A Literature Review Regarding Behavioral/Descriptive Indicators of
Pre-Service Teachers’ Dispositions for Coaching and Assessment
By Steve Rose, Teacher Quality Enhancement Disposition Team and Simpson College
July 2006
Chapter 1: Introduction and Dispositional Standards in General
The following will delineate five commonly cited sources of disposition-related standards, those
of NCATE, INTASC, the National Academy of Education, PRAXIS III, and the conceptual
framework for educator dispositions championed by Arthur W. Combs. Combs is a pioneer in
the area of dispositions, especially in terms of the dispositions needed in people in the helping
professions, and Combs‟ work has been refined by David Usher (2002) and others. Combs‟ work
has been a strong point of reference for a great number of schools and colleges of education in
other parts of the nation. Last, this chapter will present a word of caution in terms of the idea of
assessing teacher dispositions in the context of the pre-service collegiate experience. This
discussion should pave the way for a closer examination of disposition assessment systems and
indicators to follow in the second chapter. That chapter will conclude with an informal analysis
of dispositional models used in Iowa teacher preparation programs in terms of common elements
and relationship to the models addressed above. The concluding chapter will attempt a synthesis
of some of the points made earlier, and it will also include a series of “stray thoughts” I picked
up in doing this research, thoughts tangential to this paper, but perhaps helpful to us as we look
at the broad area of pre-service teacher dispositions.
NCATE
NCATE (2002) provides a rather global and sweeping approach to teacher dispositions.
Dispositions. The values, commitments, and professional ethics that influence
behaviors toward students, families, colleagues, and communities and affect
student learning, motivation and development as well as the educator‟s own
professional growth. Dispositions are guided by beliefs and attitudes relating to
values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility, and social justice*. For
example, they might include a belief that all students can learn, a vision of high
and challenging standards, or a commitment to a safe and supportive learning
environment.
(In The passion for teaching: dispositions in the schools, p. 28. 2005)
*[Note: the reference to social justice and its delineation into characteristics by various schools
and colleges of education has drawn considerable attention and criticism. See Leo (2005),
McNight, Wilson (2005), Wasley (2006)]
INTASC
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) (2004) explicitly aligns
a number of dispositions to each of its ten standards for beginning teachers, as well as aligning
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 2
each standard with a set of “knowledge” items and a set of “performance” items. For brevity‟s
sake, the following will include only those identified as disposition indicators.
Model Standards for Beginning Teacher Licensing and Development--
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. Model Standards
for Beginning Teacher Licensing and Development: A Resource for State
Dialogue. Washington DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Principle #1: The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry,
and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning
experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for
students.
Dispositions
The teacher realizes that subject matter knowledge is not a fixed body of
facts but is complex and ever-evolving. He seeks to keep abreast of new
ideas and understandings in the field.
The teacher appreciates multiple perspectives and conveys to learners how
knowledge is developed from the vantage point of the knower.
The teacher has enthusiasm for the discipline(s) she teaches and sees
connections to everyday life.
The teacher is committed to continuous learning and engages in
professional discourse about subject matter knowledge and children's
learning of the discipline.
Principle #2: The teacher understands how children learn and develop and
can provide learning opportunities that support their intellectual, social, and
personal development.
Dispositions
The teacher appreciates individual variation within each area of
development, shows respect for the diverse talents of all learners, and is
committed to help them develop self-confidence and competence.
The teacher is disposed to use students' strengths as a basis for growth and
errors as an opportunity for learning.
Principle #3: The teacher understands how students differ in their
approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are
adapted to diverse learners.
Dispositions
The teacher believes that all children can learn at high levels and persists
in helping all children achieve success.
The teacher appreciates and values human diversity, shows respect for
students' varied talents and perspectives, and is committed to the pursuit of
"individually configured excellence."
The teacher respects students as individuals with differing personal and
family backgrounds and various skills, talents, ant interests.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 3
The teacher is sensitive to community and cultural mores. The teacher
makes students feel valued for their potential as people, and helps them to
learn to value each other.
Principle #4: The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional
strategies to encourage students' development of critical thinking, problem
solving and performance skills.
Dispositions
The teacher values the development of students' critical thinking,
independent problem solving, and performance capabilities.
The teacher values flexibility and reciprocity in the teaching process as
necessary for adapting instruction to student responses, ideas, and needs.
Principle #5: The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group
motivation and behavior to create a reaming environment that encourages
positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-
motivation.
Dispositions
The teacher takes responsibility for establishing a positive climate in the
classroom and participates in maintaining such a climate in the school as a
whole.
The teacher understands how participation supports commitment, and is
committed to the expression and use of democratic values in the
classroom.
The teacher values the role of students in promoting each other's learning
and recognizes the importance of peer relationships in establishing a
climate of learning.
The teacher recognizes the value of intrinsic motivation to students'
lifelong growth and learning.
The teacher is committed to the continuous development of individual
students' abilities and considers how different motivational strategies are
likely to encourage this development for each student.
Principle #6: The teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and
media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and
supportive interaction in the classroom.
Dispositions
The teacher recognizes the power of language for fostering self-
expression, identity development, and learning.
The teacher values all of the ways in which people communicate and
encourages many modes of communication in the classroom.
The teacher is a thoughtful and responsive listener.
The teacher appreciates the cultural dimensions of communication,
responds appropriately, and seeks to foster culturally sensitive
communication by and among all students in the class.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 4
Principle #7: The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject
matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.
Dispositions
The teacher values both long term and short term planning.
The teacher believes that plans must always be open to adjustment and
revisions based on student needs and changing circumstances.
The teacher values planning as a collegial activity.
Principle #8: The teacher understands and uses formal and informal
assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual and
social development of the learner.
Dispositions
The teacher values ongoing assessment as essential to the instructional
process and recognizes that many different assessment strategies,
accurately and systematically used, are necessary for monitoring and
promoting student learning.
The teacher is committed to using assessment to identify student strengths
and promote student growth rather than to deny students access to learning
opportunities.
Principle #9: The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually
evaluates the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students,
parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who actively
seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
Dispositions
The teacher values critical thinking and self-directed learning as habits of
mind.
The teacher is committed to reflection, assessment, and reaming as an
ongoing process.
The teacher is willing to give and receive help.
The teacher is committed to seeking out, developing, and continually
refining practices that address the individual needs of students.
The teacher recognizes his/her professional responsibility for engaging in
and supporting professional practices for self and colleagues.
Principle #10: The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues,
parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students' learning
and well-being.
Dispositions
The teacher values and appreciates the importance of all aspects of a
child's experience.
The teacher is concerned about all aspects of a child's well-being
(cognitive, emotional, social, and physical), and is alert to signs of
difficulties.
The teacher is willing to consult with other adults regarding the education
and wellbeing of his/her students.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 5
The teacher respects the privacy of students and confidentiality of
information.
It should be noted that NCATE explicitly requires programs built around INTASC standards to
document the use of those standards in assessing candidates‟ dispositions (Burke, 2002).
NCATE does not, however, mandate that institutions must adopt INCATE standards.
National Academy of Education
The National Academy of Education (2005) tells us that “ . . . teachers need to develop a set of
dispositions—or habits of thinking and action—about teaching, children, and the role of the
teacher. These include the disposition to reflect and learn from practice, a willingness to take
responsibility of children‟s learning, determination and persistence in working with children until
they succeed, and the will to continue to use new approaches to teaching that will allow greater
success with students” (41—42). The academy goes on to tell us that such disposition need to be
linked to both practice and vision, and need to be imbedded in concrete examples and practice
(52).
