Creating a Teacher Orientation Seminar for certification candidates: priming your students for success.

Orientation seminars for college freshmen facilitate the transition of students from high school to college. Could similar seminars work as well for those who want to be educators? Creating a Teacher Orientation Seminar for education candidates standardizes the transfer of information and confirms commitment for third-year undergraduates and fifth-year nontraditional students seeking admission to a Teacher Education Program. In seminar format, education candidates profit from information about College of Education requirements and expectations as well as discussion time for processing field observation experiences with faculty facilitators. A Teacher Orientation Seminar may benefit students as well as faculty who partner in their commitment to quality pre-service teacher preparation.

**********

A large body of research supports the success of orientation seminars for community college freshmen. Orientation seminars improve academic performance, retention, and program completion (Raymond & Napoli, 1988). Orientation seminars build foundations for academic success, promote student interaction with faculty and staff, and convey values and traditions of the new experience (Upcraft, M., Gardner, J., & Barefoot, B., 2005). Orientation sessions bridge the gap between previous environment and collegial environment. Results of most successful orientation seminars are positively correlated with subsequent academic success and better-adjusted students (Raymond & Napoli, 1988). A credible program is one that facilitates the transition of new students, prepares them for their new learning environment, and integrates them into the academic and social fabric of their new institution (Upcraft, M., Gardner, J., & Barefoot, B., 2005).

Although research supports the success of orientation seminars with first-year community-college students, less data are available from universities that offer orientation seminars to third-year undergraduate and fifth-year graduate students who seek admission to the school's College of Education program. Following the basic studies' session of the college program, prospective education candidates sometimes appear confused with admission requirements, advisement issues, course prerequisites, observation reflections, and all facets of the expectations of the Teacher Education Program. If orientation seminars bolster students' transition from high school to college, why not use the same process to initiate education candidates into the Teacher Education Program?

Planning the First Teacher Orientation Seminar

A committee from The College of Education and Professional Studies formed with the charge to develop the Teacher Orientation Seminar (TOS). The only ground rules were to orient the students to the College's Conceptual Framework, clarify admission requirements, and familiarize the teacher candidates with the expectations of the College of Education and Professional Studies.

According to Raymond & Napoli (1988), any discussion of orientation program components must relate to the mission and goals of the specific college. The Teacher Orientation Seminar committee, composed of elementary, secondary, and physical education faculty, in the College of Education and Professional Studies, developed the following key components of the Teacher Orientation Seminar.

* Mission (Conceptual Framework) of the College of Education and Professional Studies

* Entrance requirements, policies, and procedures of the Teacher Education Program

* Requirements for recording and reflecting on the 25 hours of observation during the seminar course

* Professionalism in the local schools

* Follow-up meeting to share observation reflections, to discuss concerns, and to air questions

The TOS committee began its work by concentrating on the Conceptual Framework's Eight Learning Outcomes, the azimuth of the College of Education's mission. These Learning Outcomes were derived from NCATE's INTASC Standards for accreditation of Colleges of Education. During the Teacher Orientation Seminar, each learning outcome needed to be explained, dissected, accompanied by myriad examples, and discussed in small group settings. Teacher candidates had to grasp a firm knowledge of each of the Eight Outcomes in order to prime them for developing the skills, knowledge, and dispositions necessary for effective teaching.

After developing the key components of the Teacher Orientation Seminar, the logistics had to be marshaled out. Time, location, committee presentation, and faculty participation are weighty issues for a time-honored institution with growing enrollment and overtaxed faculty.

Logistics for the TOS Program Time

In its inception, the Teacher Orientation Seminar was designed to be presented at the beginning of each semester for students ready to enter the Teacher Education Program. During the first pilot seminar, two Saturday morning sessions, were scheduled two months apart. The first Saturday morning's agenda was

* Conceptual Framework Familiarization 

* Teacher Candidate as Creative Decision Maker

* Observation Procedures and Liability Issues

* Admission Requirements and Familiarization with the College of Education's Website

* Teacher Candidate Electronic Portfolio

Two months later, the second Saturday morning's agenda focused on the teacher candidates' reflections on their 25 hours of observation. Between the first and second Saturday sessions, armed with a standardized form for completion during observation, teacher candidates chose two different schools and at two different grade levels for visitation. During this acculturation process in experienced teachers' classrooms, teacher candidates observed actual practice of the Eight Learning Outcomes. Teacher candidates jotted down examples of (1) teacher planning and organization, (2) enthusiasm and flexibility, (3) pedagogical practices, (4) accommodation for diverse learners, (5) development of higher-order thinking skills, (6) classroom management strategies, (7) effective communication skills, and (8) formal and informal assessment procedures.

Staffing

After the first pilot of the Teacher Orientation Seminar, the committee realized that more than one TOS had to be offered each fall and spring term in order to accommodate increasing numbers of education candidates in manageable group sizes. More TOS sessions required more faculty. During the first pilot, the original committee members who represented various departments in the College, took ownership of the program and volunteered as presenters for the initial group of education candidates. Department Heads and interested faculty members observed the first pilot session. The original presenters were such personable and highly-articulate speakers, and so inflamed with a passion for the program, that many faculty observers volunteered to be part of the next TOS session. Hence, the program gained enough faculty presenters and facilitators to accommodate the increased number of sessions.

Location

The first Saturday session of TOS was held in a large seminar room of the university library, a building flanked with ample parking space. The seminar room is equipped for PowerPoint presentations. The room is furnished with comfortable chairs, easily arranged in large or small groups. Continental breakfast was available for all participants.

