Institutional Report - Standard 3: Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
Last Update: 1/15/04 *

Teacher preparation at Purdue University is a collaborative venture spanning 36 programs, and involving six Purdue schools and over fifty elementary and secondary schools in the local area.  As we have noted before, elementary and secondary education programs are organized in a Block system, where carefully constructed courses lead candidates through a coherent and sequenced curriculum with integrated field experiences.  One of the driving forces behind the reform of Purdue University teacher education programs was the belief that candidates needed to be involved in schools much earlier than they had in the past.  The reformed programs place candidates in schools at the beginning of the teacher education program and provide multiple opportunities for candidates to demonstrate in real classrooms that they have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn.  In the elementary education program, for example, candidates spend approximately 140 hours in classrooms prior to the student teaching experience.

Each of the Blocks of the teacher education program contains a component entitled Theory Into Practice (TIPs).  The TIPS for Blocks I and II are early field experiences that are carefully planned with the teachers in the schools which host Block TIPs.  Both elementary and secondary education candidates participate in these field experiences.  In addition, the methods courses for the elementary education program are taught collaboratively by the unit and school-based faculty on site in the schools.  The field experiences for these blocks are described in course syllabi.  The culminating experience of all teacher education programs is a ten to sixteen week student teaching experience. 

Early field experiences, clinical practica, and student teaching all provide Purdue candidates with opportunities to observe classroom practice, to prepare, implement, and evaluate educational materials, to develop knowledge, dispositions and performances, and to reflect on the relationship between classroom practice and student learning.

Element 1: Collaboration between Unit and School Partners

Teacher education at Purdue University provides candidates the opportunity to be in the schools early and often.  These field placements are carefully planned in cooperation between the university faculty and the faculty of the partnership schools.  When the current teacher education framework was in development, schools were approached to solicit their input as to which Block(s) they would like to host.  Placements since that time have built on that initial arrangement.

All of the Blocks that have early field experiences involve joint participation by unit and school-based faculty in instructional programs for candidates and for students.  For example, in Block IV classroom teachers help design and supervise candidate tutoring of students who need extra assistance with reading tasks and in Block V candidates work with a classroom teacher and their Purdue instructor to design an integrated curriculum unit for a specific classroom.

While candidates are in the TIP placement, cooperating teachers oversee and coordinate the lesson planning and presentations which the candidates make.  They lend their expertise in many ways.  For example, in the Block II TIP, candidates teach one on one, small group, and large group.  Their placements occur in diverse classrooms; indeed, some candidates are placed in resource rooms.  The lesson planning for the Block II TIP is designed so that candidates take student diversity into account.  In this planning, their cooperating teachers oversee and coordinate the lesson planning, and lend their expertise regarding diversity and its effects and implications.   Further collaboration is seen in that teachers, administrators, special education professionals, and college student organizations comprised of student representatives with disabilities participate frequently in the EDPS 265, The Inclusive Classroom, lectures.

University supervisors have a meeting at the end of the semester at which the TIP requirements are examined and suggestions for changes are developed.  In Block VI, university supervisors meet and are trained.  In the summer of 2003 the head university supervisor for Block VI held an assessment training session for the university supervisors.  The supervisors examined two lesson plans, rated the lesson plans, and then watched videos of student teachers teaching the lessons. For the first lesson that was viewed, the Student Teacher Observation Form was filled out independently by the university supervisors.  For the second video, the supervisors filled out the form together as they maintained a conversation about the ratings.  In both cases the head university supervisor noted a consistency of ratings, and frequent references to the guide she had prepared.

In addition, after a feedback session with the university supervisors for Block VI (elementary program student teaching), the head university supervisor realized they did not totally understand what all of the categories meant that they were using to evaluate the candidates.  So guides were prepared for the student teaching observation form and the benchmark and evaluation forms.  In 2002, the head university supervisor realized that the university supervisors also needed a guide for all of their tasks, such as writing letters of recommendation, or how to write a final evaluation.  So a University supervisor information guide was prepared to assist them with these tasks and training was conducted to improve the consistency of ratings.

