Reading Teachers Are Asked "What is Relevant In the Classroom?"
One of the most crucial problems facing teacher education today is one of relevancy. This cry for relevance suggests that what we in higher education do as we prepare students to become teachers is not compatible with the real world of the classroom. Backman tells us that as teacher educators we are perceived as (1) delivering preparation programs which have little real influence on the way in which our graduates actually teach; and (2) being completely out of touch with the actual teaching conditions in contemporary schools (1984). READING TEACHERS ARE ASKED "WHAT IS RELEVANT IN CLASSROOM?" Donna Jamar and Leo W. Pauls Emporia State University Emporia, Kansas One of the most crucial problems facing teacher education today is one of relevancy. This cry for relevance suggests that what we in higher education do as we prepare students to become teachers is not compatible with the real world of the classroom. Backman tells us that as teacher educators we are perceived as (1) delivering preparation programs which have little real influence on the way in which our graduates actually teach; and (2) being completely out of touch with the actual teaching conditions in contemporary schools (1984).
PRESERVICE EDUCATION IN READING: WHAT DO THE TEACHERS SAY?
ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to determine teachers’ perceptions of reading courses at the undergraduate level. Survey data obtained from graduates of 37 institutions were analyzed using frequencies, t‐test, analysis of variance, Duncan's Multiple Range Test, and orthogonal contrast to provide the following results: Graduates between 1970‐80 have not taken more reading courses than earlier graduates. Persons with degrees in elementaty education, early childhood education, and special education have taken reading courses while those in other areas of education have not. Graduates who have taken three or more reading courses feel prepared to teach reading. The most helpful topic in an undergraduate reading course is “how to plan a reading lesson.” The topic which needs to be added to the undergraduate reading courses is “how to organize and manage reading instruction.”
School-university cooperation in the preparation of reading teachers
in the past decade more effort appears to have been expended in pointing out the shortcomings of reading methods courses than in suggesting positive approaches to their improvement. However, Guszak's (1969) recent report amounts to a step in the right di rection. He described the strong points of a successful summer session reading methods course and made two recommendations for further improvement. First, reading methods classes ought to be taken into the schools to provide students with realistic experi ences in the school environment. Second, in order to insure adequate supervision and control of the students' experience, such programs ought to be a joint enterprise of the training institution and the school. The recommendations make sense. Implicitly, placement in an actual school setting should do much to close the traditional credibility gap in methods courses. Furthermore, there is evidence that teachers in the field value their pre-service training in read ing, particularly the training given during their student teaching experience, more highly than their in-service training (Smith, Otto, and Harty, in press). This suggests that realistic pre-service training can pay dividends. Pragmatically, the schools can benefit as much from a cooperative arrangement as can the training in stitution by gaining access to new resources. Braam and Oliver (1970) have described a cooperative ar rangement for an undergraduate elementary level reading course that they feel ". . . has contributed to a bridging of the gap between ivory tower and classroom." This article describes some relationships worked out between the University of Wisconsin and the Madison, Wisconsin, Public Schools primarily for the training of reading specialists at the graduate level.