In this article, we summarize more than a decade of work on high-leverage practices being used in the context of science teacher preparation. We describe the challenges and insights that ultimately resulted in more robust practices, a diversified suite of tools to support these practices, expanded knowledge of our own teacher education pedagogies, and stronger bonds between our preparation program and its local network of K-12 schools. The special education community has now formulated an ambitious practice-based vision for professional preparation, and advocates will find our narratives to be a mix of cautionary tales and cause for optimism.
AndersonL.StillmanJ. (2011). Student teaching for a specialized view of professional practice? Opportunities to learn in and for urban high-needs schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 62, 446–464.
2.
BallD. L.CohenD. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In SykesG.Darling-HammondL. (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BillingsleyB.BettiniE.JonesN. D. (2019). Supporting special education teacher induction through high-leverage practices. Remedial and Special Education, 40, 365–379.
4.
BrownellM. T.BenedictA. E.LekoM. M.PeytonD.PuaD.Richards-TutorC. (2019). A continuum of pedagogies for preparing teachers to use high-leverage practices. Remedial and Special Education, 40, 338–355.
5.
BrykT. (2009). Supporting a science of performance improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 507–600.
DavisE. A.KloserM.WellsA.WindschitlM.CarlsonJ.MarinoJ. C. (2017). Teaching the practice of leading sense-making discussions in science: Science teacher educators using rehearsals. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28, 275–293.
8.
DutroE.CartunA. (2016). Cut to the core practices: Toward visceral disruptions of binaries in PRACTICE-based teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 119–128.
9.
EricssonK.KrampeR.Tesch-RömerC. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.
10.
ForzaniF. (2014). Understanding “core practices” and “practice-based” teacher education: Learning from the past. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 357–368.
11.
GoodwinC. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606–633.
12.
GrossmanP.ComptonC.IgraD.RonfeldtM.ShahanE.WilliamsonP. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111, 2055–2100.
13.
HammernessK. (2006). From coherence in theory to coherence in practice. Teachers College Record, 108, 1241–1265.
14.
HiebertJ.MorrisA. (2012). Teaching, rather than teachers, as a path toward improving classroom instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 63, 92–102.
15.
KangH.WindschitlM. (2018). How does practice-based teacher preparation influence novices’ first-year instruction?Teachers College Record, 120(8), 1–44.
16.
KazemiE.GhousseiniH.CunardA.TurrouA. (2015). Getting inside rehearsals: Insights from teacher educators to support work on complex practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 67, 18–31. doi:10.1177/0022487115615191
17.
LaBoskeyV. K.RichertA. E. (2002). Identifying good student teaching placements: A programmatic perspective. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 7–34.
18.
MaheadyL. J.PattiA. L.RaffertyL. A.del Prado HillP. (2019). School–university partnerships: One institution’s efforts to integrate and support teacher use of high leverage practices. Remedial and Special Education, 40, 356–364.
19.
McDonaldM.KazemiE.KavanaghS. (2013). Core practices and teacher education pedagogies: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 64, 378–386.
20.
McLeskeyJ.BrownellM. (2015). High-leverage practices and teacher preparation in special education (Document No. PR-1). Arlington VA: Council for Exceptional Children & CEEDAR Center.
21.
SherinM. G. (2001). Developing a professional vision of classroom events. In WoodT.NelsonB. S.WarfieldJ. (Eds.), Beyond classical pedagogy: Teaching elementary school mathematics (pp. 75–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
SohmerR.MichaelsS.O’ConnorM. C.ResnickL. B. (2009). Guided construction of knowledge in the classroom: The Troika of well-structured talk, tasks, and tools. In SchwarzB.DreyfusT. (Eds.), Advances in learning and instruction (pp. 105–129). London, England: Elsevier.
23.
SpillaneJ. (2012). Data in practice: Conceptualizing the data-based decision-making phenomena. American Journal of Education, 118, 113–141.
24.
WindschitlM.StroupeD. (2017). The three-story challenge: Implications of the Next Generation Science Standards for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 68, 251–261.