The Block VI Cooperating Teacher Advisory Council (9 teachers and the head university supervisor for Block VI) meet twice yearly, in November and April.  Members of the council are outstanding teachers (one is National Board certified) who have worked recently and often with Purdue student teachers.  They advise the head university supervisor on suggested program changes, requirements, procedures, and so on.

Collaboration on evaluation of the other block courses is just as thorough as that for Block VI.  For example, in Block I a TIP supervisor is in the schools every other week to verify candidates' progress.  Mid-term contact also is made with cooperating teachers.  In Block II, an email is sent to each Block II teacher each semester to obtain his/her input on the courses and TIP.  All cooperating teachers have contact information for the TIP supervisor and course coordinator.  In the Block II TIP, supervisors visit each school weekly.  Also, cooperating teachers are contacted three to five times by email each semester to determine candidate progress.

Moreover, the Early Field Experiences Placement Coordinator of the Office of Field Experiences meets with the principals of all of the TIP schools before and after placements each year.  In the spring of 2003 the Early Field Experiences Placement Coordinator met individually with approximately 40 principals of local schools to obtain their input on the progress of the field placements, and to plan for the upcoming year.  Overall, the principals have been pleased with the Purdue candidates present in their respective schools, and all of them wanted to continue the partnership.  Some principals commented that the candidates were "on time," "motivated," "involved," and "enthusiastic."  A few negative items were addressed by the principals, which in nearly all cases involved individual candidates.  These problems included poorly written introductory letters, poor attendance, dress code issues, unprofessional conduct in the classroom, and lack of initiative.  All of the comments, positive and negative, were passed along to the respective instructors for candidate remediation.

Professional Development Collaborations

The College of Education collaborates with school-based colleagues in professional development in a number of ways.  In Block I, the course EDCI 285, Multiculturalism and Education, has two programs--the Cultural Palooza in elementary school and the Cultural Self Identity project for middle school students--running in four of the schools with which Block I interacts. These programs provide professional development for school-based faculty as well as rich diversity experiences for the candidates involved. 

At Burnett Creek Elementary School two College of Education faculty members work with Burnett Creek faculty during their school improvement release days on implications of brain research.

The Professional Development Schools with which the Purdue College of Education (COE) are allied functions through a steering committee.  This steering committee is comprised of representatives of the schools and the COE.  It meets several times a semester, and is a valuable conduit for cooperation and program review.  The PDS were developed in alignment with the work of the Holmes Group.  In 1990, the Holmes Group formulated a set of principles to guide the design of a Professional Development School.  In 1996, the Holmes Group formed the Holmes Partnership, a consortium of research universities, public school districts and organizations that represent professional educators, which adopted six principal goals:  High Quality Professional Preparation, Simultaneous Renewal, Equity, Diversity, and Cultural Competence, Scholarly Inquiry and Programs of Research, Faculty Development, and Policy Initiation.

The P³T³ project involved technology-using teachers from partner K-12 schools in its workshops for Purdue faculty development. In addition, workshops were conducted on technology integration for teachers in some of the partner districts.

Each spring a showcase is held where cooperating teachers in the Blocks (including student teaching) are brought together so that Purdue University may express appreciation for the teachers' and principals' efforts on behalf of teacher education.  At this event poster sessions are held highlighting the work of the Blocks.

The Purdue Literacy Network Project maintains a series of professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators.  The Professional Development Initiative (PDI) currently involves three projects that provide flexibility for schools or districts in these efforts: the Professional Development Series, the Summer Literacy Institutes, and Designed Professional Development.  Further information on this project may be found in the Exhibit Room.

Placement Communication

Placement communications with the schools is handled by the Office of Field Experiences.  Formal contractual agreements are made with each school.  The Early Field Experiences Placement Coordinator negotiates the TIP placements with the principals and faculty of the cooperating schools.  The Student Teaching Placement Coordinator makes contacts with principals and superintendents to set up student teaching placements.  The Director of Field Experiences and the Interim Associate Dean for Engagement also travel to the local school districts to interview the person in charge of field placements and student teaching in those districts to explain the Purdue University Teacher Education Program and procedures and listen to his/her feedback and suggestions.  This personal connection provides an effective mechanism for meaningful communication that encourages close collaboration between Purdue and K-12 faculty.

