从学科专家到专业教师
|
摘要
教育的重要性提升了对高质量的优秀教师的需求,而培养高质量的教育硕士是提高教师质量的重要途径之一。教育硕士研究生教育以培养专业教师为目标,使各专业的学科专家经过教育理论的学习与教学实践的锻炼,实现从学科专家到教学专家的转变。那么,如何建立专业性突出、实践能力强和质量可靠的教育硕士项目,以帮助在职和未来的教师从学科专家成长为教学专家?这是本文准备重点探讨的问题。
从变革历程来看,中美两国的教师教育都经历了从中等、高专到大学教育模式的转变,其发展呈现了从重视技艺到强调理论的变化,但也存在着非常明显的差异：美国的教师教育在大学化的过程中,更强调教学训练,学科知识培养被弱化；而中国恰恰相反,教师学科知识的培养由于大学重视学科性而被强化。这一差异也突出体现在两国教育硕士研究生培养模式中。
中国教育硕士研究生培养过程中的根本问题是目标定位不清,导致培养的学生职业性和实践工作能力不突出。尽管各培养单位均有比较详尽的教育硕士培养方案,但目前的关键问题不是如何表述培养目标,而是如何落实这些培养目标。在这一方面,美国力图使教育硕士培养标准化的经验值得借鉴。“标准化”是美国社会、各行各业包括高等教育传统中最有价值的核心准则,也是美国高等教育能取得今日成就的重要原因之一。在美国教育硕士培养过程中,标准化充分体现在培养目标的文字表述、课程的设置以及开发实施等所有培养环节上,最终使教育硕士培养模式彻底摆脱了对教育学硕士培养模式的简单复制。考察美国教育硕士研究生教育是如何建立标准化的培养方案以及如何标准地实施培养目标,以突出教育硕士的职业性和实践性特点的,是本文的核心目的。
本文首先对"NBPTS标准”这一美国教育硕士人才培养体系的核心标准进行了详细考察与论述。美国教师教育历经四次重要变革,从旨在培养学者型教师逐步转化为培养高质量教师,美国教育硕士项目也随之踏上专业化发展之路,而伴随着标准化运动产生的教学标准化和教师培养标准化是美国教育硕士研究生教育的特色和质量保障的关键。在专业教师培养的标准化诉求下,全美专业教学标准委员会(The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards,缩写为NBPTS)得以建立并制定了严格的教师专业教学标准以“过滤”掉不合格教师,从外部促进了教师的自身发展,保证了教师专业水平的不断提高。作为全美优秀专业教师的权威认证机构,NBPTS委员会针对国家高级教师认证设立了五项核心原则。为了促进教师专业化发展,提高美国基础教育质量,NBPTS委员会基于“五项核心原则”进一步制定了高质量教师的认证标准。随后,NBPTS专业教学标准因其权威性和高标准性而逐渐成为美国各大学教育硕士项目培养高质量教师的指导框架。随着NBPTS委员会的发展与所制定的专业教师标准的日渐完善,NBPTS专业教学标准对美国教育硕士人才培养发挥了越来越重要的作用,成为美国教育硕士人才培养体系的核心标准。
论文继而深入论述了美国教育硕士人才培养是如何基于NBPTS专业教学标准来实现“从学科专家成长为专业教师”这一核心培养目标的,并以Cameron University教育硕士项目为例,从课程、实践与评价三个角度系统考察了美国教育硕士人才培养体系及其构建与实施过程。
一是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的课程体系,通过标准化的课程体系的建立来满足教育硕士培养的专业性要求。建立基于标准的课程和相应的教学实践是培养具有专业教学能力、关注学生身心发展和充满责任感的能够因材施教的教育工作者的关键途径。“标准”具有两条脉络：学科课程标准和专业教学标准。全美各学科专业委员会和NBPTS全美专业教学标准委员会分别为高质量教师需要掌握的学科知识和需要培养的教学能力设定了培养标准,也为培养高质量教师的教育硕士课程体系提供了指导。教育硕士课程体系有两个层面,第一个是宏观层面的课程设置,即根据未来的教师需要学习的知识和需要培养的能力开设核心课、专业课等课程。第二个层面是微观层面的课程设计,即根据该门课程的教学目标、课程属性、学生情况等编制课程教学大纲。
二是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的实践体系,以满足教育硕士人才培养的实践性要求。教育的专业特性决定了教师工作具有极强的实践性,教师专业化发展对教育实践提出了更高的要求。美国教育硕士项目以NBPTS专业教学标准五项原则为指导,根据培养对象类型与课程类型,将实践环节融入课程,通过三阶段螺旋式实践模式确保教育硕士人才培养质量的实用性,通过“教育见习”、“微格教学”和“教育实习”等三个环节的教育实践有效地促进了高质量教师的培养,并通过严格实施标准确保了人才培养的有效性。
最后是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的评价体系。基于NBPTS专业教学标准的档案袋评价方式和量规评价工具有必要在教育硕士人才培养过程中被广泛运用,成为高质量教师培养的质量保障。
教育硕士研究生教育必须要走一条有别于学术性学位的发展之路。论文在总结分析美国教育硕士人才培养的专业性导向与标准性实施过程的基础上,从课程设置、实践环节、评价机制、教学方式与师资构成等五个方面对中国教育硕士研究生教育提出了改进建议：构建基于标准的课程体系来满足教育硕士人才培养的专业性要求；改革实践环节来满足教育硕士人才培养的实践性要求；引入有效的评价工具来满足教育硕士人才培养的可靠性要求；改进教学方法来满足教育硕士人才培养的教学性要求；建立多元化的师资队伍来满足教育硕士人才培养的职业性要求。
The importance of education arises the demands of high quality teachers. As the major channel of teachers education, the M.Ed. is committed to cultivate professional teachers to grow from subject experts by providing educational theories, teaching strategies and internship. Then how to develop professional, practical and quality M.Ed. program to help those employed and future teachers to grow from subject experts to professional teachers? This is the research problem of the dissertation.
Tracing back the development history of teachers' education in China and the U.S., both experienced the transformation from the middle education, to college, then university mode, and the education emphasis transforming from skills to theories. But the teachers' education in the U.S emphasizes more on the teaching training and the subject knowledge has been weakened. On the contrast, China pays more attention on subject knowledge learning. The differences are reflected on the cultivating mode of Master of Education.
The major problem existing in the education of M.Ed. in China is the ambiguity of the educational objectives, resulting in the low efficiency of students'professional and practical proficiency in future teaching. In this respect, the efforts to standardize M.Ed. Education in the U.S. afford us lessons that merit attention. The standardized process of M.Ed. education makes M.Ed. earn its own featured educational mode successfully, getting rid of the effects of M.Pd.. Hence, the core objective of this dissertation is to study the standardized process of M.Ed. education in the U.S.