Educational Testing Service PRAXIS III
A fourth approach is that developed by the Educational Testing Service for its PRAXIS
Assessment instrument, a method of assessing new teachers adopted by several states
(educational testing service, 2006). The fourth dimension of PRAXIS III is professionalism, and
many of these attributes are ones that can be assessed in pre-service aspirants. Those attributes
(Baker) are as follows:
Professionalism (PRAXIS III criterion “D”)
1 Reflects on Goals
◦ evaluates less in terms of lesson goals
◦ uses for future instruction
2 Sense of Efficacy
◦ specific, practical ways to help students succeed
3 Professional Relationships
◦ knowledge of resources
◦ professional interactions relate to learning and instruction
4 Communication with Parents
◦ knows forms of communication
◦ professional interactions relate to learning and instructions
It should be noted that PRAXIS III is aimed specifically at practicing teachers, not aspiring
teachers.
Professional Helper Attributes (Combs) Approach
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 6
A fifth approach to educator dispositions was introduced by Arthur W. Combs.
In the late Arthur W. Combs‟ last publication, Being and Becoming: A Field
Approach to Psychology (1999), he provided a brief summary of findings that
suggested it is what a helper believes that largely determines effectiveness in his
or her professional performance. Numerous studies on effective helpers (teachers,
social workers, nurses, pastors, counselors, etc.) were reported. Five areas of
belief from these studies that seemed to discriminate between good and poor
helpers were as follows:(p.251)
1. Beliefs about the significant data. Good helpers are people oriented; they are
sensitive or empathic.
2. Beliefs about people. Good helpers hold more positive beliefs about the
people with whom they work
3. Beliefs about self. Good helpers hold positive beliefs about themselves.
4. Beliefs about purposes or priorities. Good helpers hold beliefs about purposes
that are more people oriented, broader and deeper, and concerned with freeing
rather than controlling.
5. Beliefs about personal openness. Good helpers hold beliefs that allow them to
be more self-revealing than self-concealing. They are characterized by
authenticity in their beliefs.
These studies summarized by Combs, as well as a substantial number of related
studies, have been accomplished wherein it was assumed that helper behavior was
only a symptom and that effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the helper‟s efforts
stem from his or her dispositions or personal qualities—that helper effectiveness
was strongly tied to the internal attitudes, beliefs and perceptual characteristics of
the helper (i.e. Caine and Caine, 1999, 1997; Deiro, 1996; Palmer, 1998; Sparks
and Lipka, 1992; and Wasicsko, 2001)
Usher’s reformulation/5 dispositions of teacher effectiveness:
Disposition-The qualities that characterize a person as an individual: the
controlling perceptual (mental, emotional, spiritual) qualities that determine the
person‟s natural or usual ways of thinking and acting.
Basic Assumption- Behavior is a result of our total field of meanings at the
instant we act. This field of meanings is referred to as the perceptual field. It includes
how we perceive ourselves, how we perceive other people, how we perceive the task of
teaching and it‟s purposes, and how we perceive the world in general, especially our
priorities. Results of research point to the following dispositions, or
perceptual/temperament inclinations and tendencies, as habitual for more effective
teachers:
1. Empathy--Initially seeks to understand the other person‟s point of view. Is
strongly committed to sensitivity and to understanding the individual learner‟s
present perceptions. Sees that the beginning point of learning is dependent upon a
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 7
clear and accurate “fix” on the learner‟s private world of awareness at the time.
Respects and accepts as real each person‟s own unique perceptual world. This
disposition is based upon our perceptual awareness about the nature of the task of
teaching and its purposes.
2. Positive View of Others--Has a sense of trust and confidence in other persons‟
worth, ability and capacity for growth, development, and learning. Sees other
people in essentially positive ways. Honors the internal dignity and integrity of
learners and holds positive expectations for their behavior. More apt to approach
others believing they “can” than they “can‟t”. This disposition is the basic
perceptual awareness we have about what other people are like.
3. Positive View of Self--Has a self-concept that is positive with a resultant
overall sense of self-adequacy. Sees himself/herself as essentially dependable and
capable in the tasks of teaching. Sees herself/himself generally but not exclusively
in positive ways—with an overall positive, abiding and trustworthy sense of
actual and potential worth, ability and capacity for growth. Honors the internal
dignity and integrity of self and holds positive expectations for his/her own
actions. More apt to be optimistic. More apt to be realistic. This disposition is the
basic perceptual awareness of what we are “like”.
4. Authenticity--Has ways of teaching (procedures, methods, techniques,
curricular approaches) that are honest, self-revealing and allow personal-
professional congruence. Uses approaches to teaching that are realistic, open and
“fit” the people and situations and purposes at hand. Sees the importance of
openness, self-disclosure and being “real” as a person and teacher. Has developed
a personal “idiom” as a teacher who melds personality uniqueness with curricular
expectations. This disposition is based upon our perceptual awareness about the
nature of the task of teaching and its purposes.
5. Meaningful Purpose and Vision--Committed to purposes of teaching built
upon goals, attitudes and values that are broad and deep and primarily person-
centered, freeing and long range in nature. A compelling and abiding sense of
allegiance to democratic values, the dignity of being human, and the sacredness of
freedom. Sees the importance of being visionary and reflective as a teacher.
Committed to growth for all learners in mental, physical and spiritual realms
through the mission of universal education. Continually seeks to identify, clarify
and intensify knowledge and personal beliefs about what is really most important
in helping people learn.
(Wasicsko, 2001).
It is important to note that the Combs/Usher approach does not operationalize its approach to
dispositions to the degree that the INTASC standards do. It is also worth noting that their
approach is explicitly grounded in the “psychology of personality” field, and from my reading,
Comb‟s theory of personality is well respected within the mainstream of that field.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 8
Conclusion to Chapter One
Thus, we have seen an array of operating systems upon which individual programs and/or states
can develop disposition standards and indicators. These systems do not seem at all contradictory
to each other, although it is obvious that the INTASC and Professional Helper models are far
more detailed in their delineation of the expected dispositions.
One issue needs to be addressed regarding the models explained thus far. That issue is the fact
that pre-service teacher licensure seekers are not professionals, but are students. This differences
manifests itself in these ways, especially in the context of the INTASC system:
First, a pre-service aspirant, and certainly one prior to student teaching, does not have the
opportunity to clearly and/or directly demonstrate many of the traits we seek. For example there
is this disposition associated with INTASC standard seven:
The teacher believes that plans must always be open to adjustment and revisions
based on student needs and changing circumstances.” The opportunity for a pre-
service aspirant to directly demonstrate that disposition may well be inadequate.
Or even more obviously, part of the standard five disposition is: “The teacher
takes responsibility for establishing a positive climate in the classroom and
participates in maintaining such a climate in the school as a whole.
Prior to student teaching, and perhaps even during student teaching, this disposition cannot be
explicitly demonstrated. It is true that students participate in practica where some of these
dispositions might be ascertained, but at least in my professional experience, those practica are
relatively short, fragmented, and unevenly observed/assessed. Furthermore, the quality of
feedback from host teachers, regardless of its means of collection, varies widely in consistency,
quality, and accuracy.
Second is the developmental issue of traditional-age pre-service aspirants. A graduating
senior is, from a brain-based perspective, not yet an adult; and an 18-year-old first-year student
has barely crested the “hill” of adolescence. Even though the INTASC standards are written for
new teachers, one might argue that they expect a level of maturity that many promising aspirants
may not demonstrate in the collegiate arena.
