In addition to criticisms of the inadequacy of the research base for the competencies included in teacher education programs (Heath & Nielson, 1974), the complexity and expense of implementing PBTE programs were beyond the capacity of most teacher education institutions to handle, and the result was a very low level of implementation of the idea of PBTE (Zeichner, 2005).
This problem of creating forms of PBTE that are too complex and costly to implement and sustain is one that the current incarnation of PBTE will need to address, especially given the disinvestment by states in public universities that still prepare between 70% and 80% of teachers in the nation (National Research Council, 2010).
Contrary to the specificity of the Commonwealth study and the long lists of teacher competencies in many PBTE programs in the 1970s, most recent attempts by scholars to provide frameworks for what all beginning teachers need to know, be like, and be able to do (e.
Finally, in some cases of PBTE, teacher candidates or teachers have opportunities to rehearse, implement, and receive focused feedback on their use of practices (Kazemi et al.
Thus, PBTE is situated on college and university classrooms or in P-12 classrooms (or both) and utilizes the expertise of college and university educators, practicing P-12 teachers, and community-based educators in various ways.
Overall, I think that what they propose makes good sense and adds important elements to the PBTE project.
Although Hiebert and Morris' proposals nicely complement PBTE work to date and help create a system that would enable future generations of teachers to more easily benefit from the wisdom of other teachers, there are several issues in them that merit discussion.
In order to create an assessment system that incorporates the principles of PBTE and authentic assessments, a unit must clearly identify the knowledge and skills that it expects its graduates to display.
Adopting a conceptual framework is a key step in the process by which PBTE can become a unifying and defining force within a teacher preparation program.
In this manner, the incorporation of outcome and performance assessment through the use of student portfolios further builds the central principles of PBTE and authentic assessment into a Unit Assessment System.
Both PBTE and authentic assessments have great potential to change the preparation programs for preservice education professionals.
In reviewing the promise and implications of both PBTE and authentic assessments, it becomes apparent that practical methods must be developed by which they can be incorporated into unit assessment systems.