First of all, the paper studies and illustrates the core standard of M.Ed. Program in the U.S., which is the NBPTS core propositions. NBPTS is the abbreviation of The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, a national certificate authority for high quality teachers in the U.S.. Because of its high standards and authority, the NBPTS Propositions have become the instructional framework for the reconstructing of the M.Ed. Programs in the U.S.
In order to make the research more persuasive and valuable, the author pursue the M.Ed. in Cameron University in the U.S.. By experiencing the whole learning procedure, by collecting and analyzing plentiful first-hand materials, the author concluded that the NBPTS Propositions to be the core standard of M.Ed. program. Based on the core standard, the author illustrates a three-dimensional structure of the M.Ed. program formed by curriculum, practice and assessment, which would be helpful for the development of the M.Ed. program in China.
The second part of the dissertation is the detailed illustration and analysis of the curriculum, practice and assessment system of the M.Ed. program in the U.S. based on the NBPTS Propositions. Firstly, the M.Ed. curriculum is developed from two sorts of curriculum standards--subject standards and professional teaching standards, working together to educate professional high quality teachers. Secondly, the M.Ed. experiment process is formed by three types of practical training for teaching competence--observation, field experience, and internship, which are vital to the quality of the M.Ed. program. Thirdly, the assessment system of the M.Ed. consists of four gates for evaluation--admission, completion of9hours,21hours and program completion, which are necessary measures to ensure the validity of the M.Ed. Education.
Finally, the author concludes that the M.Ed, education must be developed in a distinguished way apart from the M. Pd.. The dissertation put forward to suggestions in five aspects on what to learn, what to do, how well, how to teach, and teach by whom respectively. To conclude, a standardized system including curriculum, practice, assessment, teaching methods and faculty requirement should be set up to to achieve the objective of M.Ed, which is, to cultivate high quality teachers.
The innovations of the research fall in three aspects:First is the application of experience and action research methods. The pursuing of the M.Ed, is the starting of the research, the analyzing of the first-hand literature is the refining of views, the writing of the paper is the building of the theoretical thoughts and the action improvement is the application of the research. Hence the research process illustrate a complete action research procedure from practical experience to theoretical construction, and then back to practical improvement. The second innovation lies in the research viewpoint--the NBPTS Propositions, which is the core of the M.Ed. program summarized from huge first-hand literature by the author. Last but not least innovation is the research argument, which is the construction of three-dimension M.Ed. program consisting of one core standard, two kinds of curricula, three types of practice, four stages of cultivation. And in the end, advices from five aspects of are given for the development of M.Ed. Program in China.
The dissertation consists of six chapters. The first chapter is the introduction of the dissertation, which illustrates the research background and literature review. Chapter two analyzes the NBPTS Propositions and six professional objectives. Chapter three to five are the research on curriculum, practice and assessment system respectively, which support each other and form the three-dimension system to meet the goal of the M.Ed. Program cooperatively. The last chapter summarizes the whole dissertation and give advices on five aspects for the development of the M.Ed. Program in China.
从变革历程来看,中美两国的教师教育都经历了从中等、高专到大学教育模式的转变,其发展呈现了从重视技艺到强调理论的变化,但也存在着非常明显的差异：美国的教师教育在大学化的过程中,更强调教学训练,学科知识培养被弱化；而中国恰恰相反,教师学科知识的培养由于大学重视学科性而被强化。这一差异也突出体现在两国教育硕士研究生培养模式中。
中国教育硕士研究生培养过程中的根本问题是目标定位不清,导致培养的学生职业性和实践工作能力不突出。尽管各培养单位均有比较详尽的教育硕士培养方案,但目前的关键问题不是如何表述培养目标,而是如何落实这些培养目标。在这一方面,美国力图使教育硕士培养标准化的经验值得借鉴。“标准化”是美国社会、各行各业包括高等教育传统中最有价值的核心准则,也是美国高等教育能取得今日成就的重要原因之一。在美国教育硕士培养过程中,标准化充分体现在培养目标的文字表述、课程的设置以及开发实施等所有培养环节上,最终使教育硕士培养模式彻底摆脱了对教育学硕士培养模式的简单复制。考察美国教育硕士研究生教育是如何建立标准化的培养方案以及如何标准地实施培养目标,以突出教育硕士的职业性和实践性特点的,是本文的核心目的。
本文首先对"NBPTS标准”这一美国教育硕士人才培养体系的核心标准进行了详细考察与论述。美国教师教育历经四次重要变革,从旨在培养学者型教师逐步转化为培养高质量教师,美国教育硕士项目也随之踏上专业化发展之路,而伴随着标准化运动产生的教学标准化和教师培养标准化是美国教育硕士研究生教育的特色和质量保障的关键。在专业教师培养的标准化诉求下,全美专业教学标准委员会(The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards,缩写为NBPTS)得以建立并制定了严格的教师专业教学标准以“过滤”掉不合格教师,从外部促进了教师的自身发展,保证了教师专业水平的不断提高。作为全美优秀专业教师的权威认证机构,NBPTS委员会针对国家高级教师认证设立了五项核心原则。为了促进教师专业化发展,提高美国基础教育质量,NBPTS委员会基于“五项核心原则”进一步制定了高质量教师的认证标准。随后,NBPTS专业教学标准因其权威性和高标准性而逐渐成为美国各大学教育硕士项目培养高质量教师的指导框架。随着NBPTS委员会的发展与所制定的专业教师标准的日渐完善,NBPTS专业教学标准对美国教育硕士人才培养发挥了越来越重要的作用,成为美国教育硕士人才培养体系的核心标准。
论文继而深入论述了美国教育硕士人才培养是如何基于NBPTS专业教学标准来实现“从学科专家成长为专业教师”这一核心培养目标的,并以Cameron University教育硕士项目为例,从课程、实践与评价三个角度系统考察了美国教育硕士人才培养体系及其构建与实施过程。
一是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的课程体系,通过标准化的课程体系的建立来满足教育硕士培养的专业性要求。建立基于标准的课程和相应的教学实践是培养具有专业教学能力、关注学生身心发展和充满责任感的能够因材施教的教育工作者的关键途径。“标准”具有两条脉络：学科课程标准和专业教学标准。全美各学科专业委员会和NBPTS全美专业教学标准委员会分别为高质量教师需要掌握的学科知识和需要培养的教学能力设定了培养标准,也为培养高质量教师的教育硕士课程体系提供了指导。教育硕士课程体系有两个层面,第一个是宏观层面的课程设置,即根据未来的教师需要学习的知识和需要培养的能力开设核心课、专业课等课程。第二个层面是微观层面的课程设计,即根据该门课程的教学目标、课程属性、学生情况等编制课程教学大纲。
二是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的实践体系,以满足教育硕士人才培养的实践性要求。教育的专业特性决定了教师工作具有极强的实践性,教师专业化发展对教育实践提出了更高的要求。美国教育硕士项目以NBPTS专业教学标准五项原则为指导,根据培养对象类型与课程类型,将实践环节融入课程,通过三阶段螺旋式实践模式确保教育硕士人才培养质量的实用性,通过“教育见习”、“微格教学”和“教育实习”等三个环节的教育实践有效地促进了高质量教师的培养,并通过严格实施标准确保了人才培养的有效性。
最后是基于NBPTS标准构建美国教育硕士人才培养的评价体系。基于NBPTS专业教学标准的档案袋评价方式和量规评价工具有必要在教育硕士人才培养过程中被广泛运用,成为高质量教师培养的质量保障。
教育硕士研究生教育必须要走一条有别于学术性学位的发展之路。论文在总结分析美国教育硕士人才培养的专业性导向与标准性实施过程的基础上,从课程设置、实践环节、评价机制、教学方式与师资构成等五个方面对中国教育硕士研究生教育提出了改进建议：构建基于标准的课程体系来满足教育硕士人才培养的专业性要求；改革实践环节来满足教育硕士人才培养的实践性要求；引入有效的评价工具来满足教育硕士人才培养的可靠性要求；改进教学方法来满足教育硕士人才培养的教学性要求；建立多元化的师资队伍来满足教育硕士人才培养的职业性要求。
The importance of education arises the demands of high quality teachers. As the major channel of teachers education, the M.Ed. is committed to cultivate professional teachers to grow from subject experts by providing educational theories, teaching strategies and internship. Then how to develop professional, practical and quality M.Ed. program to help those employed and future teachers to grow from subject experts to professional teachers? This is the research problem of the dissertation.
