dc.contributor.author	Ellis, Iris Cooper	en_US
dc.coverage.spatial	United States	en_US
dc.coverage.temporal	2002-2007 CE	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2010-09-22T15:57:47Z	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2011-03-02T17:29:01Z
dc.date.available	2010-09-22T15:57:47Z	en_US
dc.date.available	2011-03-02T17:29:01Z
dc.date.issued	2007-12	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10428/446	en_US
dc.description.abstract	The purpose of this study was to explore the similarities and differences in methods being used by various colleges of education throughout the United States to identify, teach, and assess educator dispositions. In addition, data were gathered to determine if relationships existed among geographic location, Carnegie classification, enrollment size, type of population served, instructional modes, date of last NCATE review, and percentage of faculty serving as NCATE Board of Examiners and state Board of Examiners and the specific dispositions assessed, how specific dispositions were selected, the points at which dispositions are assessed, who does the assessment(s), and how the results are used. A survey was mailed to 646 NCATE accredited colleges and universities within the United States; 234 surveys were returned. Following a general inspection of the survey, ten separate models were tested. Educator preparation programs reported more target dispositions worded as characteristics than dispositions worded as perceptions or those worded as behaviors. Institutions reported that faculty survey was the most common method used in the selection of target dispositions. Candidate dispositions were most commonly assessed during the program, and the assessors who most commonly assessed dispositions were college/university supervisors. Rating scale and observation instrument were the most commonly reported methods of assessing educator dispositions. The majority of respondents indicated that dispositions assessments had an effect on whether candidates progressed through their programs. Relationships, although weak, were found among assessors of dispositions and Carnegie classification groups and between enrollment size and public school mentors as assessors of dispositions.	en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents	I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 Purpose of Study ..................................................................................................................3 Research Questions ..............................................................................................................3 Hypotheses ...........................................................................................................................4 Assumptions and Limitations ..............................................................................................4 Delimitations ........................................................................................................................5 Definition of Terms..............................................................................................................5 Summary ..............................................................................................................................7 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .....................................................................................9 History..................................................................................................................................9 Definitions by Various Educational Researchers ..............................................................15 Comparison of Methodologies of Colleges and Universities ............................................26 Summary ............................................................................................................................45 III. METHOD...........................................................................................................................48 Participants.........................................................................................................................48 Instrumentation ..................................................................................................................50 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................52 Variables ............................................................................................................................52 Model Hypotheses and Data Analysis ...............................................................................56 Summary ............................................................................................................................59 IV. RESULTS ..........................................................................................................................61 Descriptive Data Results ....................................................................................................61 Statistical Analysis for Specific Relationships ..................................................................69 Summary ............................................................................................................................84 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................85 Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................................85 Summary of Research Procedures .....................................................................................86 Summary and Discussion of Findings ...............................................................................87 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................99 Recommendations ............................................................................................................100 Summary ..........................................................................................................................102 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................103 APPENDICES ..........................................................................................................................111 Appendix A Dispositions Evaluation Instrument, Columbus State University ........................................................................................111 Appendix B Secondary Student Teaching Performance Profile Form B and Rubric for Form B, College of Saint Benedict/Saint Johns University .............114 Appendix C.1: Rubric for Evaluating the Interview for Admission into Teacher Education, Henderson State University .......................................................122 Appendix C.2: Interview Rating Sheet, Henderson State University ..............................124 Appendix D: Teacher Candidate Dispositions, State University of New York at Brockport ..............................................................126 Appendix E.1: Personal Reference for Teacher Education Application, Chadron State College ...............................................................................................128 Appendix E.2: Department Recommendations for Admission to Professional Year, Chadron State College ...............................................................................................130 Appendix E.3: Secondary Block Student Evaluation Form, Chadron State College ...............................................................................................132 Appendix E.4: Teacher Intern Checklist, Chadron State University ...............................134 Appendix F: Professional Dispositions Assessment Form, Washington State University .....................................................................................136 Appendix G: Institutional Review Board Approval Form...............................................139 Appendix H: Cover Letter for Survey Packet ..................................................................142 Appendix I: Survey of U. S. Teacher Education Programs .............................................144	en_US
dc.language.iso	en_US	en_US
dc.publisher	Valdosta State University	en_US
dc.rights	Copyright protected. Unauthorized reproduction or use beyond the exceptions granted by the Fair Use clause of U.S. Copyright law may violate federal law.	en_US
dc.subject	Education Programs	en_US
dc.subject.lcsh	Teachers--United States--Attitudes	en_US
dc.subject.lcsh	Teacher effectiveness--United States	en_US
dc.title	Educator Dispositions: A Survey of U.S. Teacher Education Programs	en_US
dc.type	Dissertation	en_US
dc.contributor.department	Department of Adult and Career Education	en_US
dc.description.advisor	Lee, Julie	en_US
dc.description.committee	McElvey, Randy	en_US
dc.description.committee	Wiley, Larry	en_US
dc.description.degree	Ed.D.	en_US
dc.description.major	Education	en_US