THE SECOND GLOBAL TEACHER EDUCATION SUMMIT

 

 Quality of Teacher Education and Learning:

Practice, Innovation, and Policy

 

At

 

Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 17-20 October 2014

 

 

 

I.             Theme

 

For over three decades, globalization as a force of societal change has helped world leaders to revamp their school systems for international competitiveness and to alter the direction of teaching and learning in schools. Policymakers in education have been quick to grasp information about the accomplishments of schools in other nations. Attractive packages are picked and translated into policies with transplantation in mind. The schools and their teachers are asked to conform to reform mandates. Teacher education programs are expected to accommodate policy implementation. 

 

When schools are slow in responding to the requirements of reform, their inefficacies are being delineated. When teachers, who are designated as the spearhead of reform, question the wisdom of reform measures, their effectiveness is challenged. The programs that nurtured teachers are also deemed ineffectual. Today, a chorus of criticisms against teacher quality can be heard, suggesting a worldwide impeachment of the quality of schooling, teachers and teacher education programs.

 

Instead of contesting widespread cynicism, we wish to invite fellow educators and researchers to join us in addressing critical issues regarding teachers and teacher education so that their quality can be enhanced. The theme of the Second Global Teacher Education Summit is Quality of Teacher Education and Learning: Practice, Innovation, and Policy. By linking teacher education to teacher and student learning, we seek to provide a platform for an international and cross-cultural dialogue with educators and researchers from different parts of the world so that a broad view on the improvement of teachers and teacher education quality can be established. By initiating an inquiry into the practice, innovation, and policy of teacher and student learning, we hope to draw attention to the accomplishments of teachers and to derive meaning from innovative ideas and research findings for a well-balanced approach to teacher education.

 

The Second Global Teacher Education Summit will be held on the campus of Beijing Normal University in Beijing, the capitol of The People’s Republic of China, during 17-20 October, 2014.  The Summit will be organized in the spirit of a successful inaugural conference held three years ago in 2011 where participants from different countries gathered to address issues in teacher preparation for the new century. In charting the direction for future discussion on teacher education, we were enlightened by prominent scholars in the fields of teacher studies and deeply touched by the presence of a large number of young scholars from all over China who earnestly sought to initiate conversations with educators from abroad.

 

For the Second Global Teacher Education Summit, we call for papers that examine various dimensions of teacher education and learning for oral and poster presentation. We shall also consider proposals for symposia that address emergent interests which are related to the sub-themes as described below.

 

We hope that with your support and participation, the Second Summit will be a convivial event of ideas and fellowship.   

 

 

II.            Sub-themes

 

(1)  Quality of Teacher Education Systems

 

Systems of teacher education vary in their curricula and styles of administration and operation, but they share a common goal of producing competent teachers who can serve the interests of the nation and its students. Teacher education systems rest at an intersection where higher education, government policies, and community demands meet, but only remain at the peripheries of their concern. Research on teacher education is considered an intellectual orphan; funding for its programs normally falls far behind their actual needs; pathways to licensure are created by official whims; and the community is quick to trace problems related to teachers back to their breeding grounds. In a context of benign neglect, not much has been done to challenge the legitimacy of teacher education programs; but recent attempts in the U.S. to measure the contribution of teacher education to student achievement harbinger a systemic attempt to make teacher education more accountable for its work. While so much can be said about system construction for teacher education and its related challenges and opportunities, we seek views that address quality issues in teacher education systems: What kind of forces are at work to mold teacher education systems as we know them today? What are the characteristics of teacher education systems and programs of high quality? How should we view certain proposed standards of quality for teacher education programs? How should we derive meaning from the measures of large-scale reform endeavors that have borne new sets of demands for change in teacher education programs? Why is change necessary and inevitable in teacher education, an area of work that is parked at a crossroads of history, politics, and society?

 

 

(2)  Quality Attributes of Teachers and Teacher Education

Research findings suggest that teachers who possess certain qualities are more likely to succeed in classrooms and schools. Attributes such as a solid knowledge and skill base, strong beliefs and commitment, continuous reflection for identity construction, resilience in solving problems, genuinely nurtured professionalism, and inclusive attitude toward differences are some of the indicators that predicate quality of teachers. As teacher education programs attempt to translate such attributes in their curricula, the list of desirable traits have gotten longer, often beyond their institutional capacity to handle problems arising from the demand for new courses. Given the scope and magnitude of the teachers’ quality attributes, it will require arduous labor  to reconstruct teacher education curricula for future teachers so that they can prepare themselves and their own students for a myriad of lifelong pursuits in study, family, work, and citizenship. Our quest for a deeper understanding of the quality attributes of teachers and teacher education may lead us to the following questions: What is the state-of-the-art understanding of such quality attributes as teacher knowledge, beliefs, identity, resilience, and professionalism? What evidence do we have to support claims of a causal relationship between the quality attributes of teachers and student learning? What relevance do these quality attributes have in the assessment of teachers? How do the quality attributes enhance (or impede) teachers’ work? How should we judge the quality of teacher education programs through a lens that incorporates these quality attributes? Why is there a noticeable absence of the quality attributes in the debate on the efficacy of teacher education?