Tracing back the development history of teachers' education in China and the U.S., both experienced the transformation from the middle education, to college, then university mode, and the education emphasis transforming from skills to theories. But the teachers' education in the U.S emphasizes more on the teaching training and the subject knowledge has been weakened. On the contrast, China pays more attention on subject knowledge learning. The differences are reflected on the cultivating mode of Master of Education.
The major problem existing in the education of M.Ed. in China is the ambiguity of the educational objectives, resulting in the low efficiency of students'professional and practical proficiency in future teaching. In this respect, the efforts to standardize M.Ed. Education in the U.S. afford us lessons that merit attention. The standardized process of M.Ed. education makes M.Ed. earn its own featured educational mode successfully, getting rid of the effects of M.Pd.. Hence, the core objective of this dissertation is to study the standardized process of M.Ed. education in the U.S.
First of all, the paper studies and illustrates the core standard of M.Ed. Program in the U.S., which is the NBPTS core propositions. NBPTS is the abbreviation of The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, a national certificate authority for high quality teachers in the U.S.. Because of its high standards and authority, the NBPTS Propositions have become the instructional framework for the reconstructing of the M.Ed. Programs in the U.S.
In order to make the research more persuasive and valuable, the author pursue the M.Ed. in Cameron University in the U.S.. By experiencing the whole learning procedure, by collecting and analyzing plentiful first-hand materials, the author concluded that the NBPTS Propositions to be the core standard of M.Ed. program. Based on the core standard, the author illustrates a three-dimensional structure of the M.Ed. program formed by curriculum, practice and assessment, which would be helpful for the development of the M.Ed. program in China.
The second part of the dissertation is the detailed illustration and analysis of the curriculum, practice and assessment system of the M.Ed. program in the U.S. based on the NBPTS Propositions. Firstly, the M.Ed. curriculum is developed from two sorts of curriculum standards--subject standards and professional teaching standards, working together to educate professional high quality teachers. Secondly, the M.Ed. experiment process is formed by three types of practical training for teaching competence--observation, field experience, and internship, which are vital to the quality of the M.Ed. program. Thirdly, the assessment system of the M.Ed. consists of four gates for evaluation--admission, completion of9hours,21hours and program completion, which are necessary measures to ensure the validity of the M.Ed. Education.
Finally, the author concludes that the M.Ed, education must be developed in a distinguished way apart from the M. Pd.. The dissertation put forward to suggestions in five aspects on what to learn, what to do, how well, how to teach, and teach by whom respectively. To conclude, a standardized system including curriculum, practice, assessment, teaching methods and faculty requirement should be set up to to achieve the objective of M.Ed, which is, to cultivate high quality teachers.
The innovations of the research fall in three aspects:First is the application of experience and action research methods. The pursuing of the M.Ed, is the starting of the research, the analyzing of the first-hand literature is the refining of views, the writing of the paper is the building of the theoretical thoughts and the action improvement is the application of the research. Hence the research process illustrate a complete action research procedure from practical experience to theoretical construction, and then back to practical improvement. The second innovation lies in the research viewpoint--the NBPTS Propositions, which is the core of the M.Ed. program summarized from huge first-hand literature by the author. Last but not least innovation is the research argument, which is the construction of three-dimension M.Ed. program consisting of one core standard, two kinds of curricula, three types of practice, four stages of cultivation. And in the end, advices from five aspects of are given for the development of M.Ed. Program in China.
The dissertation consists of six chapters. The first chapter is the introduction of the dissertation, which illustrates the research background and literature review. Chapter two analyzes the NBPTS Propositions and six professional objectives. Chapter three to five are the research on curriculum, practice and assessment system respectively, which support each other and form the three-dimension system to meet the goal of the M.Ed. Program cooperatively. The last chapter summarizes the whole dissertation and give advices on five aspects for the development of the M.Ed. Program in China.
引文
① Denis Diderot. French Libralism and Education in the Eighteenth Century:the Writings of La Chalotais, Turgot, Digerot, and Condurcet on National Education, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York,1932.
② Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
③ 宋鲁郑,只有去中国才能看到未来--中国正迎来自信时代.求是[J],2013(9).
① 胡艳,迎接知识经济的挑战,深化改革我国的高等师范教育—面向21世纪高等师范教育国际研讨会综述[J1.高等师范教育研究,1998(6).
② 教育部师范教育司.教师专业化的理论与实践[J].北京：人民教育出版社,2001.
③ 国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年).http：//www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
④ 单中惠,杨汉麟.西方教育学名著提要[M].江西：江西人民出版社,2004.149-150.
⑤ 夸美纽斯.大教学论[M],傅任敢译.人民教育出版社,1999.
① Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
① 裴斯泰洛齐,夏之莲等译,裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].人民教育出版社,1984.
② 康德,瞿菊农译,康德教育论[M].商务印书版,1926.
③ 赵炬明.学科、课程、学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002(4)：23.
① 宋茬,钟秉林.走向实践与技艺化危险：中美教师教育模式改革研究[J].高等教育研究,2011(9)
② Susan, Bkack. Building a Better Teacher[J]. The American School Board Journal,1999,(4).
① 国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年)http://www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
② 关于深入推进专业学位研究生培养模式改革的意见.教育部与人力资源社会保障部.http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_823/201311/159870.html.
