From Thought Police to Thoughtful Practice: The Evolution of Dispositions Assessment in a Teacher Education Program

English Version

The teacher preparation program in this case study started the exploration of dispositions as a means to safeguard schools and students by ensuring that only teacher candidates who were knowledgeable in their content and skilled in and disposed toward creating safe learning environments for all students could obtain redentials. The described journey reveals both the pitfalls and the power of dispositions and has led to unforeseen understandings. The article describes the collaborative development of a set of dispositions and both a rubric and a systematic process by which the dispositions are assessed. The process and the effectiveness of this dispositions assessment system are revealed through candidate stories and assessment data. In addition, Mary Diez’s (2006) five principles to guide effective assessment practice provide a means to measure this assessment process against demonstrated principles for success. Implications include the understanding that teacher educators must first hold themselves accountable to the professional dispositions that they value in their candidates.

We began from a position of helplessness. Like many schools of education, our faculty felt a great responsibility to safeguard schools and students by ensuring that only teacher candidates who were knowledgeable in their content and skilled in and disposed toward creating safe learning environments for all students could obtain teaching credentials. While the vast majority of teacher candidates in our credential programs seemed well suited to the profession, occasionally an individual would surface whose remarks and behaviors would raise strong concerns about their appropriateness for the profession. However, once in the program, dismissing such unsuitable candidates was nearly impossible, in part because the faculty’s judgment of the candidates’ uitability was typically based on the answer to one question: “Would I want this person teaching my child?” While this was certainly a critical question, it lacked the criteria and process needed to gather evidence for candidate evaluation or possible dismissal.

Our first attempt to elaborate on this question led us to focus on the word person and the personality characteristics that make a person a good teacher. Drawing on the work of Haberman (1987) and others, the department’s fledgling attempt to define and measure teacher qualities resulted in a teacher candidate disposition form that listed 36 positive and negative personality characteristics to be measured on a scale from never evident to very evident. The form was to be used to evaluate applicants to this fifth-year credential program in prerequisite course and fieldwork.

Problems quickly arose with the disposition form itself. Teachers in the field expressed concerns with the design of the instrument. They were reluctant to make character judgments based on limited observation, expressing concerns and frustration about the lack of clarity in a number of the characteristics listed. For example, the characteristic “shows commitment to the common good” was deemed vague, difficult to measure, and rather lofty. Teachers pointed out that “separates personal from professional life” could be either a positive or negative characteristic, depending on the context and degree, and that a reserved and thoughtful candidate might unfairly receive a low rating for “confident and comfortable with self.” Of most concern were judgments of personality such as “unpleasant or annoying,” that were susceptible to personal bias and subjectivity.

Journals for full download on the link below
<--- Download