Third, there are many elements of the collegiate experience that, while not directly
involving the student in a teaching role, can provide collegiate instructors with insights into that
student‟s probably performance as a student teacher or teacher. For example, a student who
ignores other members of a Socratic dialogue and talks over her classmates is clearly
demonstrating a propensity toward disrespect, a propensity likely to rear itself in teacher and
student interaction. Conversely, there are those behaviors that may unduly impress collegiate
instructors—a propensity for orderliness and deference to the instructor‟s ideas—that may or
may not predict positive things about that student as a teacher, but which will likely lead an
instructor to think well of the aspirant.
Chapter 2: Behavioral and Descriptive Indicators of Dispositions
Our mission to develop a sense of appropriate indicators of dispositions does not suffer from a
lack of models. The following will discuss such models, briefly attempting to link them with one
of more of the disposition models discussed in chapter one, and, when possible, briefly discuss
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 9
the means by which these dispositions are assessed. At the risk of being repetitive, these
indicators are embedded in the pre-service and student teaching levels, and thus may look a little
different than they would in the classroom of a teacher of record.
A. INTASC-Driven Models
Let us begin by examining a program developed at Indiana University South Bend (IUSB).
Gwynn Mettetal and Sara Sage (2005), instructors there, tell us that their institution is committed
to a constructivist approach to education, and disposition development is an integral part of that
education. In fact, one of the introductory course in their program is entitled “F201/202 Personal
Demands of Teaching” (or, as the authors termed it “‟Charm School for Teachers‟”) and its focus
is on helping preservice aspirants recognize and develop the appropriate dispositions, but that the
idea of teacher dispositions is raised in their introductory course. It should be pointed out that
these “yoked” courses are tied integrally into a lab school experience, and that problem solving,
case study and role playing are used to a great extent when not at the lab school.
What are the dispositions they seek to develop?
“Communication skills, including nonverbals, listening, conflict resolution, feedback;
Diversity, especially urban classrooms and poverty;
Professional behaviors such as promptness, professional appearance, and confidentiality;
Classroom management, which focuses on building a positive classroom climate;
Reflection, including journal entries regarding personal growth and field experience” (pp
125—26).
These dispositions are operationalized in the course objectives, e.g. “The IUSB student
will be able to: Observe and interpret nonverbal cues and situational factors; . . . Demonstrate
giving and receiving appropriate feedback; . . . Collaborate with peers . . .; Demonstrate
professional behavior such as dependability, initiative, and respect for others . . . “ P. 126).
It is worth noting that, even with the lab school component, these dispositions are able to
be demonstrated in a pre-service setting consisting entirely of pre-service aspirants and collegiate
instructors.
The students are then assessed “pass/incomplete” manner, and there is included in the chapter a
discussion of “letters of concern” and a remediation policy. Typical reasons for not passing the
course and/or “letters of concern” are largely based on issues of attendance, lack of preparation,
inappropriate self-disclosure; poor participation; aggression nor passivity; and lack of tolerance,
flexibility, or respect. (p. 129). A strong counseling and remediation system is built into the use
of this set of dispositions, and the program also solicits feedback from other instructors,
education instructors and liberal arts and content, asking them to identify students who are not
demonstrating the dispositions just discussed. The program makes a point of soliciting such
feedback well before the aspirants are going to be considered for student teaching.
IUSB continues this approach into the advanced education courses and student teaching (Young
and Youngs; 2005). In these settings the approach to dispositions is guided by these general
expectations:
“Student appears warm, caring and enthusiastic in interacting with children;
Lesson activities capture the children‟s interest;
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 10
Activities are developmentally appropriate and linked to Indiana‟s academic standards;
Lessons are relevant to children‟s diverse needs and experiences;
Technology is interwoven appropriately;
Children are actively engaged in learning” (p. 137).
The above expectations are operationalized into seven sets of dispositions and those seven sets
even further delineated by a checklist that weaves dispositional elements in with those more
purely aimed at instruction, communication, motivation, planning, assessment, reflection, and
community (pp. 140—46). Following is a sampling of relatively concrete expectation of
aspirants‟ dispositions in action: professional dress, “correct” oral and written language [quotes
by Rose], responsiveness to children; rapport with children; acceptance of errors in self and
children, knowing children‟s names, self-confidence; preparation, thinking one ones feet and
adapting, calm in the face of interruptions; supportive response to children‟s divergent responses;
use of authentic assessment; planned adaptation for diverse learners; awareness of cultural
differences; clear communication; a climate of respect; reflection upon the aspirants‟ teaching
and planning; and the desire and ability to confer and collaborate to serve children (pp. 139—
47).
(It‟s worth noting that Young and Young‟s find the area of assessment particularly challenging:
UISB‟s goals for assessment of children‟s academic growth are probably the least likely to be
achieved in the field, based on the climate of paper-and-pencil accountability the aspirants see
modeled there. The authors also note that self-assessment on the part of the aspirants is
particularly difficult.)
Thus UISB‟s approach to assessing dispositions is definitely a two-tired one. The dispositions
examined in their beginning students are largely geared to be demonstrated in the traditional
collegiate setting; the second tier, while quite coherent with the first, is much more field-based
and exhaustive. One thing I noted: their student teacher assessment instrument included about
100 items. While comprehensive, I wonder about the dynamics of trying to coach and remediate
with such an instrument. See the INTASC standards presented earlier.
While UISB is the most clearly INTASC-driven, many other schools rely largely on INTASC
standards to at least their work. One such institution is the University of Nebraska at Omaha
(Schulte, et. al, 2004; Schulte et. al, 2006). This institution further particularizes the INTASC
disposition standards into a “Teacher Dispositions Index” (TDI). Some examples:
I understand that teacher expectations impact student learning (P3).
I believe it is my job to create a learning environment that is conducive to the development
of students‟ self-confidence and competence (P2).
I communicate in ways that demonstrate respect for the feelings, ideas, and contributions
of others (P9).
I take initiative to promote ethical and responsible professional practice (P9)
I work well with others in implementing a common curriculum (p7)
As can be seen with the items above, these indicators vary in their usefulness for preservice
aspirants, i.e. the last item.
Another university that has adapted the INTASC standards to their own purposes while
maintaining fidelity to the original is the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. UNCC also
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 11
approaches the issue of dispositions from the preservice perspective being taken seriously, as
well as soliciting practicing educators‟ opinions of their system. They developed 15 criteria
which include: timeliness, attendance, appearance/dress, poise/attitude (From Rose, interesting
combination), initiative, confidentiality, organization, flexibility, language, classroom
management, effectiveness (From Rose, that dispositional?), sensitivity to diversity, cooperation,
responsiveness to feedback, and rapport. These attributes are used during student teaching, and
assessed by the cooperating teachers. There is a positive correlation between preservice
aspirants‟ scores and the ranking of their overall student teaching. My sense is that these criteria
are also used prior to student teaching in a more abbreviated form, e.g. omitting “classroom
management.”
B. PRAXIS III-Driven Model
The University of Cincinnati has a set of dispositional standard drawn from both the PRAXIS III
dispositions and standards developed by the institution (Bauer). The in-house criteria address
issues of timeliness, initiative, responsibility, openness to feedback, rapport with others;
professional dress and grooming when engaged in field experiences, professional ethics, e.g.
“maintaining confidentiality,” knowledge of the ed. program‟s policies, commitment to
reflection, assessment and ongoing learning, and cooperation with other educators and
stakeholders. These qualities, as well as those to come, are assessed in the classroom, during
field experience, and during student teaching.
The following criteria are derived from PRAXIS III. The University of Cincinnati also solicits
more general responses, as you will see.