Although the seminar room in the library was graced with comfort and convenience, the committee decided to change the location to the College of Education building for the next TOS session. This building houses the "smart" classrooms, the Dean's office, the Department Heads' offices, faculty offices, the Director of Clinical Experiences office, the Teacher-Service Center, the Instructional Services Unit, and the College's computer lab. Logically, education candidates should meet for the Teacher Orientation Seminar where their professional education studies will take place and where the various services and technology capabilities are housed. During the second session, students appeared comfortable in the College of Education building, moving from classroom to classroom for the small-group discussions. According to Chapman & Read (1987), students report they are more comfortable in their new environment, knowing they can ask questions and discuss problems with a facilitator in an non-threatening environment.

During the small-group discussion phase of the second session, education candidates engaged in the business of processing their observation experiences. Most were amazed at the amount of time required to prepare lesson plans not only in alignment with the Course of Study objectives but also incorporating activities that meet learning style differences, ability differences, and accommodations for special needs. Preservice observers commented on individual teaching styles' impact on classroom climate. All education candidates eagerly discussed the ramifications of classroom management and the myriad ways of dealing with student behavior. The 25 hours of observation caused the education candidates to respect the ability of teachers to endure the daily demands of students, administrators, and parents. The careful observers noted that flexibility and high teacher expectations were significant attributes of highly-effective teachers. These small-group, faculty-facilitated sessions charged the education candidates to accept the challenge required to become highly-qualified professionals.

Summary and Discussion

How does an institution know if its orientation programs are effective? Qualitative and quantitative evaluations not only can help institutions improve programs but can let students know their opinions count for something (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). Results of these evaluations must be considered when revising and improving the Teacher Orientation Seminar and in recognizing staff performance.

In this project, 120 students in the first Teacher Orientation Seminar were surveyed about their perceptions and reflections of the seminar. When asked if they gained an overview of the entire public school organization while completing their observations, 75% agreed that the experience was helpful. The students were asked if the TOS gave them a better understanding about the specific program (elementary, secondary, physical education, special education, music) they were entering. Eighty percent agreed that after the TOS, they had a better understanding of their selected program in the College of Education. When asked if they gained information that would help them decide whether or not they really wanted to be a teacher, 98% said yes.

Comments students made in the survey about their experience include:

"It was very helpful and I enjoyed it. I appreciate the teachers and how they've helped. I enjoyed observing because now I definitely know that I want to teach."

"I feel that the orientation was very helpful It helped me to understand more about the profession that I plan to go into."

"It was very helpful. There are so many important details that I needed very much to know. I do appreciate the faculty taking time to do it."

"This orientation was a great help to me. It helped me in not only my observation hours but it also helped me understand everything that I have to complete to get into the teaching program."

The TOS committee's end-of-seminar evaluation revealed that not only were procedures, policies, and questions clarified for students, but for faculty as well. In an informal evaluation with facilitators, one faculty member exclaimed, "This morning's session has been a professional development opportunity for me!" Another faculty facilitator commented that students in her orientation groups now come up to her in the hallway, or stop by her office to ask questions, make comments, or simply to chat.

The end-of-seminar evaluation disclosed some "lessons learned" for the TOS committee to pursue.

* The TOS needs to do a better job of relating the College's Conceptual Framework to the actual practice of the Eight Learning Outcomes during the 25 hours of observation.

* The teacher candidate's role as creative decision maker needs reinforcement throughout the orientation seminar.

* Student attendance and expectations need stricter clarification.

* More computer lab time during the seminar would facilitate the initiation of the candidates' electronic portfolio.

* Increased faculty participation would present opportunities for automatic dissemination of college-wide ongoing changes in teacher-candidate requirements and expectations.

* Broader faculty participation would introduce incoming teacher candidates to faculty members in their chosen education program before students first appear in their classes.

* Seminar evaluation comments suggested that third-year undergraduate and fifth-year graduate teacher candidates (perhaps due to difference in maturity) may express different perceptions and reflections about the TOS. During the next seminar session, student evaluations could be separated into the two representative groups in order to better understand their unique responses to the seminar process.

Considering the results of the end-of-seminar evaluation, the TOS committee realized that the Saturday morning seminar sessions must evolve to a formal credit-producing course for all education candidates. A one-credit-hour Teacher Orientation Course could more adequately address the "lessons learned" from the pilot seminar.

The TOS program evolved from the concept that students need more information about requirements and expectations of their career choices as professional educators. With the research reporting that freshmen become better adjusted to campus life as a result of completing an orientation seminar, it seems logical that similar orientation seminars might work equally well for those entering Teacher Education Programs. The TOS pilot program proves the correctness of this proposal.

The end-of-seminar evaluation showed that a Teacher Orientation Seminar is most informative and "confirming" for students entering Teacher Education Programs. An unexpected outcome of the seminar was that participating faculty were equally informed and enthused. The Teacher Orientation Seminar primed both pre-service teachers and professors for the partnership commitment necessary to produce a new generation of exemplary teachers.

References

Chapman, L. C., & Reed, P. J. (1987). Evaluating the effectiveness of a freshman orientation course. Journal of College Student Personnel, (28)1, 178-180.

Martin, N. K., & Dixon, P. N., (1989). The effects of freshman orientation and locus of control on adjustment to college. Journal of College Student Development, (30), 362-366.

Schwitzer, A. M., McGovern, T.V., & Robbins, S. B. (1991). Adjustment outcomes of a freshman seminar: A utilization--focused approach. Journal of College Student Development, (32) 484-489.

Upcraft, M. L., Gardner, J. M., & Barefoot. B. O. (2005). Challenging and supporting the first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college (1st Ed.). Jossey-Bass publishers, San Francisco, CA.

Roland A. Thornburg, Ed. D, Associate Professor, Department of Health Physical Education and Recreation. Carol Uline, Ed.D, Associate Professor, Department of Secondary Education. Janell D. Wilson, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Secondary Education.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Thornburg at [e-mail].