Assessing the effects of reform in teacher education : An evaluation of the 5-year MAT program at Trinity University

The professional development school (PDS) is a prevalent reform of the past decade. The Holmes Group (1990) describes the PDS as a culmination of a school for the development of novice professionals, for the continuing development of experienced professionals, and for the research and development of the teaching profession (p. 1). Partnerships between schools and universities broaden the focus from cooperation during field placements for preservice teachers to collaborative renewal and development of each aspect of the educational system. Recent estimates of the number of PDSs range from one to several hundred (Darling-Hammond, 1996; McIntire, 1995). The PDS promises to become a distinguishing feature of teacher education programs in the next century (Holmes Group, 1995). Proliferation of PDSs creates the need for concurrent development of a substantive body of research on the organization, implementation, and efficacy of school-university partnerships. Several scholars (Starlings & Kowalski, 1990; Winitzky, Stoddart, & O'Keefe, 1992) hypothesize that lack of systematic evaluation, research, and development in forerunners of the PDS such as the laboratory school and portal school may have contributed to their recurring failure. Teitel (1994) observes that reform efforts such as PDSs often begin with great fanfare but fade as funding shifts to new programs. To guard against this cyclical pattern, educators must ask what obstacles hinder the development of partnerships between two dissimilar institutions, what strategies have various institutions found effective for negotiating impasses, and whether PDSs address the developmental needs of beginning teachers better than do traditional teacher preparation programs (Kagan, 1992). If they do, what impact do these differences have on teachers, students, and the educational system? Stallings and Kowalski (1990), reviewing research on PDSs, found qualitative and/or quantitative data on the effects of PDS implementation for only three programs. They argue that researchers must conduct evaluations of programs to construct a body of knowledge regarding PDSs and their effects on teacher preparation. Winitzky et al. (1992) state that the recent PDS movement shows great potential but, as yet, has produced little evidence to support expectations that this latest attempt to improve schools and teacher education can achieve its goals (p. 3). Yet, research documenting the development and effects of PDSs, while limited, is growing, providing educators a clearer picture of the advantages and challenges inherent in school-university collaborations (see e.g., Brandt, 1991; Darling-Hammond, 1994; Ducharme & Ducharme, 1992; Levine, 1992; Moore, 1996; Van Zandt & Harlan, 1995). In this article, I continue the dialogue regarding teacher education reform vis-a-vis the PDS, documenting benefits and obstacles encountered in the creation and maintenance of effective school-university partnerships. The 5-Year MAT Program at Trinity University In 1987, Trinity University established the Alliance for Better Schools, a school-university partnership between four schools (two elementary, one middle, and one high school) in one urban and one suburban district (San Antonio Independent School District and Northeast Independent School District) in San Antonio, Texas, and Trinity University. The partnerships created collaborative environments enhancing the reform efforts of each partner. One elementary school, reopened in 1988, became the national pilot for the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching's Basic School, designed by Ernest Boyer around four unifying principles: the school as community, a curriculum with coherence, a climate for reaming, and a commitment to character. The university liaison assigned to the school became an integral part of the development of the Basic School, conducting workshops and inservice activities for school faculty on topics such as writing interdisciplinary units while teaching the same concepts to preservice teachers through university courses. …