① 陈霞.基于课程标准的教育改革—美国的行动与启[D],上海：华东师范大学,2004
② 乐中保,美国优秀高中语文教师专业教学标准概述[J].现代教育论坛,2008(1).
③ 时芸.美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)优秀教师标准探析[D].重庆：西南大学,2007.
④ 李静.美国国家层面的科学教师专业标准探析[D].上海：华东师范大学,2009.
⑤ 洪明.美国教师质量保障体系历史演进研究[D].福州：福建师范大学,2008.
⑥ Jill B. Farrell:National Board Certified Teachers:An Untapped Resource for School Improvement? Childhood Education, Spring,3,2005.
⑦ Gary R. Galluzzo:Performance Assessment and Renewing Teacher Education:The Possibilities of the NBPTS Standards, Clearing House 78 no.4, Mr/AP,2005.
⑧ 施克灿.国际教师专业标准的三种模式及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004(12).
① 姜勇.美国“以标准为基础”的教师证照制度的改革与启示[J].比较教育研究,2011(2)
② 曾国强.美国教师培训标准述评—美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)与美国全国教师教育资格认证委员会(NCATE)教师教育标准解析[D].北京：首都师范大学,2009.
③ Carol A. Mullen, Josb Farinas, What Constitutes a "Highly qualified" Teacher? A Review of Teacher Education Standards and Trends,2003.
④ F. M. Hess, Tear down this wall:The case for a radical overhaul of teacher certification. Washington, D.C.:Progressive Policy Institute.2001.
① Linda Darling-Hammond:Reforming Teacher Preparation and Licensing:Debating the Evidence, Teachers College Record Volume 102 Number 1,2000, pp.28-56.
② 吴姗,洪明.当代美国教师认证组织的对峙与互补—全美专业教学标准委员会与美国优质教师证书委员会之比较研究.教育研究,2007(4).
③ 袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005(11).
① 杨艳梅.美国新任教师教学能力培养研究[D].重庆：西南大学,2011.
② 徐今雅.美国教育硕士培养变革的经验及启示—从基于课程到基于标准[J].比较教育研究,2008(5)
③ 周钧.能力本位的教师教育--美国阿文诺学院教师培养案例研究[J].外国中小学教育,2009(8).
① 索磊.美国小学教师职前培养体制的演变与启示[J].外国教育研究,2009(7).
② 赵卫菊.教师评价与教师专业发展--来自美国NBPTS等优秀教师评价的启示[J].高等教育与改革,2007(5).
③ 周钧.当前美国大学教育学院教师教育改革[J].教师教育研究,2010(1).
④ 祝怀新,许啸.美国研究型大学教育学院人才培养模式探析——以哈佛、斯坦福大学为例[J].高等教育研究.2009(5)
⑤ 郭志明.美国教师专业规范历史研究[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004.
① 朱旭东.教师教育专业化与质量保障体系[J],中国高等教育,2001(18).
② 洪成文.质量认证框架下的美国教师教育质量保证研究[J].比较教育研究,2004(10).
① U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998马骥雄战后美国教育研究(M].江西：江西教育出版社,1991.
① content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,924217,00.html.
① 国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出版,1986.
① U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants.2000
③ 国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出社.1986.
① 周南照.教师教育改革与教师专业发展：国际视野与本土实践[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2006,p115.
② National Education Association WEB:Confronting the Crisis:Who's Teaching Our Children?[R].Washington,DC.1993. (11).
③ New No Child Left Behind Flexibility:Highly Qualified Teachers[EB/OL]http:// www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/tea-chers/hqtftexibility.html,2010-07-12.
④ U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998.
① James Comer&Valerie Maholmes, Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher Preparation for Urban Schools'. Journal of Education for Teaching,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
① The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). What Teachers Should Know and Be Able to Do——Policy Position (Five Core Propositions).
① The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE)Accreditation of Schools, Colleges, and Departments of Education.2000.
① http://www.nbpts.org/promoting-student-learning-growth-achievement.
② 陈珊.二十一世纪美国高质量教师的标准及其实施策略[J].华中师范大学研究生学报,2006,(6).
① English as a New Language Standards [EB/OL]. http://www.nbpts.org.2002
① Goldhaber Dan). A Descriptive Analysis Of the Distribution Of NBPT5 Certified Teachers In North Carolina[J]. Economics of Education Review,2006,(2):22-23.
① Elliott, J. (1992)Action Research for Educational Change. [M]. Milton Keynes:Open University.
① Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
② Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
① Jackson, P. W. Life in classrooms. New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.1968.
② Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
③ Cornbleth, C. Curriculum in context. London:Falmer.1991.
④ Eisner, E. W. The educational imagination:On the design and evaluation of school programs (2nd ed.)(pp.97-98). New York:Macmillan.
⑤ Sizer, T.R. Horace's Compromise:The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.1984.
① Kliebard, H. The struggle for the American curriculum 1893-1958. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.1987.
① Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan. 1986.
② Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
③ Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan 1986.
① Hirsch, E.D. Cultural Literacy. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.1987.
② Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
① Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
② Ornstein, A. Curriculum:Foundations, principles, and issues(4th ed.). Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
① Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
① Garcia, J., Spalding, E., & Powell, R.R. Contents of teaching:Methods for middle and high school instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill/Prentice-Hall.2001.
② Borthwick. A&Nolan. K. Performance standards:How Good is Good Enough. Pre-summit Briefing Materials:1996 National Education Summit. Palisades, NY.
① National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk:The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC:U.S. Government Printing Office.1983.
① Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction,2005.
① Thornton S.J. Teaching social studies that matters:Curriculum for active learning. New York: Teachers College Press.2005.
① http://www.actfl.org.
① http://www.sde.state.ok.us.
① Tyler, R.W. Basic princeples of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.1949.
① 袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005(11).
① Joan,P.I. Using National Board Standards to Redesign Master's Degree for Teachers:A Guide for Institutions of Higher Education, http://www.nbpts.org.
① http://graduate.bnu.edu.cn/ReadNews.aspx?NewsId=11100905270.2011.10.09
② http://www.pde.ecnu.edu.cn/worksl_id.aspx?pageid=33&Class_id=52&xiazai_idl=162. 2012.1.3.
③ 赵炬明.学科、课程、学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002(4)：23.
① James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher Preparation for Urban Schools'. Journal of Education for Teachine,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
② 裴斯泰洛齐,夏之莲等译,裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].人民教育出版社,1984.
③ 康德,瞿菊农译,康德教育论[M].商务印书版,1926.
① M.Ed. Graduate Programs Handbook, Cameron University Department of Education.http://www.cameron.edu/graduate.Evised spring 2009.
① Fenwick W.English.Deciding What to Teach and Test:Developing,Aligning,and Auditing the Curriculum [M].Thousand Oaks,California:Corwin Press,Inc.,2000.
① 崔允都,夏雪梅.试论基于课程标准的学生学业成就评价[J].课程教材教法,2007(1)：13-18.