Content Knowledge and Its Organization for Learning (Praxis III Domain A)
10. The Candidate appreciates that “knowledge” includes multiple perspectives and that
development of knowledge is influenced by the perspective of the "knower." Evidence that the
Candidate possesses this disposition:
is consistently evident.
is usually evident.
is sometimes evident.
is inconsistent with, or contrary to, this disposition.
I am unable to judge the Candidate‟s possession of this disposition.
11. The Candidate is dedicated to teaching the subject matter and to keeping informed and is
competent in the discipline and its pedagogy. Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
12. In designing curriculum, the Candidate appreciates both the particular content of the subject
area and the diverse needs, assets, and interests of the students and values both short and long-
term planning. Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
Creating an Environment for Student Learning (Praxis III, Domains B and C)
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 12
13. The Candidate is committed to the expression and use of democratic values in the classroom.
Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
14. The Candidate takes responsibility for making the classroom and the school a “safe harbor”
for learning, in other words, a place that is protected, predictable, and has a positive climate.
Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
15. The Candidate recognizes the fundamental need of students to develop and maintain a sense
of self-worth and that student misbehavior may be attempts to protect self-esteem. Evidence the
Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
16. The Candidate believes that all children can learn and persists in helping every student
achieve success. Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
17. The candidate values all students for their potential as people and helps them learn to value
each other. Evidence the Candidate possesses this disposition:
(The Likert scales responses in #1 are repeated.)
Now the more global questions:
Please identify any other skills, behaviors, and/or knowledge that enhance this
Candidate's successful progress.
Please identify any other skills, behaviors, and/or knowledge that interfere with this
Candidate's successful progress.
Identify actions/recommendations that you have already taken/made with this Candidate
(include conference dates).
Thus this institution has used “established” standards but added to them with standards obviously
aimed at assessing a student in a collegiate setting and with the solicitation of any information
related to dispositions and other qualities relevant to teacher behavior.
C. The Combs/Usher Perceptual Psychology Model in Practice
The Combs/Usher model of helper/teacher dispositions seem to drive a great number of
programs, at least by judging from the presentations and literature generated over the past five
years. To reiterate those characteristics in a highly summarized form, good teachers (Combs, p.
251):
1. Is people-, not thing, oriented.
2. Believe in the abilities, the efficacy, of the students they serve.
3. Believe that they themselves are capable, efficacious people.
4. Believe in freeing up the people they serve, not controlling them.
5. Are open and self-revealing, characterized as authentic.
So how have these been operationalized? Chapter one in this document gives us some sense of
that. (See pp. 6 and 7.) The difficulty with this approach is fully acknowledged by Usher (2002)
and others: “dispositions are not behaviors. they do not exist as distinct entities of actions or
thoughts, or traits. Rather, they represent the ways in which an individual has stocked, structured
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 13
and ordered his or her individual psyche/ … perceptual field.” Mark Wasicsko, seemingly the
leading thinker in the Combs/Usher model of teacher dispositions, uses the following categories
and indicators as a means of showing connections between various researchers, theorists and
schools of education (2005). The indicators are presented in binary language, with the desired
trait listed first.
Perception of self
Identified-unidentified
Able-unable
Positive-negative
Perceptions of others
Able-unable
Dependable-undependable
Worthy-unworthy
Perception of purpose
Larger-smaller
Freeing-controlling
Revealing-concealing
Frame of reference
People-things
Internal-external (From Rose, locus of control)
Openness to experience-closedness to experience
University of Northern Kentucky
Wasicsko further delineates this model as used by the University of Northern Kentucky in this
fashion.
Empathy
Seeks to understand the other person‟s point of view.
Is strongly committed to sensitivity and to understanding the individual learners‟ present
perceptions.
Sees that the beginning part of learning is dependent upon a clear acceptance of the
learner‟s private world of awareness at this time
Respects and accepts as real each person‟s unique perceptual world.
Negative empathy (a bad thing) as revealed by comments in journals conveying negqative
feels and/or lack of sympathy.
Positive view of others
Trust and confidence in students‟ worth and ability.
Believes that others can grow.
Sees others in a positive way.
Have positive expectations of others‟ behavior and capacity for behavior change.
Believes students are efficacious.
Positive view of self
Sees self as self-adequate.
Sees self as a competent teacher.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 14
Sees self as having the ability to learn and grow as a teacher.
Has realistic expectations for self.
Authenticity
Teaches in an honest, self-revealing manner that allows personal and professional
congruence.
Is emotionally honest with self and others.
Has the ability (Rose would substitute “desire”) to individualize and make teaching
relevant to their students.
Meaningful purpose and vision
Committed to the purpose (not just process) of teaching.
Committed to helping every child; allied with the ideas of democracy, human dignity, and
the sacredness of freedom.
Committed to the growth of all learners.
Is visionary and self-reflective as an educator.
Two issues arise at this point in my mind, even though I am strongly attracted to this system,
grounded as it is in the actual field of psychology, especially a lot of thinking going on in
“cognitive therapy” psychology right now. First, these are hardly behavioral indicators or even
descriptors in the sense that they need little interpretation or context. This means that they are
“hard to use” and difficult for someone without considerable study to put into practice from the
evaluator point of view. (To go beyond the scope of my work a bit, Wasicsko and his followers
have developed an elaborate series of mechanisms by which to teach evaluators how to learn to
discern these dispositions in education students, even prior to student teaching. This is done with
a series of carefully shaped scenarios, designed to get at the above attributes without it being
apparent. Evaluators-in-the making are taught to code such behaviors, and pre-student-teaching
education students both create scenarios which are then coded in terms of this system, and are
taught the Combs/Usher system as a model of teaching dispositions.) Secondly, this system is
not oriented to the behaviors pre-student-teaching aspirants demonstrate in the classroom where
education professors have the most opportunity for observation. In other words, it is hard to use
these descriptors to directly assess a pre-student-teaching aspirant.
Heritage University
A number of other colleges and universities have drawn on the Combs/Usher approach in
varying degrees of fidelity. One such school is Heritage University in Toppenish, Washington
(Reichel, et. al, 2005). For what it‟s worth, Heritage University serves a largely nontraditional
and “minority” population in its undergraduate certification programs. Their system is of
particular note because of its attempt to blend in other considerations only suggested by the
Usher/Combs approach, to couch the its system in more concrete language and pre-service
contexts, and to allow for issues not raised in the combs/Usher model. Their disposition system
looks like this.
1. Professionalism: Candidate consistently demonstrates ethical conduct, including honesty,
integrity, trustworthiness, and support for social justice.
Committed to the belief that all students can learn.
Sense of trust in others worth, ability, and capacity for growth.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 15
Honesty.
Dress and grooming.
Integrity.
2. Situation Appropriate Behaviors: Candidate consistently demonstrates flexibility,
sensitivity, and resiliency.
Self-controlled.
Sensitive to the needs and abilities of others.
Adaptability to change.
Resiliency.
Tactfulness.
3. Respect: Candidate honors, values, empowers, and demonstrates consideration ad regard for
others with diverse opinions and backgrounds.
Open-minded.
Collaborates.
Compassionate.
Empathetic.
Caring.
4. Collaborations: Candidate demonstrates empathy, positive rapport, flexibility, and team
building skills to achieve a common goal. Candidate demonstrates awareness of cultural
dynamics.
Tolerant of others views.
Develops and nurtures rapport with diverse populations.
Cooperative and flexible.
Accepting of others opinions.
Patient.