Element 2: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice

Initial Level Programs

The Theory Into Practice (TIP) field experiences associated with the Blocks are carefully designed so that candidates have placements with a wide range of grade levels, schools, and student diversity.  These factors are tracked by the Office of Field Experiences to ensure that this variety is built into the program.  The activities which candidates have during the TIPs are based on the Purdue conceptual framework, state and professional standards including the INTASC principles, and consist of a variety of reflection opportunities.  TIP assignments set out in Block course syllabi include philosophy statements and case studies, and learning analyses of students on an individual, small group, and large group basis.

All initial teacher education programs at Purdue prepare candidates to use information technology effectively.  Candidates must successfully complete EDCI 270, Introduction to Educational Technology and Computing.  They develop an electronic portfolio as they progress through the program.  And technology is a strand flowing through all of the Block courses.  There is an expectation that candidates incorporate information technology in their field experiences in the schools.  The lesson plan rubric assists with the assessment of how they use technology in their teaching.  Candidates also attend technology in-services in their schools.  For example, the Tippecanoe School Corporation provides a technology orientation for Purdue candidates, to acquaint them with the ways in which information technology is applied in that school district.

The primary purpose of the increased emphasis on early field experiences in the new teacher education program is to provide candidates with opportunities to learn through observation of exemplary teacher models and application of knowledge to real teaching situations.  Hence, these experiences are structured to provide multiple opportunities to learn through observing and doing.  Grading criteria and evaluation forms for the Block TIPs and student teaching are based on the INTASC principles.  The assignments are mapped to the INTASC principles and the College of Education conceptual framework, enabling us to determine if candidates' field experience assignments are assisting their professional growth.

Attention is given to the sequence of field placements so that candidates are provided a diverse set of experiences. Block I and Block II schools are all different.  Placements for a given candidate will be a K-2 and then grades 3-6 split for elementary, and a middle school-high school split for secondary education candidates in their Block I and Block II TIPs.  Purdue staff work with K-12 schools to ensure diverse placements.  For example, another secondary placement was needed in Block I.  So faculty and staff approached the Frankfort schools since there is a 20% Hispanic population in those schools and secured their participation.

Every field experience has observation components.  In the TIPs, candidates observe their cooperating teachers and the students in the classroom.  In the earlier Blocks, the observation is more holistic and focuses on issues such as classroom organization and management, and student behaviors.  In later TIPs the observations are more targeted to specific behaviors and performances by both teachers and students.  Candidates observe each other in the classroom as well, since field placement TIPs customarily send several candidates into each classroom.

In the TIPs and in student teaching, candidates plan and deliver instruction, to single students, small groups, and a large group.  They are invited to and attend Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings, parent conferences, faculty meetings, and various in-service activities.

Candidates in TIPs and in student teaching carry out assignments specified in the syllabi of their courses.  They do this under the direct supervision of their cooperating teacher and their university supervisor, and indirectly under the supervision of the professor who is coordinating the block and therefore responsible for the syllabus.  In doing this work they necessarily interact with these persons, and with the other candidates who share the TIP placement with them.  For example, In Block VI (elementary student teaching) there are observation conferences, mid-term benchmarks, and a final evaluation.  In Block VI the university supervisor visits them nine times.

Reflection is built into every TIP and into student teaching.  In Block VI, candidates develop reflective summaries weekly.  They also do special topic reflective summaries.  The topics for these reflective summaries include such things as assessment and classroom management.  Elementary candidates also create another reflective piece at the end of student teaching, a letter of advice to the next set of student teachers.  These letters are then read by the university supervisors in the ensuing semester at the first meeting with the new student teachers.

Student teaching at Purdue is a carefully crafted set of experiences that lead the candidate from observation to increasing responsibility for teaching.  Throughout the program all of the student teaching experiences place an emphasis on candidate learning.  In Block VI (elementary student teaching) candidates have six seminars with their university supervisors in which the candidates assigned to a given supervisor meet to share and debrief their experiences.  At every seminar they bring artifacts.  As an example of an artifact, they interview their principals and share those interviews.  Candidates also share lesson plan ideas, such as how to actively involve students in learning. 

