then-prevailing prototype of process-product research on teaching. We considered process-product research on teaching behavioristic, simplistic, and unduly dependent on standardized achievement tests as indicators of product. Indeed, the leaders of process-product research, such as Nate Gage (1978) and Barak Rosenshine (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986), complained that their critics were unnecessarily “complexifying” the phenomenon of teaching, whereas the hall-mark of scientific progress was increased sim plification, not complication. Moreover, if research on teaching were to have the desired impact on policy makers, it needed to be both simple and clearly connected to easily under stood indicators of student achievement. Finally, there was a moral message in the process-product tradition. Our bottom-line obligation as teachers was to the students and their learning. To study teaching without reference to students was unethical self-indulgence. These two articles stimulated me to reflect on my history of work as an active scholar on teaching and teacher education. I thought about the nearly four decades of research in which I had been actively involved. And I began to wonder how, if at all, it added up. I concluded that we may be asking the wrong questions and focusing on the wrong units of analysis. That is, individual studies rarely can be adjudged as valuable or trivial per se. Instead, we need to think about extended programs of scholarship, in which a variety of types of research are pursued, to maximize the value to be gained from studies of teaching. I want to tell a story of more than 30 years of research, of a series of research programs that cumulated into a meaningful knowledge base, an enduring policy initiative, and the spinning off of a number of significant lines of research. I begin with my work on medical problem solving in the 1960s and 1970s, followed by the research on teaching as information processing that characterized the IRT programs. A set of studies on the development of teacher knowledge, with special reference to pedagogical conten
{"title":"Reprint: Truth and Consequences? Inquiry and Policy in Research on Teacher Education","authors":"L. Shulman","doi":"10.1177/00224871231161457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231161457","url":null,"abstract":"What kind of research on teaching is of most worth? To what extent should researchers in this field be conducting highly functional investigations that attempt to identify the key elements of accomplished teaching or the most important components of teacher preparation programs or experiences? Should we be asking whether teacher education programs significantly improve the likelihood that someone will teach effectively? Should we instead be conducting inquiries that explore the rich complexities of teaching, learning, schooling, and development and the contexts that support them? What genres of research are worth undertaking? The tacit dialogue between the present articles by Wilson, Floden, and Ferrini-Mundy (2002 [this issue]) and by Florio-Ruane (2002 [this issue]) is nostalgically familiar. We designed the Institute for Research on Teaching (IRT) in 1975 on the basis of our critique of the then-prevailing prototype of process-product research on teaching. We considered process-product research on teaching behavioristic, simplistic, and unduly dependent on standardized achievement tests as indicators of product. Indeed, the leaders of process-product research, such as Nate Gage (1978) and Barak Rosenshine (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986), complained that their critics were unnecessarily “complexifying” the phenomenon of teaching, whereas the hall-mark of scientific progress was increased sim plification, not complication. Moreover, if research on teaching were to have the desired impact on policy makers, it needed to be both simple and clearly connected to easily under stood indicators of student achievement. Finally, there was a moral message in the process-product tradition. Our bottom-line obligation as teachers was to the students and their learning. To study teaching without reference to students was unethical self-indulgence. These two articles stimulated me to reflect on my history of work as an active scholar on teaching and teacher education. I thought about the nearly four decades of research in which I had been actively involved. And I began to wonder how, if at all, it added up. I concluded that we may be asking the wrong questions and focusing on the wrong units of analysis. That is, individual studies rarely can be adjudged as valuable or trivial per se. Instead, we need to think about extended programs of scholarship, in which a variety of types of research are pursued, to maximize the value to be gained from studies of teaching. I want to tell a story of more than 30 years of research, of a series of research programs that cumulated into a meaningful knowledge base, an enduring policy initiative, and the spinning off of a number of significant lines of research. I begin with my work on medical problem solving in the 1960s and 1970s, followed by the research on teaching as information processing that characterized the IRT programs. A set of studies on the development of teacher knowledge, with special reference to pedagogical conten","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"74 1","pages":"144 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46333672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/00224871231160372
A. Lin Goodwin
Thirty years ago, “Problems, process, and promise: Reflections on a collaborative approach to the solution of the minority teacher shortage” (Goodwin, 1991) offered a perspective on an approach to the minority teacher shortage. That piece represented the start of the author’s life-long work on teacher preparation, with a particular focus on the recruitment and retention of teachers of color in response to growing numbers of students of color juxtaposed against a predominantly white teaching force. Now, several decades later, this article is her opportunity to reflect on those early thoughts, framed by the question: What progress have we made (or not) as a profession, and a society, in addressing this imperative? In pondering this question, this piece returns to the focus of the original article to think anew about problems, process, and promise as conceptual lenses for assessing how far we have come and where we now need to go.
{"title":"Enduring Problems, Rethinking Process, Fulfilling Promises: Reflections on the Continuing Shortage of Teachers of Color","authors":"A. Lin Goodwin","doi":"10.1177/00224871231160372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231160372","url":null,"abstract":"Thirty years ago, “Problems, process, and promise: Reflections on a collaborative approach to the solution of the minority teacher shortage” (Goodwin, 1991) offered a perspective on an approach to the minority teacher shortage. That piece represented the start of the author’s life-long work on teacher preparation, with a particular focus on the recruitment and retention of teachers of color in response to growing numbers of students of color juxtaposed against a predominantly white teaching force. Now, several decades later, this article is her opportunity to reflect on those early thoughts, framed by the question: What progress have we made (or not) as a profession, and a society, in addressing this imperative? In pondering this question, this piece returns to the focus of the original article to think anew about problems, process, and promise as conceptual lenses for assessing how far we have come and where we now need to go.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":"101 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135837744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：