5. Commitment to Learning: Candidate demonstrates responsibility (accountability,
reliability), courage, and a genuine desire for personal and professional growth based on self-
reflection/feedback.
Work ethic.
Punctual class attendance
Timely completion of school work
Recognition of the importance of consistent reflection on practice and knowledge base.
Accepts responsibility for actions.
While the Combs/Usher model is not explicitly addressed in this set of disposition indicators, the
impact of that thinking is obvious, e.g. the bullet points under “Respect” and “Collaboration.”
George Washington University
George Washington University houses another program using a series of dispositions largely
stemming from the Combs/Usher paradigm (Ihrig and Rice, 2005). The program breaks its
disposition system into five broad areas: empathy, positive view of others, positive view of self,
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 16
authenticity, and meaningful purpose and vision. Each major category is delineated as follows.
Empathy
Initially seeks to understand another person‟s point of view.
Is strongly committed to sensitivity and to understanding the individual learner‟s present
perceptions, e.g. understanding another‟s pain or sadness; believing in the student‟s
ability . . . ; dealing with a sense of helplessness; empathy for the frustrations the student
and others have in dealing with other or a systems issue.
Positive view of others
Trust and confidence in a student‟s worth and ability.
Trust and confidence in a coworker‟s worth and ability
Capacity for growth in others
Sees others in a positive way.
Has positive expectations for behavior.
Believes people CAN versus Can‟t.
Positive view of self
Positive self-concept
Positive concept of self as teacher.
Recognized capacity for self-growth.
Holds realistic expectations of self.
Authenticity
Teaches in an honest, self-revealing way that allows personal and professional congruence.
Self-disclosing and real.
Uses teaching approaches that are realistic and fit student needs.
Meaningful purpose and vision in terms of
The purpose of teaching.
Allegiance in helping children.
Commitment to student growth.
(From Rose--some descriptors slightly paraphrased or “cleaned up” for grammatical purposes.)
It should be noted that GWU, as do most of the schools using the Combs/Usher approach,
actively teach these dispositions and weave them explicitly into coursework, including student
self-evaluations.
D. Other Models
Drury University
Drury University bases its dispositional descriptors and assessment in large part on the work of
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 17
James Comer. Drury is a rather entrepreneurial four-year, private, liberal arts college in St.
Louis, Missouri. As White et. al tell us the college drew “on a rich array of theoretical
perspectives the DEI (disposition evaluation instrument) at Drury University reflect [ing] those
influences that are especially pertinent to the unique environment of a liberal arts university.
Theories emphasized by the authors include the affective domain, especially Bloom‟s
Taxonomy, Krathwohl‟s Taxonomy for Affective Processes, Gardner‟s Multiple Intelligences
Theory; emotional intelligence through the findings of Salovey and Goleman; Comer‟s
Developmental Pathways Model; and Brain-Based Learning. While all of these theorists
impacted the development of the DEI, the work of Dr. James Comer became the primary thrust
during a recent revision (White, et. al, 2004).
Comer‟s model has six developmental pathways as he applied it to children‟s maturation (White,
et. al), although Drury, without much explanation, sees fit to apply them to teacher aspirants‟
dispositions. These six pathways are in terms of: social interactions, ethical behavior, physical
development, cognitive development, language development, and psychological development.
These pathways, evaluated using a 1—4 Likert scale, are further delineated below.
Physical Pathway
Candidate is on time.
Candidate is always well groomed and appropriately dressed.
Candidate is composed, positive, and self-confident.
Candidate is always prepared for lessons.
Linguistic Pathway
Candidate encourages debate and open discussion.
Candidate demonstrates an understanding of effective verbal and non-verbal
communication by choosing language, and delivery techniques appropriate to the
audience.
Candidate models effective communication strategies when asking questions, listening,
giving directions, probing for understanding, and helping others express their ideas.
Social Pathway
Candidate creates and maintains extensive informal networks.
Candidate develops relationships that are mutually beneficial.
Candidate builds rapport and keeps others in the loop.
Candidate mentors, coaches, and fosters skills in others.
Candidate cultivates satisfaction and loyalty.
Candidate offers appropriate assistance.
Candidate makes and maintains personal friendships among associates.
Candidate spots potential conflict bringing disagreements into the open and de-escalates
the conflict.
Candidate orchestrates win-win situations.
Candidate builds trust through reliability and authenticity.
Candidate actively seeks out opportunities to fulfill the group‟s mission.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 18
Candidate mobilizes others.
Candidate understands diverse world-views and is sensitive to group differences.
Candidate respects and relates well to people of diverse backgrounds.
Psychological Pathway
Candidate possesses a sense of humor.
Candidate is willing to voice unpopular views.
Candidate shows sensitivity and understands perspectives shared by others.
Candidate offers and receives useful feedback and identifies the need for further growth.
Candidate is effective in the process of give and take, registers emotional cues, and
synthesizes messages.
Candidate helps out based on understanding the needs and feelings of others.
Candidate understands emotions.
Candidate realizes links between feelings.
Candidate recognizes that feelings affect performance.
Candidate is aware of strengths and weaknesses.
Candidate operates from hope of success rather than feeling of failure.
Candidate sees setbacks as the result of manageable circumstances, not personal flaws.
Candidate possesses self-assurance.
Candidate manages feelings and emotions.
Candidate challenges authority.
Ethical Pathway
Candidate acts ethically and is above reproach.
Candidate admits mistakes and confronts unethical actions in others.
Candidate takes tough, principled stands.
Candidate meets commitments and keeps promises.
Candidate has a guiding awareness of values and goals.
Candidate holds self-accountable.
Candidate uses the group‟s core values in choices and decisions.
Candidate challenges bias and intolerance.
Cognitive Pathway
Candidate thinks clearly and stays focused under pressure.
Candidate is attentive to emotional cues.
Candidate frequently creates his/her own opportunities in the classroom.
Candidate seeks out fresh ideas.
Candidate adapts responses and tactics.
Candidate is results-oriented.
Candidate learns how to improve performance.
Candidate finds a sense of purpose in the larger mission.
Candidate is reflective and learns from experience.
Candidate understands needs and matches needs to services or products.
Candidate continually seeks to improve professional skills and knowledge.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 19
(White et. al, 2004)
Drury students are educated on this approach to dispositions They are evaluated with the D.E.I.
by themselves, instructors, and other students. The results of that last means of assessment seem
to be particularly powerful and possibly distressing for students. It should also be noted, that
Drury has a partnership elementary school where their students carry out extensive field
experiences. (White et. al, 2004)
University of Tennessee
The university of Tennessee model (Benner and Wishart, 2006) looks to be a very pragmatic
blend of models we have already examined. These indicators are as follows, and different
indicators must be assessed in courses assigned to them through the program.
1. Provides equitable learning opportunities.
2. Promotes achievement of students at all levels.
3. Recognizes students‟ unique prior knowledge, life experiences, and interests . . .
4. Understands and involves a variety of resources in the school, family, culture, and
community to facilitate student learning.
5. Seeks out, develops, and implements the most appropriate methods to meet diverse
learning needs.
6. Develops students‟ skills as problem solvers as students‟ progress towards becoming
independent, self-directed learners.
7. Practices personal reflection, seeks constructive feedback, and willingly learns from others
and past experience.
8. Plans and organizes the classroom to maximize instructional and learning time.
9. Collaborates with other professionals to improve the learning of students.
10. Serves as appositive role model for students and others in terms of regular attendance,
grooming, punctuality, and professional demeanor.
11. Demonstrates positive work habits and interpersonal skills, including a positive attitude,
dependability, honesty, and respect for others.