 

 

(3)  Teacher Education and Teacher Quality

 

Educational reform magnifies issues in teacher quality. Many of these issues are related to the teachers’ inability to deal with change. The teachers’ reluctance to change in accordance with policy requirements are often construed as a sign of professional ineptness or preservation of self-interests. In curriculum reform, for example, the reticence of Chinese teachers to change is no more evident than in their resistance to suggestions that they should move from the pedagogical center. Teachers’ reluctance to embrace national curricula has cumulated to open defiance in certain western societies. Delayed display of conformity has cast teacher quality in dubiety and criticisms are gradually aimed at all aspects of their work – failure to maintain high academic standard, lax in character building, disregard for students’ developmental stages and differences, to name just a few. Teachers are now being assessed all over the world; and their professionality is openly questioned. In the absence of evidence that teachers are ill-trained, teacher education programs, by extension, bear the brunt of criticisms against teacher quality. From what is being taught in their programs to the quality of teaching practice by student-teachers, teacher education institutions are now asked to prove their effectiveness. What will be the future of teacher education when its educational and social relevance can no longer be assumed? What evidence do we have to support arguments that our teachers are working competently to facilitate student learning? What have teachers learned in teacher education programs and on their jobs that delineates teacher quality?  How can the teachers’ contribution to the development of schools and students be authentically measured and documented? How can teachers and teacher education programs work together to enhance teacher quality in a genuine and sustainable manner? Why are the foundations of teacher education and teacher professionalism so fragile that both seem powerless in the face of political manipulation and public distrust?

                       

 

(4)  Teacher Education and Student Learning

 

Teacher education affects student learning through the teachers it nurtures. Students learn in competitive educational systems that are, to a certain extent, driven by fear – fear of falling behind and fear of being surpassed. The teachers’ concerns in teaching will substantiate this speculation. In the past, the accomplishments of teachers that foster student learning were lauded, often in public, as demonstration of professional quality, care and devotion. However this has given way to laments of low academic achievement and anti-social behaviors among our students. Where students achievement scores are found wanting in international assessment exercises, the teachers are faulted for being unable to guide their students’ academic pursuits. By comparison, we are now hearing less about the accomplishments in teaching and learning. As the scope of discussion on student learning is confined increasingly to academic circles, even the teachers themselves are sometimes at a loss when confronted by learning problems that require further inquiry and enlightenment from researchers. For many teachers in our schools, for example, informed observation, diagnosis, and treatment (or referral) of student learning difficulties seem to be such a remote exercise that it is simply beyond their capability to engage. Sadly, our attention has been shifted to achievement standards and scores as the determinant of educational quality; and naturally, there appears to be fewer teachers who are genuinely interested in the complexities of student learning. What can we do for teachers who are keen to learn about learning? What are the elements of teaching that can truly enhance the students’ learning in their tech-driven life experiences? How can we unearth the intricacies of student learning and tailor the work of teacher education to suit student interests? How do we ascertain the contribution of teachers to student learning authentically and draw meaningful lessons from it?  How do we ascertain the linkage between teacher education and student learning without prejudicing the purpose, direction, and inner workings of teacher education programs? Why do recently promulgated educational policies emphasize student achievement at the expense of student learning?      

