Shive describes and analyzes the cur rent status of professional practices boards for teaching. The questions of assessment for entry into the profes sion, interdependence of certification and teacher preparation programs, and national versus state professional prac tices boards are examined. Implications of such boards forthe state of the profes sion including improving minority rep resentation in teaching, establishing high standards for practice, and improv ing public confidence in teachers are also considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. (1983). Educating a profession: Profile of a beginning teacher. Washington, DC: Author .
2.
American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education. (1987). Summary of certification/licensure systems for six professions. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Baratz, J.C. (1986). Black participation in the teacher pool. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.
4.
California Commission on the Teaching Profession. (1985). Who will teach our children?: A strategy for improving California's schools. Sacramento, CA: Author.
5.
Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. ( 1987). The national board for professional teaching standards: A prospectus. Washington, DC: Author .
6.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1986). We need schools able and willing to use Carnegie's "teachers for the 21st century. "Teacher Educator, 22, 29-32.
7.
Feistritzer, C.E. (1985). The condition of teaching: A state by state analysis . Lawrenceville, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8.
Gage, N.L. (1978). The scientific basis of the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
9.
Gardner, W.E. , & Palmer, J.R. (1982). Certification and accreditation: Background, issue analysis and recommendations. Washington, DC: National Commission on Excellence in Education .
10.
Gifford, B.R. (1984). Prestige and education: The missing link in school reform. The Review of Education, 10, 186-198.
11.
Goodison, M. (1985). Pros and cons of paper and pencil tests for teacher assessment. Paper presented at the annual Assessment and Policy Conference of the Education Commission of the States, Boulder, CO.
12.
Gutman, R. (1985). Educating architects : Pedagogy and the pendulum . The Public Interest, 80, 67-91.
13.
Haberman, M. (1986). Licensing teachers: Lessons from other professions . Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 19-22.
National Center for Education Statistics. ( 1984). The condition of education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
16.
Shulman, L.S. (1987a). Assessment for teaching: An initiative for the profession. Phi Delta Kappan, 68, 38-44.
17.
Shulman, L.S. (1987b). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
18.
Shulman, L.S., & Sykes, G. (1986, March). A national board for teaching? In search of a bold standard. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.
19.
Sykes, G. (1986). The social consequences of standard setting in the professions. Washington, DC: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.
20.
Wise, A. (1986a). A case for trusting teachers to regulate their profession (Commentary), Education Week, VI: 24.
21.
Wise, A.E. (1986b). Three secnarios for the future of teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 649- 52.
