This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Diez, M. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Looking Back and Moving Forward

Three Tensions in the Teacher Dispositions Discourse

Alverno College

This review chronicles the origins of the use of the term "dispositions" in teacher education and highlights problems in its current definitions and applications, suggesting questions that need to be addressed in dealing with those problems and outlining necessary changes in teacher education programs to address development and assessment of the whole teacher.

Key Words: teacher education • dispositions • teacher assessment

References

• Alverno College Faculty. (2005). Ability-based learning outcomes: Teaching and assessment at Alverno College. Milwaukee, WI: Alverno College Institute.
• Alverno College Institute. (2005). Ability-based learning program: Teacher education. Milwaukee, WI: Author.
• Bok, D. ( 2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Breese, L., & Nawrocki-Chabin, R. (2007). Social cognitive perspective in dispositional development. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 31-53). Charlotte. NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Combs, A.W., & Snygg, G. (1949). Individual behavior: A perceptual approach to behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
• Diez, M.E. (1990). A thrust from within: Reconceptualizing teacher education at Alverno College. Peabody Journal of Education, 65(2), 4-18.
• Diez, M.E. (1999). Critical components in the preparation of teachers. In R. A. Roth (Ed.), The role of the university in the preparation of teachers. London: Falmer Press.
• Diez, M.E. (2006a). Assessing dispositions: Five principles to guide practice. In H. Sockett (Ed.), Teacher dispositions: Building a teacher education framework of moral standards (pp. 49-66). Washington, DC: AACTE.
• Diez, M.E. (2006b). Assessing dispositions: Context and questions. The New Educator 2(1), 57-72.[CrossRef]
• Diez, M.E. (2007). The role of coaching in working with dispositions. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 205-220). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Diez, M.E., & Hass, J.M. (1997). No more piecemeal reform: Using performance-based approaches to rethink teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 19(2), 17-26.
• Diez, M.E., Hass, J.M., Henn-Reinke, K., Stoffels, J.A., & Truchan, L.C. (1998). Guiding coherence: Performance-based teacher education at Alverno College. In M. E. Diez (Ed.), Changing practice of teacher education: Standards and assessment as a lever for change. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
• Dottin, E. (2006). A Deweyan approach to the development of moral dispositions in professional teacher education communities. In. H. Sockett (Ed.), Teacher dispositions: Building a teacher education framework of moral standards (pp. 27-47). Washington, DC: AACTE.
• Dweck, C.S. (1989). Motivation. In A. Lesgold, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Foundations for a psychology of education (pp. 87-136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Edwards, S. (2007). Dispositions: Research, assessment, and defensibility. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York City, February.
• Hodges, T.D., & Clifton, D.O. (2004). Strengths-based development in practice. In A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
• Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensure and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
• Katz, L.G. (2006). Reflections on respecting the learner. Inside Gateways, June. Retrieved from http://www.ilgateways.com/newsletter/archives/lkatz062006.aspx on July 13, 2007.
• Katz, L.G., & Raths, J.D. (1985). Dispositions as goals for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1, 301-307.[CrossRef]
• Kyllonen, P.C., Walters, A.M., & Kaufman, J.C. (2005). Non-cognitive constructs and their assessment in graduate education: A review. In J. Abedi & H. O'Neil (Eds.), Assessment of noncognitive influences on learning: A special issue of Educational Assessment, 10(3), 147-52.
• Liesveld, R., & Miller, J. (2005). Teach with your strengths: How great teachers inspire their students. New York: Gallup Press.
• Loacker, G. (Ed.). (2000). Self assessment at Alverno College. Milwaukee, WI: Alverno College Institute.
• Mentkowski, M.M., & Associates ( 2000). Learning that lasts: Integrating learning, development, and performance in college and beyond. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Milam, S. (2006). Understanding the institutional context: Legal implications of decisions about individual candidates. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, San Diego, January.
• National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (1989). What teachers should know and be able to do. Detroit: Author.
• Oja, S.N. & Reiman, A.J. (2007). A constructivistdevelopmental perspective. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 93-117). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Roberts, R. (2006). Technical considerations: Assessing dispositions in the continuum of professional preparation and practice. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, San Diego, January.
• Schmoker, M.J. (2006). Results NOW: How we can achieve unprecedented improvements in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
• Sockett, H. (2006). Character, rules, and relations. In H. Sockett (Ed.), Teacher dispositions: Building a teacher education framework of moral standards (pp. 8-25). Washington, DC: AACTE.
• Sullivan, W. (2004). Preparing professionals as moral agents. Carnegie Perspectives, December 2004. Retrieved from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/perspectives/sub.asp?key=245&subkey=572 on July 14, 2007.
• Wasicsko, M.M. (2007). The perceptual approach to teacher dispositions: The effective teacher as an effective person. In M. E. Diez & J. Raths (Eds.), Dispositions in teacher education (pp. 55-91). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
• Wilkerson, J.R. (2006). Measuring teacher dispositions: Standards-based or morality-based? Teachers College Record, published April 20, 2006, http://www.tcrecord.orgIDnumber:12493, accessed May 24, 2006.

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 58, No. 5, 388-396 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0022487107308418


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. D. Osguthorpe On the Reasons We Want Teachers of Good Disposition and Moral Character Journal of Teacher Education, September 1, 2008; 59(4): 288 - 299. [Abstract] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Diez, M. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?