① Stephen Chappuis, Richard J.S. Assessment for Learning[M].Portland, Oregon:Assessment Training Institution,2005.
① Heidi Goodrich A. Understanding Rubrics. http://www.middleweb.com/ rubricsHG.html,1997.
② 祝智庭,钟志贤.现代教育技术—促进多元智能发展[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2002.
③ 焦建利.教育技术学研究的历史演化与未来趋势--从2975篇博士学位论文题目看研究选题与方法的变化.电化教育研究,2003(1).
④ 钟志贤,王觅,林安琪.量规：一种现代教学评价的方法[J].中国远程教育,2007(10).
① 唐玉霞,马兰.教学评估量规的编制及应用[J].评价与管理,2012(1).
[1]潘懋元.新编高等教育学[M].北京：北京师范大学,1996.
[2]张楚廷.高等教育哲学[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,2004.
[3]张楚廷.高等教育学导论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2010.
[4]张楚廷.课程与教学哲学[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2003.
[5]张楚廷主编.高校教师教育教学技能[M].长沙：湖南人民出版社,2010.
[6]雷鸣强.教育功效观：一个教育原理的新视角[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,1999.
[7]刘铁芳.守望教育[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004.
[8]刘铁芳主编.追寻有意义的教育[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2006.
[9]孙俊山.教育过程的美学意蕴[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2006.
[10]王承绪等编译.高等教育新论----多学科研究[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,1988.
[11][伯顿.克拉克]探究的场所----现代大学的科研和研究生教育[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2001.
[12]许云昭,石鸥.差距与超载：中美教育管理比较研究[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2000.
[13]方展画.罗杰斯“以学生为中心”教学理论述评[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1990.
[14][美]哈蒙德,斯诺顿著,葛雪雷等译.教师是这样炼成的[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2007.
[15][美]哈蒙德著,陈允明等译.教师应该做到的和能够做到的[M].北京：中国青年出版社,2007.
[16]教育部师范教育司.教师专业化的理论与实践[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2001.
[17]钟志贤.大学教学模式革新：教学设计视阈[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2008.
[18]曾绍元.中国高等学校教师队伍建设和发展[M].北京：航空工业出版社,1996.
[19][美]玛丽埃伦.韦默著,洪岗译.国外大学教学与教改译丛.以学习者为中心的教学[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2006.
[20][美]罗伯特.M.戴尔蒙德著,黄小苹译.国外大学教学与教改译丛.课程与课程体系的设计和评价实用指南[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2006.
[21]刘捷.专业化：挑战21世纪的教师[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2003.
[22]单中惠,杨汉麟.西方教育学名著提要[M].南昌：江西人民出版社,2004.
[23][捷]夸美纽斯著.傅任感译.大教学论[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1999.
[24][瑞士]裴斯泰洛齐著.夏之莲等译.裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1984.
[25][德]康德著.瞿菊农译.康德教育论[M].北京：商务印书版,1926.
[26]郭志明.美国教师专业规范历史研究[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004.
[27]国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出版,1986.
[28]周南照.教师教育改革与教师专业发展：国际视野与本土实[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2006.
[29]马骥雄.战后美国教育研究[M].南昌：江西教育出版社,1991.
[30]王泽农,曹慧英.中外教师教育课程设置比较研究[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2003.
[31]许高厚,翟家庆,孟详悟主编.教育实习导论[M].北京：北京师范人学出版社,1995.
[32]祝智庭,钟志贤.现代教育技术促进多元智能发展[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2002.
[33]靳希斌.教师教育模式研究[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2009.
[34]闫寒冰.信息化教学评价----量规实用工具[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2003.
[35][美]Popham, W. J促进教学的课堂评价[M].北京：中国轻工业出版社,2002.
[36]钟秉林,教师教育转型研究[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2009：51-56.
[1]姚利民,高教教学方法研究述评[J].大学教育科学,2010,(1).
[2]雷鸣强,陈钧.建构面向21世纪“立交自主”的高师培养模式[J].高等师范教育研究,1999,(1)
[3]潘涌.论“师本培训”中的学科首席教师[J].浙江教育科学,2008,(5).
[4]刘鹂,安玉洁.微格教学的多元化架构[J].电化教育研究,2005,(9).
[5]姚国庆,在教学过程中Workshop的实践与经验总结[J].中国科教创新导刊,2007,(4).
[6]宋茬,钟秉林.走向实践与技艺化危险：中美教师教育模式改革研究[J].高等教育研究,2011,(9).
[7]赵炬明.学科,课程,学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002,(4).
[8]张建功,张振刚.美国专业学位研究生教育的学位结构及启示[J].高等教育研究,2008,(7).
[9]宋鲁郑,只有去中国才能看到未来----中国正迎来自信时代.求是[J],2013,(9).
[10]胡艳.迎接知识经济的挑战,深化改革我国的高等师范教育----面向21世纪高等师范教育国际研讨会综述[J].高等师范教育研究,1998,(6).
[11]陈霞.基于课程标准的教育改革----美国的行动与启[D],上海：华东师范大学,2004.
[12]乐中保.美国优秀高中语文教师专业教学标准概述[J].现代教育论坛,2008,(1).
[13]时芸.美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)优秀教师标准探析[D].重庆：西南大学,2007.
[14]李静.美国国家层面的科学教师专业标准探析[D].上海：华东师范大学,2009.
[15]洪明.美国教师质量保障体系历史演进研究[D].福州：福建师范大学,2008.
[16]施克灿.国际教师专业标准的三种模式及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004,(12).
[17]姜勇.美国“以标准为基础”的教师证照制度的改革与启示[J].比较教育研究,2011,(2).
[18]曾国强.美国教师培训标准述评----美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)与美国全国教师教育资格认证委员会(NCATE)教师教育标准解析[D].北京：首都师范大学,2009.
[19]吴姗,洪明.当代美国教师认证组织的对峙与互补----全美专业教学标准委员会与美国
[20]优质教师证书委员会之比较研究.教育研究,2007,(4)
[21]袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005,(11).
[22]杨艳梅.美国新任教师教学能力培养研究[D].重庆：西南大学,2011.
[23]徐今雅.美国教育硕士培养变革的经验及启示—从基于课程到基于标准[J].比较教育 研究,2008(5)
[24]周钧.能力本位的教师教育----美国阿文诺学院教师培养案例研究[J].外国中小学教育,2009,(8).
[25]索磊.美国小学教师职前培养体制的演变与启示[J].外国教育研究,2009,(7).
[26]赵卫菊.教师评价与教师专业发展----来自美国NBPTS等优秀教师评价的启示[J].高等教育与改革,2007,(5).
[27]周钧.当前美国大学教育学院教师教育改革[J].教师教育研究,2010,(1).
[28]祝怀新,许啸.美国研究型大学教育学院人才培养模式探析----以哈佛、斯坦福大学为例[J].高等教育研究.2009,(5).
[29]朱旭东.教师教育专业化与质量保障体系[J],中国高等教育,2001,(18).
