Introduction to the Urban Teaching Residency: Looking Across Models and Contexts

• In Event: Urban Teacher Residencies, Year 1: Looking Across Models and Contexts

Abstract

Created in response to shortcomings of both traditional and alternate route teacher preparation programs, UTRs view context and practice as residents’ most critical resources. While UTRs universally see the divide between theory and practice as a false dichotomy, they vary widely in context and structure—each UTR is designed to meet the needs of a specific urban community, and may differ according to conceptions of teacher knowledge, partnerships, and program roles. This presentation looks across UTR models and contexts using the framework proposed by Taylor, Klein, Onore, & Strom (2011).

Epistemologically, traditional university-based programs consider knowledge to be primarily academic in nature - transferred by professors to their pre-service teachers who then go out and apply their knowledge in the classroom (Korthagen & Kessels, 1999; Tom, 1997). In contrast, UTRs tend to place practical and academic knowledge on more equal footing, although programs vary according to emphasis. For example, one program in this symposium emphasizes theory and practice in a contextualized setting, where knowledge is acquired through disciplinary, "context-specific" preparation for teaching in its partner urban district.

In addition, UTRs’ conceive of the inter-institutional partnership as highly democratic. While inter-institutional partnerships do exist in more conventional teacher education programs, they tend to be one-sided, with the university retaining the position of power and authority (Goodlad, 1990; Gorodetsky & Barak, 2008). Across UTRs, conceptions of partnerships vary, but parity and equity of voice are stressed. One UTR described here has a wide range of partnerships, including charter management, non-profit, and higher education organizations.

Another common critique of traditional teacher education programs is their failure to adequately connect theory and methods learned in coursework to actual practice in the classroom (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Grossman, Hammerness, & McDonald 2004). Mending this disconnect by integrating curriculum and coursework to more effectively prepare urban teachers is a primary feature of the UTR model (Berry, Snyder, & Montgomery, 2008), and different program contexts allow for unique development of this integration. For example, one program adopts a stance of inquiry, integrating relevant coursework with extensive, guided practical experience while curriculum is negotiated among mentors, university faculty, and community based organizations.

The UTR model responds to two additional critiques of traditional teacher education: the role of the P-12 school-based educator, and the varying degree of impact on behalf of the university faculty member (visiting faculty, often adjunct faculty) due to inconsistent interactions with student teachers (Bullough & Draper, 2004; Zeichner, 2010). Researchers have found that the clinical component of teacher preparation involving classroom practice with a collaborating or mentor teacher is often ill-coordinated with university coursework (Hascher, Cocard, & Moser 2004; Hammerness, 2006; Valencia, 2009). In response, one symposium UTR uses P-12 teachers in a highly collaborative capacity and also engages the school principal in program development. Each UTR also provides expanded and more connected roles for university faculty, although at differing levels. In one program, faculty members have an expanded role that includes serving on the program’s Advisory Board, working groups, and committees.

Authors

• Kathryn Jill Strom, California State University - East Bay

• Monica Taylor, Montclair State University