12. Accepts responsibility for what happens in her/his classroom and for other school-wide
responsibilities contributing to student learning and a safe, orderly environment.
13. Participates in professional growth responsibilities within and outside the school.
14. Maintains standards of confidentiality regarding student information and
communications,
15. Uses sound judgments and thoughtful decision making with consideration of the
consequences.
(Benner and Wishart, 2006)
It is worth pointing out the obvious: that most of these traits are ones that would show up
directly in the pre-k—12 classroom, not the college classroom. We definitely see the impact of
INTASC here, but it is evident that the program drew disposition descriptors from a variety of
resources, most likely including their own experience in teaching at the preservice level. Last,
the courses associated with this list are all senior level “methods” courses. Thus, with the use of
these descriptors as the program is designed. the program would be ill equipped to provide
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 20
formal feedback to the student until late in the program.
Hemline University
Like many of the other programs we have looked at, Hamline University in St. Paul, Minnesota,
introduces its students very explicitly to its disposition system ad provides ongoing feedback
(Kiley and Wimsatt, 2004). Note below that these descriptors, while being rather general, lend
themselves more to assessment in the college classroom as opposed to the heavily field-oriented
set used by the University of Tennessee. Their students are explicitly taught this set of
dispositions, then are observed both in the college classroom and in field experiences.
Collaboration
Curiosity
Motivation
Hope and Humor
Caring and empathy
Truth and honesty
Risks and adventures
Ambiguity and paradox
Intellectual care
Perseverance and patience
(Kiley and Wimsatt, 2004)
E. Iowa approaches
The following will discuss a series of themes that emerge from an analysis of Iowa teacher
preparation programs than do an exhaustive depiction of dispositions targeted by those programs.
The latter work has already been largely done by Don Long (of Faith Baptist Bible College and
Theological Seminary) and myself in the summer of 2005. One could stretch this dimension of
research on dispositions to a ridiculous degree. Indeed, each of our Iowa four-year teacher prep
programs has their own system. Most separate out dispositions as a separate area and labeled as
dispositions. Others are woven into the fabric of a larger teacher aspirant “competency system.”
See appendix items A and B. In these appendixes it is clear that some overtly dispositional traits,
e.g. punctuality and tact, are overtly identified as dispositions by Simpson College (Appendix
Item A), whereas others, e.g. “Use critical reflection and self-reflection techniques to guide
choices and actions” (Appendix Item B) clearly have a dispositional bent to them.
Again, this is hardly a scientific sampling, but I included it for comparison with what we are
seeing nationally. I will not identify colleges in the discussion below, but the data set I drew on
was made up of documents from the three four-year or more regent‟s institutions, Briar Cliff,
Cornell, Drake, Dordt, Graceland, Grand View, Grinnell, Iowa Wesleyan, and Simpson. Again,
this sampling is not to represent the state, but only samples the state, given that I requested such
documents in the middle of the summer when many of us forgo such work, being “off contract.”
One aside, one community college shared that they have no system of assessing dispositions in
place, and suggested that was the norm among schools not in a license-recommending position.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 21
Themes
Time Use & Dependability
Almost every teacher prep program that shared data with me explicitly addresses the issue of
time use and dependability. Why? My guess is because: 1. those qualities are easy to observe
in pre-service aspirants in the college classroom setting and 2. those qualities impact our lives as
professors of education.
Communication
This comes up in the large majority of systems I looked at. Some of us are very explicit in
breaking down what we mean, e.g. written, spoken and nonverbal communication. The reasons
for the ubiquitousness are the same as for “Time Use and Dependability.”
Politeness and respect
The term politeness is not often used, but as a more generalized theme, it is not sufficient to
merely label this theme “respect.” We expect an overt courtesy on the part of our students, and
we usually couch this in language about interacting with students and other professionals.
However, my guess is that part of this commonality is because polite respect is something we
both expect of our students (however unconsciously on our parts), and it is something we can
readily observe in our classrooms, then project its existence (or lack thereof) out into the “real
world.”
Terms like “tact” also appear occasionally.
Interpersonal skills (and other synonymous language)
Interpersonal skills (and other synonymous language) appear in most of the documents.
Depending upon the document, this trait is unpacked to varying degrees.
Responsibility and Initiative
Responsibility and initiative are frequently referred to, but not universally. Again, these are
traits that can be readily observed in non-field-based settings as well as the field.
Reflectivity
About half of the sampling of documents I read explicitly refer to reflectivity. Many of those
documents go on at some length in describing aspects of responsibility. When such explicitness
is present, the programs typically couch that language in terms of teaching performance and
pursuing pedagogical goals.
Critical Thinking
Critical thinking (or an appreciation for) appears infrequently. One could argue that critical
thinking is subsumed under the category of reflectivity.
Sensitivity to Cultural and Community Norms
Sensitivity to cultural and community norms appears in several documents. Some documents
further delineate this idea in terms of minorities.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 22
Confidentiality
Confidentiality and respect for others privacy appears in some of these documents. Most often
this is couched in terms of information about students.
Flexibility and Adaptability
Flexibility and adaptability or synonymous language appears in a fair amount of the documents.
Seeking Support or Feedback
A desire to actively seek out and respond to feedback was mentioned in a number of documents.
Some schools simply identified the ability to respond appropriately to feedback, not its pursuit,
as the sum of this disposition.
Professional Growth/Life Long Learning
Seeking opportunities for professional growth or a pursuit of life long learning is mentioned in a
fair amount of the documents.
Curiosity, Desire to Know, or Passion for Content
Being characterized by curiosity, being intellectually active, or having a passion for the content
area is mentioned in a few of the documents.
Diversity
An appreciation of diversity and/or the ability to capitalize on diversity are mentioned in a few
documents.
Fairness/Equity
An ability to be fair or equitable is mentioned explicitly in a few documents.
Awareness of Student Needs
Being attuned to student needs in a variety of dimensions—intellectual, physical, emotional,
social, etc.—is mentioned in a few documents.
Attention to Professional Duties
Attention to the array of professional duties beyond mere classroom instruction, e.g. monitoring
students at play, participating in extracurricular activities, etc., was mentioned in a few
documents.
Honesty
Honesty was mentioned in a few documents. It is interesting to me that this trait was not made
more explicit by more schools. It is a disposition that can be demonstrated (or the lack thereof)
in a non-field-based setting.
Creativity
Creativity was mentioned by only a couple of schools insofar as I noted. It could be that this trait
is “housed” more in the area of cognitive skills by most programs.
Conclusion to Chapter 2
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 23
It is obvious that INTASC thought factors heavily into the adoption of individuals programs‟
dispositional standards and indicators. This is often explicit stated by various programs, and the
language used to express dispositions seems to be drawn from INTASC more than any other set
of “national” standards. The Professional Helper” model also seems to have impacted a number
of programs nationally, although that impact is not obvious in looking at dispositional standards
of most Iowa teacher preparation programs.
It is also obvious that, while Iowa programs share a general sense of common expectations, those
expectations vary somewhat. Also, we seem to have very commonly identified dispositional
indicators that can be observed in a non-field-based setting.
While it is not the purview of my work to discuss at length the teaching of dispositional
standards and behaviors, it is obvious in my reading and attendance at the Fourth Annual
Symposium for Educator Dispositions (Nov., 2005) that a number of programs nationally
integrally weave instruction about dispositions into the formal curriculum and instruction of their
programs. This is perhaps true in Iowa, but my sense is that we, as a set of programs, are less
likely to do this sort of work than schools like Indiana University at South Bend (Mettetal and
Sage, 2005) which builds that aspect of their program around INTASC standards or schools like
the University of Northern Kentucky (Wasicsko, 2005) that build their instructional and
assessment systems on the Professional Helpers model.
