Diez, Mary E. & Raths, James (Eds.) (2007). Dispositions in Teacher Education. Review by Jan Carpenter, George Fox University

Diez, Mary E. & Raths, James (Eds.) (2007). Dispositions in Teacher Education. Charlotte. NC: Information Age Publishing Pp. v + 235     $40     ISBN 1-59311-631-6 Review by Jan Carpenter George Fox University August 12, 2008 The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (2008) calls for teacher candidates who demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all studentslearn. The inclusion of professional dispositions is the focus of dialogue among teacher educators who align their programs with NCATE standards in preparation for accreditation program review. Questions regarding the definition, identification, nature, development, and assessment of teacher dispositions are essential, yet controversial elements of these discussions. Critical analysis is essential as the answer to these questions will directly impact program development, the education and practice of the candidates, and, ultimately, the lives of students in the P-12 system. Diez and Raths’ (2007) edited text, Dispositions in Teacher Education, is a practical resource for teacher education faculty as they explore the complexities of teacher dispositions and determine programmatic design. Divided into three parts, this book begins with an overview by Larry Freeman. In this chapter, he explores the history of dispositions in teacher education. Freeman explains the foundational shift from knowledge, skills, and attitudes to knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Additionally, he addresses why it is important to include dispositions; offers definition of the concept; compares it with similar terms such as temperaments, traits, and habits; delineates differences between the dispositional and the non-dispositional; and discusses the identification and usefulness of dispositions. Many of the dilemmas faced by teacher educators are deconstructed in Freeman’s work. He articulates historical context, definitions, questions, and assumptions in such a way that he creates both a foundation and framework for the book. Five theoretical perspectives for conceptualizing dispositions are developed in chapters 2 – 6. The first three describe experiences of teacher education programs from theoretical discussion to programmatic application and candidate assessment. Each includes the process of struggling with similar, ambiguous questions: What are dispositions? How do we identify them? Are they stable or dynamic? If they can develop, how can a teacher education programs offer experiences that lead to genuine growth? What is the role of the faculty in that process? However, each also articulates the decisions at which they arrived. These studies offer helpful models for teacher educators to examine in their own journey from theoretical paradigms to program development and implementation. The structure of chapters 5 and 6 is somewhat different than the other chapters in part one. Rather than offer examples of theoretical constructs and program development, they each focus on one element that is critical to address regardless of program design. Freeman considers the interaction between context and dispositions in chapter 5 while Hare explores the intersections of teacher formation and dispositions in chapter 6. Both authors address theoretical perspectives, yet they expand the conversation and present lenses through which to analyze any program. These authors provide cautionary reminders; in the development of dispositional elements of a teacher education program, consider the complexity and significance of context and self. Alverno College has embraced a social-cognitive perspective for incorporating teacher dispositions into their curriculum. In chapter 2, Breese and Nawrocki-Chabin describe their program built on Bandura’s work with modeling, self-efficacy, and self-assessment, and Boyatzis’ guidelines for analyzing present and developing future dispositions. Teacher educators at Alverno have determined that “dispositions are made manifest through intentional, practiced behaviors that can be challenged, developed, and enhanced even as they denote behavioral tendencies that endure over time” (Breese & Nawrocki-Chabin, p. 33). The authors clearly show connection between Bandura’s four stages of modeling and programmatic structures; students have an observational experience (the attention component), analyze actions over time (retention component), practice behaviors they have observed (reproduction component), and use reflection and feedback to analyze their own actions and set goals (the motivation component). Students analyze behavior in others and in themselves using Boyatzis’ definitions of skills, self-image and social rules, and motives and traits to aid them in self-analysis and goal setting. “Committed to the belief that teacher behaviors can be nurtured” (Breese & Nawrocki-Chabin, p. 49), Alverno College implements strategies, built on a strong theoretical foundation, aimed at facilitating reflection, self-knowledge, and self-chosen goals for change in the dispositions of their preservice teachers. With an emphasis on having multiple opportunities over time to self-assess dispositions, this model fits well with an undergraduate program. Elements may be appropriately woven into a MAT program; however, limited time in an accelerated program may be problematic for showing growth. Operating from a perceptual approach, Wasicsko focuses on the assessment of dispositions as admissions criteria in chapter 3. Believing that dispositions develop over a lifetime and that a teacher education program is not long enough to allow for significant change, Wasicsko asserts that candidates must possess a minimal level of required dispositions to be admitted to a program. Grounded in Combs’ perception theory, the author outlines two strategies for the admission process—one for an undergraduate program and one for a MAT program. Before acceptance to an undergraduate program, students take two introductory courses; in the first, they participate in a series of assignments designed to facilitate self-assessment of teacher dispositions. Scored on a 7-point Likert scale, these assessments rank dispositions from effective to ineffective. According to perceptual theory, individuals have the ability to make solid decisions about their fit for a career in education based on adequate information and self-reflection. Those who continue take a second class that embeds mentoring and counseling regarding