[30洪成文.质量认证框架下的美国教师教育质量保证研究[J].比较教育研究,2004,(10).
[31]陈珊.二十一世纪美国高质量教师的标准及其实施策略[J].当代教育科学,2006(17).
[32]许明.美国“大学本位”教师教育改革的新尝试----“新时代教师计划”述评[J].比较教育研究,2010,(4).
[33]洪明.当前美国教师教育思想的主要流派[J].国外社会科学,2009,(6).
[34]郑东辉,施莉.国外教育实习发展概况及启示[[J].高等师范教育研究,2003,(5).
[35]徐志伟.国外高师教育实习改革的主要经验[J].黑龙江高教研究,1994,(2).
[36]肖美良.国外教师教育实习特点分析[J].教师教育,2006,(4).
[37]李崇爱,王昌善.欧美发达国家教育实习的模式与理念[J].教育评论,2005,(4).
[38]陈建华.西方发达国家教育实习的时间安排及其启示[J],外国中小学教育2002,(3).
[39]那茂菊.中外教育实习改革的趋势[J],西南师范大学学报,1999,(1).
[40]崔允漷,夏雪梅.试论基于课程标准的学生学业成就评价[J].课程教材教法,2007,(1).
[41]唐玉霞,马兰.教学评估量规的编制及应用[J].评价与管理,2012,(1).
[42]周钧.美国联邦政府对改革现行教师资格证书制度的政策[J]教师教育研究,2003,(6).
[43]赵德成,夏靖.表现性评价在美国教师资格认定实践中的应用及其启示[J].外国教育研究,2008,(2).
[44]焦建利.教育技术学研究的历史演化与未来趋势----从2975篇博士学位论文题目看研究选题与方法的变化.电化教育研究,2003,(1).
[45]钟志贤,王觅,林安琪.量规：一种现代教学评价的方法[J].中国远程教育,2007,(10).
[1]M.Ed. Graduate Programs Handbook, Cameron University Department of Education,http://www.cameron.edu/graduate.evised spring 2009.
[2]Susan, Bkack. Building a Better Teacher[J]. The American School Board Journal,1999,(04).
[3]Denis Diderot. French Libralism and Education in the Eighteenth Century:the Writings of La Chalotais, Turgot, Digerot, and Condurcet on National Education, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York,1932.
[4]Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
[5]Gary R. Galluzzo:Performance Assessment and Renewing Teacher Education:The Possibilities of the NBPTS Standards, Clearing House 78 no.4, Mr/AP,2005.
[6]Carol A. Mullen, Josb Farinas, What Constitutes a "Highly qualified" Teacher? A Review of Teacher Education Standards and Trends,2003.
[7]F. M. Hess, Tear down this wall:The case for a radical overhaul of teacher certification. Washington, D.C.:Progressive Policy Institute.2001.
[8]Linda Darling-Hammond:Reforming Teacher Preparation and Licensing:Debating the Evidence, Teachers College Record Volume 102 Number 1,2000, pp.28-56.
[9]U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants.2000.
[10]U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998.
[11]Thornton S.J. Teaching social studies that matters:Curriculum for active learning. New York: Teachers College Press.2005.
[12]National Education Association WEB:Confronting the Crisis:Who's Teaching Our Children?[R].Washington,DC.1993. (11),
[13]James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher
[14]Preparation for Urban Schools. Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol.25,No.1,1999.
[15]The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). What Teachers Should Know and Be Able to Do-Policy Position (Five Core Propositions).
[16]The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE)Accreditation of Schools, Colleges, and Departments of Education.2000.
[17]Tyler, R.W. Basic princeples of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.1949.
[18]Goldhaber Dan. A Descriptive Analysis Of the Distribution Of NBPT5 Certified Teachers In North Carolina[J]. Economics of Education Review,2006,(2):22-23.
[19]Elliott, J. (1992)Action Research for Educational Change. [M]. Milton Keynes:Open University.
[20]James A. Johnson. Secondary Student Teaching:Readings. Scott, Foresman and Company,1971.
[21]Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
[22]Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
[23]Jackson, P. W. Life in classrooms. New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.1968.
[24]Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
[25]James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher
[26]Preparation for Urban Schools'c Journal of Education for Teachine,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
[27]Fenwick W.English.Deciding What to Teach and Test:Developing,Aligning,and Auditing the Curriculum [M].Thousand Oaks,California:Corwin Press,Inc.,2000.
[28]Stephen Chappuis, Richard J.S. Assessment for Learning [M].Portland, Oregon:Assessment Training Institution,2005.
[29]Cornbleth, C. Curriculum in context. London:Falmer.1991.
[30]Eisner, E. W. The educational imagination:On the design and evaluation of school programs (2nd ed.)(pp.97-98). New York:Macmillan.
[31]Sizer, T.R. Horace's Compromise:The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.1984.
[32]Kliebard, H. The struggle for the American curriculum 1893-1958. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.1987.
[33]Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan. 1986.
[34]Hirsch, E.D. Cultural Literacy. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.1987.
[35]Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
[36]Ornstein, A. Curriculum:Foundations, principles, and issues(4th ed.). Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
[37]Garcia, J., Spalding, E., & Powell, R.R. Contents of teaching:Methods for middle and high school instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill/Prentice-Hall.2001.
[38]Borthwick. A&Nolan. K. Performance standards:How Good is Good Enough. Pre-summit
[39]Briefing Materials:1996 National Education Summit. Palisades, NY.
[40]National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk:The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC:U.S. Government Printing Office.1983.
[41]Mayer R.E. Applying the Science of Learning [M].Upper Saddle River,NJ:Pearson,2010:94.
[42]Wise, A. E. & Leibbrand, J. A.. Standards and teacher quality:Entering the new millennium[J]. Phi Delta Kappan,2000,81(8):612-621.
[43]Kuligowske, B., Holdzkom, D. & French, R.. Teacher performance evaluation in southeastern states:Forms and functions [J]. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,1993, (1):335-358.
[44]Pecheone, R. L. & Chung R. R.. Evidence in teacher education:the performance assessment for California teachers (PACT) [J]. Journal of Teacher Education,2006,57(1):22-36.
[45]Jill B. Farrell:National Board Certified Teachers:An Untapped Resource for School Improvement? Childhood Education, Spring,3,2005.
[46]Dennis Jennifer. Syllabus of Advanced Methods in Secondary Education. Department of Education of Cameron University.2009.
[47]Hall R.A. Syllabus of Introduction to Graduate Research.Department of Education of Cameron University.2009.
[48]卡梅隆大学教育学院M.Ed.Graduate Programs Handbook.Cameron University Department of Education.http://www.cameron.edu/graduate
[49]美国教育部http://ed.gov/hclb
[50]美国外语教学委员会http://www.actfl.org.
[51]美国俄克拉荷马州教育部http://www.sde.state.ok.us.