(5)  Innovative Ideas and Practices in Teacher Education and Development

 

For a field that has been criticized for its intellectual vapidity, teacher education has managed to tap skillfully into the knowledge base of academic disciplines and to promote innovative ideas and practices that promised to benefit teaching and learning in a variety of contexts. From learning through the new media to “reflective blogging”, and from “mindfulness in the classroom” to “networked learning communities”, teacher education and its participants have carved new routes to teaching and learning in schools and beyond. The incorporation of “social-emotional learning” into the curriculum of certain schools in the West suggests that emotional intelligence can be taught and could help students better regulate their emotions. The conception of teachers as leaders empowers them with new meanings and responsibilities at work, and ideas of distributed leadership may take the schools one step closer toward democratic management. The re-interpretation of the mentoring role of school teachers in the practicum yields benefits for student-teachers and their students. There is no dearth of practitioners in teaching that are ready to experiment; and there are a lot of teacher educators who are engaged in experiments. But, why does an impression of poverty prevail over what has become a rich field of educational innovations? What should be done in order for a confluence of innovations to emerge for the benefit student and teacher learning? In fact, what are the major educational innovations that have brought on significant changes in teaching and learning? How should we judge the quality of innovative ideas and practices and find those with a measure of excellence amidst a sea of novel ideas and practices?  How should we view the agency of innovators in the structure of schooling and teacher education, and, through that, understand the meaning of educational innovations for learning?

           

 

III.           Forums

 

(1)  Tin Ka Ping Teacher Education Research Forum for Young Scholars (Pre-summit conference to be held on 17 October 2014, only for young scholars who come from Mainland China, Hong Kong SAR, Macau or Taiwan)

(2)  Forum on Professional Development of Teacher Educators

(3)  Forum on University-School Partnership and Teacher Development

(4)  Forum on Teacher Education on the Internet and Development of Teachers in Rural Schools

(5)  Forum on Quality of Teacher Education from the Perspective of Assessments of International Student Achievement (PISA, TIMSS, etc.)

 

IV.          Invited Keynote Speakers (In alphabetical order)

 

Xiangming Chen (Peking University, China)

Anthony Clarke (University of British Columbia, Canada)

Cheryl Craig (University of Houston, USA)

Chris Davison (University of New South Wales, Australia)

Christopher Day (University of Nottingham, UK)

Lin Goodwin (Columbia University, USA)

Pamela Grossman (Stanford University, USA)

Qing Gu (University of Nottingham, UK)

David Hansen (Columbia University, USA)

Chi-kin Lee, John (Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong SAR, China)

Wing On Lee (National Institute of Education, Singapore)

Nai-kwai Lo, Leslie (Beijing Normal University, China)

John Loughran (Monash University, Australia)

Paulien Meijer (Utrecht University, Netherlands)

Lynn Paine (Michigan State University, USA)

Lijuan Pang (Beijing Normal University, China)

Manabu Sato (Gakushuin University, University of Tokyo, Japan)

Michael Schratz (University of Innsbruck, Austria)

Zhongying Shi (Beijing Normal University, China)

Ken Zeichner (University of Washington, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA)

Xiaoman Zhu (Beijing Normal University, China)

 

 

V.           Important Dates

 

Conference Dates: 17-20 October 2014

The First Round of Registration: 1 February 2014—31 May 2014

Proposal Submission Deadline: 31 May 2014

Proposal Review: 1-29 June 2014

Notification of Acceptance of Proposal: 30 June 2014

Paper Submission Deadline: 15 September 2014

The Second Round of Registration: 1 June 2014—30 September 2014

 

VI.          Languages of Conference

 

English, Chinese

VII. Conference Formats

 

Paper, Poster, Forum, Workshop

 

VIII. Registration Fees

All participants are required to register prior to the conference and submit the proposal and full paper via the on-line registration and paper submission system. If you have any questions regarding registration, please contact us at gtes2014bnu@gmail.com.

 

Table 1: Registration Fees

Participants Rates	Local Participants		International Participants
	Non-Students	Students	Non-Students	Students
Register by 31 May 2014	1000 RMB	400 RMB	300 US Dollar	100 US Dollar
Register after 31 May 2014	1500 RMB	600 RMB	500 US Dollar	150 US Dollar

 

Note:

1. “Local Participants” refer to people who are working or studying in Mainland China, Hong Kong SAR, Macau or Taiwan.

2. Keynote speakers register free of charge.

 

 

IX. Conference Organizing Committee

 

Sponsor: Beijing Normal University

Organizer:

The Center for Teacher Education Research, Beijing Normal University, Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Science in Universities, Ministry of Education, PRC

Co-organizers:

China Institute of Education Policy, Beijing Normal University

Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University

 

 

X. Contacts

 

Contact Address: Center for Teacher Education Research, Beijing Normal University, No. 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street, Haidian District, Beijing, China, 100875

Contact Persons: Pro. Song Huan, Dr. Yuan Li, Ms. Li Shengnan

Tel: 86-10-58804316-602, 86-10-58804316-601, 86-10-58804318

Fax: 86-10-58804318                     

E-mail: gtes2014bnu@gmail.com