Assistant Teachers in Prekindergarten Programs: What Roles Do Lead Teachers Feel Assistants Play in Classroom Management and Teaching?

Assistant teachers are a ubiquitous yet virtually overlooked part of the early education workforce. Assistant teacher education level and its relationship to various classroom characteristics and the roles lead teachers feel assistants play in classroom management and teaching were examined in a nationally representative sample of 3,191 state-funded prekindergarten classes. Research Findings: Most classrooms had at least 1 paid assistant teacher, and classrooms with multiple assistants were more likely to be in Head Start. Lead teachers in public schools were more likely to have a bachelor's degree or higher, to be paired with an assistant with a high school degree, and to report fewer release hours for planning (alone or shared with assistants) than teachers in Head Start. Hierarchical multiple regression indicated that assistant teachers were rated as most useful to teaching duties when the classroom was in a Head Start setting, when the discrepancy between the lead and assistant teachers’ education was smaller, and when there were more shared release hours for planning. Practice and Policy: Implications focus on future prekindergarten teacher workforce needs, the need for more shared planning time and guidance in its use, and the need for more attention to and support for the training and roles of assistant teachers.     

Critical moments in negotiating authority: grading,accountability, and teacher education

Understanding teacher educators’ reasoning about critical moments in negotiating authority can inform efforts to foster democratic teacher education practices and prepare future teachers to teach democratically. We know very little, however, about critical moments in negotiating authority, particularly in teacher educators’ practices. The purpose of this study was to examine, using self-study methodology, a teacher educator’s assumptions and perspectives about purposefully and explicitly negotiating authority through grading and accountability processes in an undergraduate teacher education course. From a critical pedagogical lens – concerning the intersection of classroom power relations, democratic citizenship, and student growth – the findings suggest that seeking legitimacy through consensual acceptance, responding to students’ expressed interests, and constructing knowledge through continual questioning present potential frameworks for constructing purposeful pedagogical partnerships consistent with democratic aims in teacher education.     

Negotiating authority through jointly constructing the course curriculum

Understanding how authority is negotiated in teacher education classrooms can inform efforts to foster democratic teacher education practices and prepare future teachers to teach democratically. We know very little, however, about how authority is negotiated in different classroom contexts, particularly in teacher education settings. This qualitative study examined how authority was negotiated in an undergraduate teacher education course in which I – as the teacher of the course – involved students in actively determining the content, method, and assessment of the course through jointly constructing the course curriculum. Using self-study methodology to understand more deeply the problems embedded in my practice as a beginning teacher-educator, I generated themes from the data using the constant comparative method. The findings suggest that deriving legitimacy from mutually recognized sources, working from shared purposes, and confronting students’ deeply rooted familiarity with authoritarian teaching practices present potential frameworks for negotiating authority in teacher education – while illuminating the challenges of teaching democratically in authoritarian contexts. Such insights are important for helping future teachers experience alternatives to conventional teaching while accounting for the complexity of learning to bring democratic values to life in classrooms at all levels.     

Don’t stop make-believing

ABSTRACT

How is it that we can rationally assert that sport outcomes do not really matter, while also seeming to care about them to an absurd degree? This is the so-called puzzle of sport. The broadly Waltonian solution to the puzzle has it that we make-believe the outcomes matter. Recently, Stear has critiqued this Waltonian solution, raising a series of five objections. He has also leveraged these objections to motive his own contextualist solution to the puzzle. The aim of this paper is to defend the Waltonian solution. The general upshot is that, contra Stear, a make-believe based solution to the puzzle is viable after all.     

Muscle force characteristics of male and female collegiate cross-country runners during overground running

ABSTRACT

Males and females demonstrate unique running mechanics that may contribute to sex-related differences in common running related injuries. Understanding differences in muscle forces during running may inform intervention approaches, such as gait retraining addressing muscle force distribution. The purpose of this study was to compare muscle force characteristics and inter-trial variability between males and females during running. Twenty female and 14 male collegiate cross-country runners were examined. Three-dimensional kinetic and kinematic data were collected during overground running and used to estimate muscle forces via musculoskeletal modelling. Principle components analysis was used to capture the primary sources of variance from the muscle force waveforms. The magnitude of the forces for the hamstrings, gastrocnemius, and soleus muscles were higher across the majority of stance in male runners regardless of footstrike pattern. Males also demonstrated greater inter-trial variability in the timing of the peak gluteus maximus force and the magnitude of local peaks in the gastrocnemius force waveform. Male and female collegiate cross-country runners appear to employ unique lower extremity muscle force characteristics during overground running.     

On the Boundaries of Framing Terrorism: Guilt,Victimization, and the 2016 Orlando Shooting

The 2016 Orlando shooting offers an intriguing lens through which to evaluate the boundaries of media frames in the interpretation of terrorism. Using an experimental design (N = 243), the current study investigated the effects of two dominant frames—the homophobic hate crime and the Islamic terrorist frame—on collective guilt, collective victimization, and pro–lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) political action. In addition, political partisanship and social network diversity were evaluated as potential moderators. Compared to the Islamic terrorist frame, exposure to the homophobic hate crime frame increased collective guilt and decreased collective victimization, subsequently enhancing support for the LGBTQ community. Moreover, social network diversity was shown to override the framing effect, as individuals who reported high diversity were more likely to sign a petition in solidarity with the LGBTQ community, irrespective of frame condition.     

Video tutorials revisited: The relationship between their use and library assessment quiz scores

There is considerable literature evaluating video tutorials. By the first decade of the twenty-first century, research established that online video tutorials performed as well as traditional face-to-face instruction. However, there is little evidence that students actually viewed the tutorials. This study compares postinstruction assessment quiz scores from one class over four semesters with usage statistics for five video tutorials during the same time frame. The data indicate that students do view the tutorials. However, the results also show that usage statistics, together with quiz scores, declined as students progressed through the five tutorials. Additionally, the study determined that there was no positive correlation between the number of viewings and postviewing assessment scores.     

Discourse,Justification, and Education: Jürgen Habermas on Moral Epistemology and Dialogical Conditions of Moral Justification and Rightness

In this essay Walter Okshevsky addresses the question of whether a certain form of dialogically derived agreement can function as an epistemic (universal and necessary) criterion of moral judgment and ground of moral authority. Okshevsky examines arguments for and against in the literature of educational philosophy and develops Jürgen Habermas's affirmative answer as presented in his discourse theory of morality. Habermas's position is articulated as a moral epistemology (“strong dialogicality”) and is developed through his critique of the “monologism” of certain aspects of Immanuel Kant's moral theory. Okshevsky concludes with a consideration of some educational implications of Habermas's position.