dispositional situations into the process; at the conclusion, students must receive the recommendation of an instructor, based on evidence of the required dispositions, to continue in the program. The process is modified for admission to the MAT program with candidates completing the self-assessment on their own followed by an interview and scoring of essays by teacher education faculty using the same Likert scale as the undergraduate program. While Wasicsko suggests continued opportunities to enhance candidate dispositions, demonstrated evidence of dispositions prior to program completion, and that faculties should possess and demonstrate the same dispositions, the focus of this chapter is on assessing dispositions as part of admission criteria. In chapter 4, Oja and Rieiman apply a constructivist-developmental perspective to dispositions. This central message is that “disposition is best understood within the context of our understanding of thoughtful and responsible teacher professional judgment” (p. 109). They identify four theoretical perspectives of their program: (a) meaning is constructed, (b) individuals make meaning from experiences, (c) learning occurs as people interact with their environment, and (d) construction and reconstruction of meaning occurs through assimilation and accommodation and affective dissonance. From these ideas, they offer seven developmental design principles, referred to as integrated learning framework (ILF), on which to build programs; the underlying belief is that teacher educators should develop increasingly more complex experiences for preservice teachers and offer guidance and support to them through disequilibrium to accommodation. The seven principles are: (1) building trust and respecting context; (2) offering increasingly complex and challenging roles; (3) providing guided inquiry through self-assessment and professional dialogue; (4) differentiating for students, offering support and challenge to meet their individual needs;(5) preservice teachers experience a balance between experience/action and reflection; (6) continuity of experience and inquiry occurring over time; significant learning requires a minimum of four to six months; and (7) implementating a reflective coaching process of support, observation, and feedback. Subsequently, the authors present examples of application for preservice teachers, a mentoring model for first year teachers, and for implementation with inservice teachers involved in action research. Freeman, in chapter 5, states that it is not enough to display a list of dispositions and assume effectiveness; the complexity of context requires careful analysis that allows for the irregularity and unpredictability of the teaching experience. First, Freeman differentiates between metadispositions, a priori dispositions, and dispositions in action. Then, asserting that teacher educators often produce a list of virtues without analysis of how they are developed, he posits that dispositions should be conceptualized as three interrelated elements: values, strategies, and intention-in-action. Values describe why one would engage in an activity, strategies determine how, and intention-in-action is the observable behavior within an event. These three elements must be considered within context as context shapes intention and behavior. Next he offers this framework for analyzing dispositions: constraints and possibilities of context + an intention-in-action + values to be realized + pursuing selected strategies. Finally, he provides three examples of dispositional analysis using this framework. These concrete examples are helpful for conceptualizing the implementation of his framework. Drawing from Palmer’s work on teacher formation, Hare defines dispositions metaphorically in chapter 6. She begins by describing dispositions as the upper most layer of soil in a flowerpot. Digging below the surface, one next encounters thoughts, then feelings, followed by values, then beliefs, and finally what she describes as “the most important layer, a vital and yet nameless core” (p. 143). Hare explains that although external forces exert pressure for teachers to conform to certain culturally defined behaviors, it is the self we are disposed to be that teaches. Therefore, it is important that teachers gain self-knowledge in each of the metaphorical layers. The role of teacher educators in this process is to provide time, safe space, and skilled guidance through this self-inquiry process. Hare continues to outline principles to include in program development which are valuable resources for teacher educators. Chapters 7 and 8 comprise Part II: Experiential perspectives on educator dispositions. After setting the foundation with the historical progression and definition of dispositions in education, Raths, in chapter 7, clarifies two steps for teacher educators to take when developing programs to meet the NCATE standard—selecting and assessing dispositions. When selecting disposition, he suggests that teacher educators consider the conceptual scope of chosen dispositions, that some negative dispositions may need to be weakened in individuals, and he stresses the importance of judgment and sensitivity to context in the application of dispositions. Next, Raths briefly offers three examples of assessment methods. However, he concludes by stating that assessing dispositions is problematic; he has found low inter-rater reliability and that supervisors and cooperating teachers consistently rate candidates generously at the top of the scale. While this chapter is helpful in outlining a process for program development, it ends with the frustrating realities surrounding the disposition conversation. The ability to tolerate ambiguity seems to be a required disposition for teacher educators as they proceed in the study of teacher dispositions. Peterson delineates a study of alternatively certified teachers’ perceptions of dispositions in chapter 8. Consisting of participants who are changing careers, the goal of this study was to determine dispositions necessary to successful teaching and determine differences between dispositions integral to teaching and those fundamental to other careers. Findings include human connections, flexibility in dealing with ambiguity, persistence and determination, and being open to suggestions as dispositions necessary to successful teaching. For the comparison of dispositions between careers, Peterson provides a table with responses from a variety of fields. This table entitled: “Alternative Certification Candidates’ Views on the Differences in Expectations in Work Settings Which may Necessitate Different Dispositional Behaviors” (p. 175) clarifies some general differences between careers, but requires inferential thinking to get to the necessary dispositions. Peterson also presents two brief case studies, the first comparing teaching with work in the television industry, and the second with newspaper reporting. Peterson ends by explaining that the study facilitated understanding of necessary dispositions to become a successful teacher and provided insight into the challenges of changing careers and the successful transition to school cultures. While an interesting and valuable study, it leaned toward broader comparisons rather than focusing on dispositions. With many individuals entering MAT programs to change careers, this is an area that merits further attention. The last three chapters of the book, Part III, address persisting issues raised by dispositions. Chapter 9 revisits the complexity of assessing dispositions; the role of coaching is the central focus of Chapter 10; and dispositions as a dialogue conclude the book. Although a short section, it is worth the investment of a thorough and reflective reading. Diez begins chapter 9 with an analysis of assessment in the larger context of teacher education. Exploring epistemological views behind various assessments, she raises issues regarding purpose, implications for programmatic implementation, and interpretation of data. These issues are viewed through the lenses of quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Diez also includes an appraisal of current trends. With these as a foundation, she proceeds to explain four concerns regarding the credibility of assessment of teacher candidates—reductionism, disconnectedness, superficiality, and a culture of compliance. Themes throughout each of these are authenticity, depth, and integrity of the assessment. Following the exploration of problems, Diez examines the following familiar questions: Are dispositions stable or can they develop? Are they best assessed in a particular way? Can the assessment of dispositions help to develop dispositions? What should teacher educators consider when developing a plan to assess dispositions? With the first two questions, Diez articulates answers from two epistemological perspectives. For the last two questions, she acknowledges the emergent nature of the issues and outlines some recent findings. In chapter 10, Diez posits that a coaching model is relevant to the discussion on dispositions whether viewed from the epistemological assumption that dispositions are stable or dynamic; the methodology for implementation, however, would differ according to ideological stance. After distinguishing coaching from therapy, mentoring, consulting, and supervising, Diez describes examples of coaching models from two perspectives. Viewing dispositions as stable, the role of a coach might be to facilitate interpretative self-assessment of individual strengths and needs followed by goal setting for success in the classroom based on those interpretations. Another approach explores strengths-based coaching where the coach helps the candidate to identify and develop his/her top five talents in order to find success in a teaching career. Diez then discusses coaching models from the ideological perspective that dispositions are dynamic. She introduces the use of collaborative, instructional, or facilitative coaching to enhance moral development. Following theoretical discussion of the different models, Diez describes two teacher education programs—Governors State University in which dispositions are viewed as stable and Alverno College in which feedback and self-assessment is thought to facilitate development of dispositions. Stooksberry concludes the book by returning to the same questions that were introduced at the beginning and were woven throughout the chapters: How are dispositions defined? How can they be systematically integrated into teacher education programs? Are they stable or dynamic? How can they be integral to the entire program rather than a compliant add-on component? How can they be assessed effectively? How is context relevant to dispositions? Rather than detail her responses to these questions, she positions them as dialogic topics for teacher educators. While the first part of the chapter offers guidance for dialogue within institutions, the second half explores the implications of continued dialogue within the context of the greater field of teacher education. She articulates that dialogue could contribute to a common definition of dispositions that could lead to the development of a professional code of ethics. This macro dialogue could also facilitate the gathering of evidence across diverse programs for the purpose of identifying best practice within the field. Research regarding significant questions of what Stookesberry refers to as the “dispositions puzzle” (p. 229), will continue to inform that cross-field dialogue adding depth to our understanding of essential elements. The strength of this book is the analysis of complex issues from multiple perspectives with authentic examples of practical application. The contributing authors have not come to consensus regarding definition, application, or assessment with dispositions; rather they consider various angles each developed with theoretical support. Therefore, this book can provide a foundation for a broad understanding of dispositions, be a useful tool for guiding discussion, and/or provide initial design for program development. In the introductory chapter, Freeman states that the intent of the book is to “explore these questions, to provide the reader with a variety of perspectives that will enrich the discourse about dispositions among teacher educators” (p. 4). This book has indeed reached that goal. The inclusion of dispositions in the NCATE standards has been the impetus for critical dialogue among teacher educators. Theoretical frameworks guiding program development of universities will have a fundamental impact on candidates and ultimately on the lives of children. It is a topic worthy of exploration so that we do not fall victim to reductionism, disconnectedness, superficiality, or culture of compliance as outlined by Diez in chapter 9. About the Reviewer Jan Carpenter is an Assistant Professor of Education and Director of the fulltime MAT program at George Fox University. Her interests include middle school education, teacher preparation, and teacher identity development.