One concept related to knowledge about effective teaching that I chose to summarize from the province of Ontario’s professional teaching standards, Costa and Garmston (2002), and the Danielson (2007) text is Community of Learners that Involves Families and Community Members. This concept is referred to in two of the Ontario College of Teachers (OCT, n.d.) standards: Leadership and Community as well as Ongoing Professional Learning. This concept (Community of Learners that Involves Families and Community) is also referred to in the Danielson (2007) text’s domain 4: Professional Responsibilities. In comparison, within the sixth of six domains of inquiry: Knowledge of Collegial Interactions in the Costa and Garmston (2002, p. 181-182) text, the community inclusiveness concept is only partially developed.
In Ontario, a governing body called the Ontario College of Teachers (OCT) was established in 1997 by legislation entitled Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (OCT, n.d.). The OCT’s mandate is to certify teachers through a licensing process as well as govern, set standards of practice and conduct for teachers, provide for the ongoing education of teachers, investigate complaints against teachers, and accredit teacher education programs (OME, 2011). According to the OCT (n.d.), standards of practice for the teaching profession include (1) leadership and community as well as (2) ongoing professional learning. Each of these two standards is further defined by three key elements to which educator-members of the OCT are expected to adhere. These six key elements include (for the standard of leadership and community) responsibility and service, creation of a learning community, and sustaining learning through innovation and change; followed by (for the standard of ongoing professional learning) teacher learning and student learning, professional growth, and improving practice.
Similar in content to these two out of the five OCT standards and six out of the twenty key elements is Danielson’s (2007) framework for professional practice’s domain levels of performance. For example, Danielson (2007, p. 42) states that the most distinguished level of teacher-practitioner, the highest attainable goal educators should be striving to reach, is defined by highly developed “ethical standards and sense of professionalism, showing perceptive use of reflection, effective systems for record keeping and communication with families, leadership projects, and extensive professional development activities.”
Similarly, the OCT standard entitled Teaching Practice relates to Danielson’s (2007, p. 42) professional responsibilities domain, as they both refer to the keeping of “effective systems for record keeping and communication with families” or colleagues. However, the OCT standards do not mention or refer to educators allowing and encouraging students to “contribute to the systems for record keeping and family communication” where appropriate, as is described in domain 4: Professional Responsibilities of the Domain Levels of Performance by Danielson (2007, p. 42). Whereas, the Danielson (2007) text does not mention under Professional Responsibilities the importance of “inviting parents [/guardians] and members of the community to share their knowledge and skills in supporting classroom and school activities”, as does the OCT (n.d.) standards. In this regard, they are somewhat complementary as they provide slightly different perspectives on a consistent point of view.
Comparing the OCT and Danielson concept of community of learners, which includes the elements of leadership, community, ongoing professional learning, and responsibilities, to the domain of inquiry mentioned as “Knowledge of Collegial Interactions” by Costa and Garmston (2002) was revealing. Clearly, the concept of community of learners is restricted by the latter authors to that of the educators in the school environment, and does not include the students, their families or larger community, as do the OCT and Danielson concepts. In other words, the Costa and Garmston (2002) text restricts its focus to only the collegial interactions between educators, excluding the strong positive influence families and community members have shown through research to have on promoting and supporting improvements in student academic achievement (Williams, 2003; Weiss, Kreider, Lopez, and Chatman, 2005).
Another concept related to knowledge about effective teaching is that of an educator’s reflective practice, which according to Costa and Garmston (2002, p. 179) should include self-knowledge in “the areas of values, standards, and beliefs.” In contrast, the OCT (n.d.) refers to educator’s reflection as the kind that focus on pedagogical methods. Whereas Danielson (2007, p. 42) refers to highly developed “ethical standards.” However, all three resources, Costa and Garmston (2002), Danielson (2007), and the OCT (n.d.), are similar as they agree that pedagogical instruction must include a persistence by the educator in finding and applying instructional approaches that meet every student’s needs. In addition, they all three concur regarding the importance of content knowledge, as well as the ability of the instructor to tie that content knowledge to the curriculum standards and to each child’s real-life experiences. This is where the relationship between the development of teaching standards and the professionalization of teaching intersect.
Curriculum standards exist as the big ideas about what students are to know and be able to do to become contributing citizens in their communities, province or state, country, and perhaps even in the world. Well-written curriculum standards come with exemplars in the form of essential questions that act as guides for teachers who must unpack those curriculum standards and develop practical yet flexible lesson plans that include a variety of instructional approaches for all types of learners. In my opinion, The Ontario Ministry of Education (OME) does an adequate job of assisting educators to unpack the curriculum standards. Though there is room for improvement, the OME curriculum standards are of a practical value in the real world of instruction.
References
Costa, A.L. and Garmston, R.J. (2002). Cognitive Coaching: A Foundation for Renaissance Schools (2nd Edition). Norwood, Massachusetts: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing Professional Practice. A Framework for Teaching (2nd Edition). Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
OCT (n.d.). Ontario College of Teachers. The Standards of Practice for the Teaching Profession. Retrieved on January 10, 2011 from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/CSTP/Ontario-Teaching-Standards.pdf
OME (2011). The Ontario Ministry of Education. The Teaching Profession. Retrieved on January 10, 2011 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teacher/employ.html
Weiss, H.B., Kreider, H., Lopez, M.E., and Chatman, C.M. (2005) Preparing Educators to Involve Families From Theory to Practice, Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Williams, B. (2003). Closing the achievement gap: A vision for changing beliefs and practices (2nd Edition). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.