[52]全美专业教学标准委员会http://www.nbpts.org/promoting-student-learning-growth-achievement.2006,(6).
[53]College Board, Chinese Guest Teacher Summer Institute. Stanford University,2008.
[1]国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年).http://www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
[2]关于深入推进专业学位研究生培养模式改革的意见.教育部与人力资源社会保障部.http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_823/201311/159870.html
[3]New No Child Left Behind Flexibility:Highly Qualified Teachers[EB/OL]http:// www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/tea-chers/hqtftexibility.html,2010-07-12.
[4]Heidi Goodrich A. Understanding Rubrics. http://www.middleweb.com/rubricsHG.html,1997.
[5]English as a New Language Standards [EB/OL]. http://www.nbpts.org.2002
[6]Content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,924217,00.html.
[7]Joan,P.I. Using National Board Standards to Redesign Master's Degree for Teachers:A Guide for Institutions of Higher Education, http://www.nbpts.org.
② Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
③ 宋鲁郑,只有去中国才能看到未来--中国正迎来自信时代.求是[J],2013(9).
① 胡艳,迎接知识经济的挑战,深化改革我国的高等师范教育—面向21世纪高等师范教育国际研讨会综述[J1.高等师范教育研究,1998(6).
② 教育部师范教育司.教师专业化的理论与实践[J].北京：人民教育出版社,2001.
③ 国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年).http：//www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
④ 单中惠,杨汉麟.西方教育学名著提要[M].江西：江西人民出版社,2004.149-150.
⑤ 夸美纽斯.大教学论[M],傅任敢译.人民教育出版社,1999.
① Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
① 裴斯泰洛齐,夏之莲等译,裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].人民教育出版社,1984.
② 康德,瞿菊农译,康德教育论[M].商务印书版,1926.
③ 赵炬明.学科、课程、学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002(4)：23.
① 宋茬,钟秉林.走向实践与技艺化危险：中美教师教育模式改革研究[J].高等教育研究,2011(9)
② Susan, Bkack. Building a Better Teacher[J]. The American School Board Journal,1999,(4).
① 国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年)http://www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
② 关于深入推进专业学位研究生培养模式改革的意见.教育部与人力资源社会保障部.http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_823/201311/159870.html.
① 陈霞.基于课程标准的教育改革—美国的行动与启[D],上海：华东师范大学,2004
② 乐中保,美国优秀高中语文教师专业教学标准概述[J].现代教育论坛,2008(1).
③ 时芸.美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)优秀教师标准探析[D].重庆：西南大学,2007.
④ 李静.美国国家层面的科学教师专业标准探析[D].上海：华东师范大学,2009.
⑤ 洪明.美国教师质量保障体系历史演进研究[D].福州：福建师范大学,2008.
⑥ Jill B. Farrell:National Board Certified Teachers:An Untapped Resource for School Improvement? Childhood Education, Spring,3,2005.
⑦ Gary R. Galluzzo:Performance Assessment and Renewing Teacher Education:The Possibilities of the NBPTS Standards, Clearing House 78 no.4, Mr/AP,2005.
⑧ 施克灿.国际教师专业标准的三种模式及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004(12).
① 姜勇.美国“以标准为基础”的教师证照制度的改革与启示[J].比较教育研究,2011(2)
② 曾国强.美国教师培训标准述评—美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)与美国全国教师教育资格认证委员会(NCATE)教师教育标准解析[D].北京：首都师范大学,2009.
③ Carol A. Mullen, Josb Farinas, What Constitutes a "Highly qualified" Teacher? A Review of Teacher Education Standards and Trends,2003.
④ F. M. Hess, Tear down this wall:The case for a radical overhaul of teacher certification. Washington, D.C.:Progressive Policy Institute.2001.
① Linda Darling-Hammond:Reforming Teacher Preparation and Licensing:Debating the Evidence, Teachers College Record Volume 102 Number 1,2000, pp.28-56.
② 吴姗,洪明.当代美国教师认证组织的对峙与互补—全美专业教学标准委员会与美国优质教师证书委员会之比较研究.教育研究,2007(4).
③ 袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005(11).
① 杨艳梅.美国新任教师教学能力培养研究[D].重庆：西南大学,2011.
② 徐今雅.美国教育硕士培养变革的经验及启示—从基于课程到基于标准[J].比较教育研究,2008(5)
③ 周钧.能力本位的教师教育--美国阿文诺学院教师培养案例研究[J].外国中小学教育,2009(8).
① 索磊.美国小学教师职前培养体制的演变与启示[J].外国教育研究,2009(7).
② 赵卫菊.教师评价与教师专业发展--来自美国NBPTS等优秀教师评价的启示[J].高等教育与改革,2007(5).
③ 周钧.当前美国大学教育学院教师教育改革[J].教师教育研究,2010(1).
④ 祝怀新,许啸.美国研究型大学教育学院人才培养模式探析——以哈佛、斯坦福大学为例[J].高等教育研究.2009(5)
⑤ 郭志明.美国教师专业规范历史研究[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004.
① 朱旭东.教师教育专业化与质量保障体系[J],中国高等教育,2001(18).
② 洪成文.质量认证框架下的美国教师教育质量保证研究[J].比较教育研究,2004(10).
① U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998马骥雄战后美国教育研究(M].江西：江西教育出版社,1991.
① content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,924217,00.html.
① 国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出版,1986.
① U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants.2000
③ 国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出社.1986.
① 周南照.教师教育改革与教师专业发展：国际视野与本土实践[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2006,p115.
② National Education Association WEB:Confronting the Crisis:Who's Teaching Our Children?[R].Washington,DC.1993. (11).
③ New No Child Left Behind Flexibility:Highly Qualified Teachers[EB/OL]http:// www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/tea-chers/hqtftexibility.html,2010-07-12.
④ U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998.
① James Comer&Valerie Maholmes, Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher Preparation for Urban Schools'. Journal of Education for Teaching,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
① The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). What Teachers Should Know and Be Able to Do——Policy Position (Five Core Propositions).
① The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE)Accreditation of Schools, Colleges, and Departments of Education.2000.
① http://www.nbpts.org/promoting-student-learning-growth-achievement.
② 陈珊.二十一世纪美国高质量教师的标准及其实施策略[J].华中师范大学研究生学报,2006,(6).
① English as a New Language Standards [EB/OL]. http://www.nbpts.org.2002
① Goldhaber Dan). A Descriptive Analysis Of the Distribution Of NBPT5 Certified Teachers In North Carolina[J]. Economics of Education Review,2006,(2):22-23.
① Elliott, J. (1992)Action Research for Educational Change. [M]. Milton Keynes:Open University.
① Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
② Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
① Jackson, P. W. Life in classrooms. New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.1968.
② Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
③ Cornbleth, C. Curriculum in context. London:Falmer.1991.
④ Eisner, E. W. The educational imagination:On the design and evaluation of school programs (2nd ed.)(pp.97-98). New York:Macmillan.