In student teaching, candidates are observed by their cooperating teachers and the university supervisor and in some cases, the head university supervisor for that program area.  In the TIPs, candidates work under the observation and supervision of the cooperating teacher.  They also are observed by the instructors for their course or course section.  In Block III the courses are taught on-site, and so the instructors are in the schools each time the candidates are.

For each course instructors have developed rubrics and other instruments for documenting candidate learning.  These, like the assessments they accompany, are linked to the INTASC principles.  For example, in EDFA 205, references linked to the INTASC principles accompany candidate TIP projects.  In EDCI 363 a tutoring feedback form (see course packet) is completed by the university supervisor for each candidate tutoring session.  This allows the course instructor to document the progress of each candidate in acquiring teaching skills and to adjust course content and experiences accordingly.

Documentation of candidate performance is particularly comprehensive during student teaching, as that is when candidates have the best opportunity to practice and demonstrate teaching performances.  In EDCI 496, Student Teaching in the Elementary School, assessment forms have been prepared for use by cooperating teachers and university supervisors.  Each form is accompanied by a guide for its use, and both the forms and guides are mapped to the INTASC principles.  These forms include the Block VI Student Teacher Observation Form and guide, the Benchmark Evaluation Form and guide, and the Final Evaluation Form and guide.

Special Education

Field experiences in special education follow much the same pattern as field experiences in elementary education.  Candidates complete EDPS 461S, Practicum in Special Education, ideally the same semester as the methods course, and the semester prior to student teaching.  Candidates log 60 hours in a classroom with students with severe disabilities.  The level (elementary or secondary) is a function of the license they seek.  Candidates work with their cooperating teachers to identify a target student and plan individual instruction for that student.  They develop a portfolio and behavior management plans as well as collect data on student learning and behavior management.  The professor in charge of the course approaches master teachers in the area for placements.  The professor supervises the field experiences.  Occasionally, if the numbers warrant, a doctoral student with classroom experience may be hired to assist with some of the supervising.

The cooperating teacher and the university supervisor evaluate the work of candidates in student teaching.  After each visit (at least four visits are made during a semester) the university supervisor completes a write-up on the candidate's performance.  This evaluation is discussed with the candidate and the cooperating teacher.  The professor gives each candidate feedback on the components of the portfolio which are mapped to the Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB) standards.  The cooperating teacher and the university supervisor each prepare a summative evaluation of the candidate at the end of the semester.  During school visits, the professor confers with the cooperating teachers and solicits their advice on ways to improve the practicum experience.

Early Childhood Education

In the Early Childhood Education and Exceptional Needs program (ECEEN), candidates gain knowledge and skills for a variety of careers in educational and intervention programs for all young children and their families.  This major prepares candidates to be teachers in inclusive preschool classrooms and/or in classrooms serving children with exceptional needs up through grade 3.  ECEEN candidates learn about normally developing children and children with exceptional needs.  They develop skills for working with typically developing children, children with exceptional needs, and their families.  Several ECEEN courses include practicum components which provide candidates opportunities to develop their skills for working with infants and young children. The Child Development Laboratory School and the Purdue Child Care Program are state-of-the-art facilities on campus that are used extensively by candidates for observation, practicum, and student teaching experiences.

Student teaching is a high point of the senior year in the Department's Early Childhood Education and Exceptional Needs major.  In their senior year, ECEEN candidates complete a semester of full-time student teaching that includes children with and without disabilities.  Placements are available in a variety of settings in the Greater Lafayette area.  Examples of student teaching sites for the past two years are:  Greater Lafayette Area Special Services Preschool; Lafayette Head Start; Purdue Child Development Laboratory School; Purdue Child Care Program; Tippecanoe County Child Care, Lafayette; and Village Nursery School, West Lafayette.

Secondary

Secondary methods courses also contain field experiences.  Typically the instructor selects cooperating teachers with the advice of principals and department heads, and with the assistance of the Office of Field Experiences.  For secondary student teaching the school corporation may have regulations that affect cooperating teacher selection (e.g., how often a teacher may have a student teacher).  Secondary candidates take Blocks I and II, but several semesters may intervene before they take their methods courses.  Consequently, secondary methods courses attempt to "re-socialize" the candidate to the context of the school as well as prepare the candidate for student teaching.  EDCI 422, The Teaching of English in Secondary Schools, will serve as an example.