Part of my task was to identify behavioral indicators as well as descriptive. I chose not to break
out my discussion of dispositional indicators in terms of that language for this reason: Purely
behavioral indicators, while important, may not address directly some of the habits of mind and
heart that we hope to develop or at least find in aspiring educators. It is apparent in looking that
the dispositional indicator language in this document that purely behavioral descriptors are in the
minority; and that the level of concrete description is also quite variable. Related to this, the
habits of heart and mind we expect are often the ones clothed in the fuzziest language. To twist
that now hackneyed expression, perhaps “The things hardest to count are the things that count
the most.”
Chapter 3: Conclusion
The previous text has explored a variety of models for developing dispositional standards and
indicators. It has also shown a series of those models being played out in teacher preparation
programs across the nation, as well as Iowa. It has briefly addressed three issues that I believe
are central to our work.
1. How is the developing of dispositional standards and indicators different in an environment
that is largely non-field-based or “briefly-field-based” (i.e. practica woven into college
classroom instruction). This is the norm for our students before they begin student
teaching, and this is the best time when we can instruct, remediate, and, at worst, screen
aspiring teachers in terms of dispositions.
2. Iowa‟s different programs, as well as many programs across the nation, tend to be heavy
on “good girl/good boy” dispositions. This is not a criticism per se, but it is tempting to
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 24
focus on the most concrete, whether or not they are the most important.
3. Although not the purview of this review, it is obvious that a system to teach and promote
desired dispositions need to be in place if a teacher preparation program wishes to serve
its students and its public appropriately. That explicit approach not only seems the most
efficacious thing to do, but also the most moral.
See below for some stray thoughts that might induce thought or conversation on this issue of
aspiring teacher dispositions.
Chapter X: Strays
Stray dispositions
Some dispositional traits seem to stand out in the sense that they are relatively unique to one or
two descriptions or instruments.
Spreading self too thin (Robert J. Sternberg as cited by Ann Rose, 2005).
Wallowing in personal difficulties (Robert J. Sternberg as cited by Ann Rose, 2005).
Stray thoughts
Some ideas I picked up that don‟t fit within the purview of this paper, but which are worth noting
as we do our work.
While slightly tangential, it is worth noting that even with the first draft of INTASC
standards occurring fifteen years ago, professional and scholarly literature regarding
dispositional standards became commonplace only within the 21st century. It could be
that the No Child Left Behind legislation and other measures focusing on teacher
accountability have led our profession into a closer examination of all dimensions of
teacher quality.
Only four percent of institutions evaluate dispositions explicitly prior to entry into the
program (Ann Rose, 2005). My sense is that they programs are ones aimed at
nontraditional students, e.g. degree holders seeking initial licensure (Ganalon, et. al)
Wasicsko (2005a) makes the point that Northern Kentucky University and others using the
Combs/Usher model never deny a student progress or certification. Instead, they defer it.
This puts the responsibility of demonstrating the necessary dispositions on the aspiring
teacher‟s shoulders and also offers that aspirant some hope. My question is this: what
then of someone has failed at the student teaching level? How might that person
demonstrate the necessary dispositions without a teacher prep program risk using another
student teaching placement?
In Washington State there is a consortium of small public and private teacher-prep
programs (Reichel, 2005) that are actively and systematically sharing their work in
addressing Washington State‟s Conceptual Framework for Teachers.
Perhaps it goes beyond the purview of my task to say so, but Graceland‟s “Dispositions
and Behavioral Descriptors” strikes me as an excellent model for a program to examine
as it seeks to revise its own disposition documents and instruments.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 25
References
Baker, Susan (2005). PRAXIS III criteria found on Dennison University website. Retrieved July
14, 2006. http://www.denison.edu/education/st/praxis111.html
Bauer, Anne M. (2006). University of Cincinnati candidate dispositions progress report.
Personal communication via e-mail. July 12, 2006.
Benner, Susan M. and Bill Wishart (2006) . “Discerning quality through dispositions
assessments: Philosophical and political contexts for dispositions in teacher education.” AACTE
Conference, Jan. 2006. Retrieved July 15 from www.aacte.org/Events/06scheduledsessions1
Burke, Peggy Y. (2002). “A mechanism for monitoring dispositions in preservice teachers.”
Childhood education. Summer, Vol. 78, #4, pp. 224k & 224m.
Combs, Arthor W. (1999). Being and becoming: field approach to psychology. New York:
Springer Publishing Company, Inc.
“Definition of Dispositions by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education
(NCATE)” (2002). In The passion for teaching: dispositions in the schools, edited by
Robert E. Smith, Denise Skarbeck, & James Hurst. Scarecroweducation: Lanham,
MD (2005), p. 223.
Educational Testing Service (2006). “About the PRAXIS III test.” Downlaoded July 16, 2006
from:
http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.1488512ecfd5b8849a77b13bc3921509/?v
gnextoid=19732d3631df4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=1838
197a484f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD
Flowers, Claudia (2006). “Confirmatory factor analysis of scores on the Clinical Experience
Rubric: a measure of dispositions for preservice teachers. Educational and
psychological measurement. June, 2006. (No page numbers; received manuscript
directly from the author in July, 2006).
Ihrigh, Kasren and Elisabeth Rice (2005). “A model of disposition modification: the results pf
preservice teachers‟ perceptions of their dispositions in a year long graduate teacher
training program.” Presentation at the fourth annual symposium on educator
dispositions, Northern Kentucky University. Nov. 17, 2005.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). (1992). Model
standards for beginning teacher licensing, assessment and development. Retrieved
June 29, 2006, from http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/corestrd.pdf.
Kiley, ???? and Joy Wimsatt (2004). “Documenting dispositions.” Association of Independent
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 26
Liberal Arts Colleges of Teacher Education—Annual Extended Meeting, Feb. 7, 2004.
Leo, John (2005). “Classroom Warriors.” U.S. News and world report. Oct. 24, 2005. Vol. 139,
#2 15. Retrieved electronically via EBSCO-Host June 28, 2006.
McKnight, David (2004). “An Inquiry of NCATE‟s Move into Virtue Ethics by Way of
Dispositions (Is this what Aristotle Meant?)”. Educational studies, Vol. 35, #22, 212-
230.
Metteteal, Gwynn and Sara Sage (2005). “Teaching and Evaluating Dispositions in a Preservice
Education Course” (pp. 123—134). In The passion for teaching: dispositions in the
schools. Edited by Robert L. Smith, Denise Skarbeck, & James Hurst.
Scarecroweducation: Lanham, MD.
National Academy of Education (2005). A good teacher in every classroom: preparing the
highly qualified teachers our children deserve. John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco.
Reichel, Connie; Mickie Clise; Paul Ganalon, Debby Lierman, and Lauren McClanahan (2005).
“Essential dispositions: Washington state‟s conceptual framework for teachers.” Panel
discussion at the fourth annual symposium on educator dispositions, Northern
Kentucky University. Nov. 17, 2005.
Rose, Ann C. “Assessing dispositions: the role of intuition and self-management.” Presentation
at the fourth annual symposium on educator dispositions, Northern Kentucky
University. Nov. 17, 2005.
Schulte, Laura; Nancy Edick, Sarah Edwards, Lana Danielson, and Key Keiser. “Why teach and
assess dispositions in educator preparation programs.” Essays in education, volume
12, 2004. (No page numbers; received manuscript directly from the first author in
July, 2006)
Schulte, Laura; Nancy Edick, Sarah Edwards, and DeboraMackiel. “The development and
validation of the Teacher Disposition Index. AACTE Conference. San Diego.
