Welcome to the Machine: A Meta-Analysis of Teacher Education Faculty Accreditation Practices and Responses

• In Event: 18.037 - Examinations of Faculty Motivation and Engagement Within Current Sociopolitical Contexts for Teacher Education Reform

Abstract

Objectives or Purposes
In a very short time period, the focus of teacher education programs has migrated from committing resources and energy to prepare great teachers, to dividing resources (both monetary and intellectual) between educating teachers and proving that they are educating teachers in the way the template (or machine) has determined is most effective. This project sought to examine, at a meta-level, the teacher education faculty accreditation practices and responses represented in current literature.
Perspective(S) Or Theoretical Framework
As teacher education programs across the United States slowly awaken to the reality that is accreditation (DeMink-Carthew, 2016; Imig et al., 2016), faculty face increasing demands (Chang et al., 2016) to present evidence that they already meet newly minted standards of educator preparation. In this moment of weakness of our collective teaching psyche, the various teacher education accreditation organizations that had been emerging as a process of self-improvement for programs, were quickly overrun by a larger organization, with a more focused goal of providing a template within which all teacher education programs must fit.
Teacher educators who were able to address curriculum in the manner of their choosing were suddenly finding themselves faced with expectations and data collection requirements that might as well have been a collegiate level scripted reading basal (Bourke & Lloyd, 2016). Despite this, many of the most recent publications regarding accreditation practices all laud the way the process has helped improve teacher education practices and candidate effectiveness. Yet, come across a group of teacher educators from various institutions and mention the word accreditation, and the response will not necessarily be as positive.
Methods and Data Sources
The researchers engaged in a review of recent literature that included published research reports from 2014 through 2016 in national or international, peer-reviewed publications. Concept maps of 53 identified research-based scholarly works were created and organized into an overall concept map. From the overall map, researchers conducted a node analysis of key concept map nodes that included topics related to accreditation and faculty activity.
Results
Overall, faculty reported that accountability and accreditation in teacher education was a good thing. The processes provided for systematic review of existing and new programs that were intended to improve the quality of the teaching profession. However, the results also indicate that there are high levels of dissatisfaction that exist as a result of imposed structures and poorly communicated expectations. The result is a pervasive atmosphere of suffering through accreditation processes, rather than embracing accreditation as a way to improve programs and improve the overall quality of the teaching profession.
Significance of the Study
The significance of this project lies in the future implementation practices of accreditation in teacher preparation. As teacher preparation faculty we must change our culture, and eventually the practices of program evaluation and accreditation, to become a meaningful and engaging facet of our role as teacher educators.

Authors

• Raymond W. Francis, Central Michigan University

• Gina M. Garner, Aquinas College