This course presents a ten-week field experience.  To help candidates make the most of this field experience as a preparation for student teaching itself, the course is structured in such a way that several assignments and major projects are linked to the field experience.  During the semester, candidates write four reflective journal entries based on their field experience, focused on each of four topical domains (e.g. learners as individuals, schools as institutions, curriculum in context).  They co-teach a full-period lesson on campus that is expressly geared to the grade level and student population corresponding to the field experience placement.  Moreover, candidates develop as a major, semester project full-fledged instructional units of 4 - 6 weeks duration--again suited for candidates in their field experience placements--with the hope that it might be adapted subsequently for use when student teaching.  Finally, a culminating course portfolio organizes and reflects upon various instructional and non-instructional materials, including those secured through the field experience, always with an eye to resources for student teaching.

Advanced Level Programs

In elementary education and in educational technology master's programs, candidates develop a portfolio addressing the standards, under the guidance of faculty.  They use their own classrooms for the field site.  These candidates already have entry into their own classrooms, and they know their students well.  Further, using the candidate's own classroom is conducive to integrating the standards across the content areas, which could be problematic in a classroom where they were guests. 

At the advanced level, counselors-in-training complete a practicum and two internships.  Two semesters of internship, at a school level different from that of the practicum, are part of the second year in the counselor education program.  Counselors-in-training usually stay at one school for the entire year, beginning during the pre-school meetings and concluding at the end of Purdue's spring semester.  Candidates must log 300 hours each semester, for a total of 600 hours, of which 240 are direct hours.  In the practicum candidates spend at least 100 hours in one school, and at one school level, with at least 40 of those hours in direct services to students.  Candidates meet with their supervisor one hour per week on campus for group supervision and with their campus supervisor, for group supervision, for two hours and twenty minutes once each week.  Candidates are expected to demonstrate continual personal and professional growth throughout the internship.  Candidates submit four audiotapes of various kinds of sessions during the semester for campus-supervisor critiquing.  They also typically submit a case conceptualization, a personal/professional growth paper, a paper regarding school culture, various reaction papers, and a topical PowerPoint presentation.

Candidates in the School Counseling program log 25 hours of observation and interaction in one or two classrooms in one building prior to their practicum and internship experiences.  Candidates spend at least one full day in the classroom, with the other hours divided over two to four days.  The purpose of this activity is to assist counselors-in-training to appreciate what is required of classroom teachers each day.  An additional assignment is required to focus attention on the classroom environment.  The counselors-in-training keep a journal and then write a paper with approximately two paragraphs per hour of observation, based on the 25-hour experience.

The Educational Administration building level administrator internship experience takes place over the fall and spring semesters of a given academic year.  Candidates log at least 300 clock hours of work at the school site.  Assignments and experiences in the internship are built around each of the IPSB building level administrator standards.  Candidates develop personal goals and objectives for the internship.  They specify performances, knowledge and dispositions on which they will focus during their time in the schools.  The performances, knowledge and dispositions on which the internship focuses are selected in consultation with their on-site supervisor.  The on-site supervisor reviews the candidate's logs and related reflections and approves them for transmittal to the university supervisor.

Educational Administration candidates produce bi-weekly logs, which correspond to the goals, objectives, and selected performances, knowledge, and dispositions.  In these logs candidates describe the activities they have undergone in the two-week period, and the observations they have made of their on-site supervisor.  They then write reflections on those observations and activities, in which they analyze them in relation to the IPSB standards.

Educational Administration candidates during their internships also produce standards papers.  In a standards paper the candidate analyzes each of the IPSB standards and identifies the elements of the standards one must understand in order to become an effective school leader.  These papers are developed with specific references to their school site.  These papers are read by the onsite mentor and by the professor who directs the internship.  Candidates receive feedback from each.  Educational Administration candidates also are required to write case studies based on their experiences in the internship.  These case studies focus on problems or situations they have encountered as an administrative intern.  These case studies are posted on the course WebCT site.  All candidates in the course are expected to comment on each case study posted.  The cases are analyzed in reference to good professional practice and in reference to the IPSB standards.