January 30, 2006.
Usher, Dick. (2002) “Arthur Combs‟ five dimensions of helper belief reformulated as five
dispositions of teacher effectiveness.” Presentation at the Second Annual Symposium
on Teacher Education, Richmond, VA, Nov 22, 2002.
Wasiko, Mark (2005). Fourth annual symposium on educator disposition pre-conference
training (manual). Northern Kentucky University. November, 2005.
Wasiko, Mark (2005). “Description of Usher‟s dispositions used for coding.” Fourth annual
symposium on educator dispositions. Northern Kentucky University. November,
2005.
Wasley, Pauala. “Education School Revises Policy on „Dispositions.‟” Chronicle of higher
education. March 10, 2006. Vol. 52, #27. Retrieved electronically via EBSCO-Host
June 28, 2006.
White, Jane, Edward Williamson, and Cynthia Bice, “Using Comer's developmental pathways to
measure student disposition at Drury University.” Third annual symposium on educator
dispositions. Northern Kentucky University. November, 2004.
www.educatordispositions.org/.../file.php/
Wilson, Robin. “We Don‟t Need that Kind of Attitude.” Chronicle of higher education. Dec.
16, 2005. Vol. 52, #17. Retrieved electronically via EBSCO-Host June 28, 2006.
Young, Linda J. and Diane C. Youngs. (2005) “Exploring Dispositions in Student Teaching and
Field Experience.” In The passion for teaching: dispositions in the schools, edited by
Robert E. Smith, Denise Skarbeck, & James Hurst. Scarecroweducation: Lanham,
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 27
MD (2005), p. 135--152.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 28
Appendix
Appendix Item A Competencies & Indicators that Simpson College Formally Associates
with Dispositions
Competency 10: Simpson Teacher Education Program graduates will demonstrate effective
communication skills and techniques.
(INTASC: 6; ITSMC NA; 1PC: 14.23(4) f)
Performance Indicators
10P1: Use and model effective verbal communication skills and
techniques.
(INTASC: 6; ITSMC: None; IPC: 14.23(4) f)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
All education and methods courses (i.e. art, music, physical education) with an emphasis in:
Education 300P, 303P, 304P, 305P, 316/516, 340s/540s, and 388/588
10P2: Use and model effective written communication skills and techniques.
(INTASC: 6; ITSMC: None; IPC: 14.23(4) f)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
All education and methods courses (i.e. art, music, physical education) with an emphasis in:
Education 300/300P, 303/303P, 304/304P, 305/305P, 316/516, 340s/540s, and 388/588
10P3: Use and model effective nonverbal communication skills and techniques.
(INTASC: 6; ITSMC: None; IPC: 14.23(4) f)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
All education and methods courses (i.e. art, music, physical education) with an emphasis in:
Education 300P, 303P, 304P, 305, 312, 316/516, 321, 340s/540s, and 388/588
10P4: Use and model effective media communication skills and techniques.
(INTASC: 6; ITSMC: None; IPC: 14.23(4) f)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
All education and methods courses (i.e. art, music, physical education) with an emphasis in:
Education 229/529, technology modules, 300P, 303P, 304P, 305P, 316/516, 340s/540s, and
388/588
Competency 11:Simpson Teacher Education Program graduates will demonstrate essential
dispositions and professional attributes.
(INTASC: 6, 9, 10; ITSMC: 7, 8; IPC: 14.23(4) f, h, i, j)
Performance Indicators:
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 29
11P1: Attend classes, appointments, advising sessions, etc. on a regular basis.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: None)
11P2: Arrive for classes, observations, meetings, appointments, etc. on time.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: None)
11P3: Use tactful and respectful behavior in dealing with professors, peers, students, school
personnel, etc.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: 14.23(4) i)
11P4: Be reliable and dependable.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: 14.23(4) i)
11P5: Take the initiative in classes, field experiences, student teaching, etc.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
11P6: Demonstrate personal and professional ethics.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: 14.23(4) i)
11P7: Demonstrate flexibility and adaptability necessary to given situations.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
11P8: Respond with an open-mind and a positive and accepting attitude when presented
with performance feedback.
(INTASC: 9, 10; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
11P9: Demonstrate an open mind and an unbiased attitude when approached with new ideas.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
11P10: Actively seek opportunities for personal and professional growth.
INTASC: 9; ITSMC: 7; IPC: 14.23(4) h)
11P11: Exhibit enthusiasm for, an interest in, and a commitment to, teaching and learning.
(INTASC: None; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
11P12: Demonstrate the ability to critically reflect and realistically self assess.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: 7; IPC: 14.23(4) h.)
11P13: Demonstrate respect for diversity and community.
(INTASC: 3; ITSMC: 4; IPC: 14.23(4) b.)
Note: Competency 10 & 11 indicators will be assessed, every semester, in all education and
methods classes (i.e. art, music, and physical education).
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 30
Appendix Item B: Simpson College Competency Indicators with Strong Dispositional
Elements
From Steve Rose
This work does not represent the official position of our program. I merely toyed around with the other
competencies and indicators that we had not identified as “dispositional” in nature in an effort to see what
other disposition indicators were embedded in our candidate assessment program as it existed in the
summer of 2005.
Additional Disposition-linked Competency Indicators in Simpson
College’s Teacher Preparation Program
In addition to our more strictly “dispositional” set of competency indicators making up
competencies #10 and 11, Simpson College’s teacher prep. program developed several
“dispositional” indicators that are scattered throughout our other sets of competency
indicators. Each of these competency indicators is assessed in at least one of our pre-
service courses, and most are assessed multiple times. These competency indicators came
about to some degree by reflecting on and reacting to the INTASC standards, the Iowa
new Teacher Standards, Charlotte Danielson’s work, and so on. A sampling of these
course links and “learned body links” is shown in 7P1—8P1
2P1: Provide equitable opportunities and appropriate activities for all
students.
2P2: Adapt instruction for diverse learners.
3P2: Plan instruction based upon individual student needs within the context
of the class and the community.
3P4: Articulate the “why” for the many aspects of long and short term
planning.
4P1: Critically reflect on, and appropriately utilize, research to inform the
educational process.
4P3: Articulate the “why” for the many aspects of the teaching and learning
process (including reflection on the effectiveness of instruction).
5P2: Provide a safe emotional environment that positively influences the
teaching and learning process.
Literature Review—Descriptive and Behavioral Disposition Indicators 31
5P3: Provide an organized environment that positively influences the
teaching and learning process.
7P1: Use critical reflection and self-reflection techniques to guide choices and
actions.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: 7; IPC: 14.23(4) h)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
Education 241B, 300P, 303P, 304P, 305P, 312, 321, 340s/540s classes,
art/music/physical education methods courses, and 388/588 (student
teaching)
7P2: Advocate for children and education—even when personal and/or
professional risks are possible.
(INTASC: 9; ITSMC: None; IPC: None)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
Education 114, 300P, 303P, 304P, 305P, 321, 340s/540s classes,
art/music/physical education methods courses, and 388/588 (student
teaching)
8P1: Foster positive relationships with parents, school personnel, and
organizations within the larger community.
(INTASC: 10; ITSMC: 8; IPC: 14.23(4) i)
Courses where competency may be assessed:
Education 241B, 300P, 303P, 304P, 305P, 316/516, 340s/540s classes,
art/music/physical education methods courses, and 388/588 (student
teaching)