Redesigning Teacher Education in a Research-Intensive University: Identifying Organizational Assumptions Through Double Loop Learning

• In Event: 34.049 - Teacher Education Redesign in Research-Intensive Universities: Perspectives From Research and Practice

Abstract

Purpose
Our institution, a research intensive university with more than 20 teacher preparation programs (approximately 300 candidates each year), is seven years into a ten-year, four million dollar redesign of its teacher preparation programs. This paper discusses our redesign efforts through a lens of double loop organizational learning.

Theoretical framing
Double loop organizational learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978) allows us to not only find the problems within our programs and fix them, a single loop learning approach, but also engages us in a fundamental re-examination how teacher preparation operates in our institution. We engage in a double loop learning approach by delving into questions of why particular problems present themselves and examine the underlying institutional norms, procedures, policies, and values that led to the problems that appear to need solving.

Method and analysis
This paper draws on the results of a mid-course assessment of our redesign efforts. This analysis in based on annual reports to the funding agency, presentations to our university community and national meetings, advisory groups meetings, and research groups engaged in the work.

Discussion and findings
We discuss three themes in this paper.

Defining sustainability organizationally
While we were diligent in attending to sustainability from the beginning, over time, we came to realize that new people and new institutional “structures” only served us well during the launch phase of these new efforts and we needed a more nuanced understanding of how to think about sustainability within our institution. We then created a framework that accounts for four parts of the organization that contribute to ongoing institutional activities: Operational systems, leadership, finance, and culture. Each of these is discusses in turn related to their contributions to understanding how sustainability works within our institutional norms and practices.

Conceptualizing partnership between schools and the university
We have moved our partnership conceptualization to creating a “third space” between the university and schools (Zeichner, 2010). We have identified six practices that inhabit this third space—professional language, coaching strategies, expectations of performance, evaluation tools, policies, and inquiry questions. By defining the practices that reside in this third space, we can better understand how learning activities and teacher educators contribute to our partnership development work and challenge our university-based assumptions.

Developing a knowledge community
Some members of our university community became more engaged in the redesign and development work than others. While participation in task groups, committees, and summits has been robust, deep and consistent knowledge of the overall redesign frameworks and goals resides within a smaller community engaged in research and development efforts. After two years of work together, this group began to identify as a knowledge community of teacher educators (Olson & Craig, 2001). Identifying and nurturing this knowledge community is now essential to understanding our organizational learning efforts aimed at reaching the double loop level.

Significance
Our analysis describes three themes that other institutions have identified as barriers to change efforts in teacher education and explores them through double-loop organizational learning. Each of these descriptions provide a new conceptualization for sustainable change, developing partnerships, and organizing for organizational learning.

Author

• Mistilina D. Sato, University of Minnesota