Educational Administration candidates also conduct a self-evaluation and review of the intern experience at the end of the spring semester.  In addition, the on-site supervisor provides an evaluation of the overall internship experience, thus providing valuable feedback to the university supervisor.  Finally, the on-site supervisor completes an evaluation of the intern's performance at the conclusion of the internships.

Another example is the practicum in the gifted education licensure program (EDPS 695G).  This practicum includes a reflective journaling component where candidates analyze the effects of their teaching on individual students and groups of students, develop strategies for improving student learning, and reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of their attempts to differentiate instruction for talented learners.

Data

In field placements and in student teaching, candidates collect data on student learning, analyze the data, reflect on their work, and develop strategies for improving learning.  These processes are documented in the syllabi for each course.  A few illustrative examples suffice here.  In Block III, EDCI 362, Literacy Teaching and Learning in the Elementary School I, candidates complete an emergent literacy assessment project that utilizes the collection and analysis of data.  Candidates conduct an emergent reading and an emergent writing elicitation with a kindergarten child.  They analyze the child's emergent literacy processes evidenced in the child's "pretend reading" of a favorite storybook using Sulzby's (1991) Storybook Reading categories.  The Purdue candidates also assess the child's emergent writing using Sulzby's, Barnhart's, & Hieshima's (1989) Forms of Writing and Re-reading Assessment categories.  In addition, the candidates assess the child's knowledge about books and book handling using Clay's (1972) Concepts About Print.  After collecting the emergent literacy data, the candidates analyze the data by comparing them to the categories established in each of the assessment tools listed above.  Finally, candidates write a case study report which focuses on the case study child's strengths and needs and includes two developmentally appropriate and multilevel literacy lesson plans that would support the case study child's developing literacy within the framework of the whole class.

In Block I candidates are introduced to the idea of collecting data on student learning to develop strategies for improving learning. They do this through journals. Candidates write a journal entry for each visit to their field experience (TIP) school. Each journal entry consists of a brief record of experiences, reflections on those experiences, and reflections on classroom readings, writings, and discussions.  The journal serves as a place for candidates to record reflections and changing feelings about what it is like to be a teacher. The instructor reads and responds to each journal entry during the semester. In the journal candidates reflect on the following:

• A description of the school and surrounding area.
• A description of the classroom: How are seats arranged? What materials are displayed? Is student work up on the walls?
• What classroom routine activities are you performing? 
• What work have you done with individual students?
• What small group and/or large group activities have you engaged in?
• What lessons have you assisted the teacher with?
• Observe one student and write field notes on observation. Reflect on the field notes.
• Reflect on conversations with teacher (see Teacher Interview questions).
• Reflect on concepts being discussed in EDCI 285 (gender, race, ethnic, class and other diversity etc.)
• Other (Your instructor may provide additional guided activities for reflection).

Topics from journals are then brought forward for class discussion; some of the topics relate to student learning.

Staff Experience

The clinical faculty who work with Purdue candidates average from 15 to 19 years of teaching experience over the past three years.  The school districts monitor who works with the candidates, and are careful to ensure that candidates are placed with teachers whom they consider master teachers.  Faculty provides an explanation of the blocks and the expectations for the experiences the candidates will have, including the assignments that the candidates need to complete.  Typically the principal of each school manages the signup of the teachers who work with a given block.  At the secondary level, department chairs often assist in identifying cooperating teachers.

OFE staff provides an orientation for cooperating teachers in student teaching, and for university supervisors.  The head university supervisor in Block VI also holds assessment training sessions with the university supervisors during which they view videos of student teachers teaching, critique them, complete and review the evaluation forms, and then compare their critiques in an effort to achieve more consistency among the supervisors in the assessment process.

Element 3: Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions to Help All Students Learn

* Please note, this site was prepared for the March 6-10, 2004, NCATE/IPSB Board of Examiners visit. The information posted here is available to the public and every attempt is being made to ensure its completeness and accuracy. If you have any updates or corrections, or have difficulty accessing or locating any documents, please contact T. J. Oakes, NCATE Coordinator, at oakest@purdue.edu or 765-494-5486, or contact Richard Frisbie, Assessment Coordinator and WebMaster at rfrisbie@purdue.edu or 765-494-2360.