⑤ Sizer, T.R. Horace's Compromise:The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.1984.
① Kliebard, H. The struggle for the American curriculum 1893-1958. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.1987.
① Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan. 1986.
② Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
③ Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan 1986.
① Hirsch, E.D. Cultural Literacy. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.1987.
② Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
① Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
② Ornstein, A. Curriculum:Foundations, principles, and issues(4th ed.). Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
① Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
① Garcia, J., Spalding, E., & Powell, R.R. Contents of teaching:Methods for middle and high school instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill/Prentice-Hall.2001.
② Borthwick. A&Nolan. K. Performance standards:How Good is Good Enough. Pre-summit Briefing Materials:1996 National Education Summit. Palisades, NY.
① National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk:The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC:U.S. Government Printing Office.1983.
① Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction,2005.
① Thornton S.J. Teaching social studies that matters:Curriculum for active learning. New York: Teachers College Press.2005.
① http://www.actfl.org.
① http://www.sde.state.ok.us.
① Tyler, R.W. Basic princeples of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.1949.
① 袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005(11).
① Joan,P.I. Using National Board Standards to Redesign Master's Degree for Teachers:A Guide for Institutions of Higher Education, http://www.nbpts.org.
① http://graduate.bnu.edu.cn/ReadNews.aspx?NewsId=11100905270.2011.10.09
② http://www.pde.ecnu.edu.cn/worksl_id.aspx?pageid=33&Class_id=52&xiazai_idl=162. 2012.1.3.
③ 赵炬明.学科、课程、学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002(4)：23.
① James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher Preparation for Urban Schools'. Journal of Education for Teachine,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
② 裴斯泰洛齐,夏之莲等译,裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].人民教育出版社,1984.
③ 康德,瞿菊农译,康德教育论[M].商务印书版,1926.
① M.Ed. Graduate Programs Handbook, Cameron University Department of Education.http://www.cameron.edu/graduate.Evised spring 2009.
① Fenwick W.English.Deciding What to Teach and Test:Developing,Aligning,and Auditing the Curriculum [M].Thousand Oaks,California:Corwin Press,Inc.,2000.
① 崔允都,夏雪梅.试论基于课程标准的学生学业成就评价[J].课程教材教法,2007(1)：13-18.
① Stephen Chappuis, Richard J.S. Assessment for Learning[M].Portland, Oregon:Assessment Training Institution,2005.
① Heidi Goodrich A. Understanding Rubrics. http://www.middleweb.com/ rubricsHG.html,1997.
② 祝智庭,钟志贤.现代教育技术—促进多元智能发展[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2002.
③ 焦建利.教育技术学研究的历史演化与未来趋势--从2975篇博士学位论文题目看研究选题与方法的变化.电化教育研究,2003(1).
④ 钟志贤,王觅,林安琪.量规：一种现代教学评价的方法[J].中国远程教育,2007(10).
① 唐玉霞,马兰.教学评估量规的编制及应用[J].评价与管理,2012(1).
[1]潘懋元.新编高等教育学[M].北京：北京师范大学,1996.
[2]张楚廷.高等教育哲学[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,2004.
[3]张楚廷.高等教育学导论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2010.
[4]张楚廷.课程与教学哲学[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2003.
[5]张楚廷主编.高校教师教育教学技能[M].长沙：湖南人民出版社,2010.
[6]雷鸣强.教育功效观：一个教育原理的新视角[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,1999.
[7]刘铁芳.守望教育[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2004.
[8]刘铁芳主编.追寻有意义的教育[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2006.
[9]孙俊山.教育过程的美学意蕴[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2006.
[10]王承绪等编译.高等教育新论----多学科研究[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,1988.
[11][伯顿.克拉克]探究的场所----现代大学的科研和研究生教育[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,2001.
[12]许云昭,石鸥.差距与超载：中美教育管理比较研究[M].长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,2000.
[13]方展画.罗杰斯“以学生为中心”教学理论述评[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1990.
[14][美]哈蒙德,斯诺顿著,葛雪雷等译.教师是这样炼成的[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2007.
[15][美]哈蒙德著,陈允明等译.教师应该做到的和能够做到的[M].北京：中国青年出版社,2007.
[16]教育部师范教育司.教师专业化的理论与实践[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2001.
[17]钟志贤.大学教学模式革新：教学设计视阈[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2008.
[18]曾绍元.中国高等学校教师队伍建设和发展[M].北京：航空工业出版社,1996.
[19][美]玛丽埃伦.韦默著,洪岗译.国外大学教学与教改译丛.以学习者为中心的教学[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2006.
[20][美]罗伯特.M.戴尔蒙德著,黄小苹译.国外大学教学与教改译丛.课程与课程体系的设计和评价实用指南[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2006.
[21]刘捷.专业化：挑战21世纪的教师[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2003.
[22]单中惠,杨汉麟.西方教育学名著提要[M].南昌：江西人民出版社,2004.
[23][捷]夸美纽斯著.傅任感译.大教学论[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1999.
[24][瑞士]裴斯泰洛齐著.夏之莲等译.裴斯泰洛齐教育论著选[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1984.
[25][德]康德著.瞿菊农译.康德教育论[M].北京：商务印书版,1926.
[26]郭志明.美国教师专业规范历史研究[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004.
[27]国家教育发展与政策研究中心编.发达国家教育改革的动向和趋势(第一集)[M].北京：人民教育出版,1986.
[28]周南照.教师教育改革与教师专业发展：国际视野与本土实[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2006.
[29]马骥雄.战后美国教育研究[M].南昌：江西教育出版社,1991.
[30]王泽农,曹慧英.中外教师教育课程设置比较研究[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2003.
[31]许高厚,翟家庆,孟详悟主编.教育实习导论[M].北京：北京师范人学出版社,1995.
[32]祝智庭,钟志贤.现代教育技术促进多元智能发展[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2002.
[33]靳希斌.教师教育模式研究[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2009.
[34]闫寒冰.信息化教学评价----量规实用工具[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2003.
[35][美]Popham, W. J促进教学的课堂评价[M].北京：中国轻工业出版社,2002.
[36]钟秉林,教师教育转型研究[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社,2009：51-56.
[1]姚利民,高教教学方法研究述评[J].大学教育科学,2010,(1).
[2]雷鸣强,陈钧.建构面向21世纪“立交自主”的高师培养模式[J].高等师范教育研究,1999,(1)
[3]潘涌.论“师本培训”中的学科首席教师[J].浙江教育科学,2008,(5).
[4]刘鹂,安玉洁.微格教学的多元化架构[J].电化教育研究,2005,(9).
[5]姚国庆,在教学过程中Workshop的实践与经验总结[J].中国科教创新导刊,2007,(4).
[6]宋茬,钟秉林.走向实践与技艺化危险：中美教师教育模式改革研究[J].高等教育研究,2011,(9).
[7]赵炬明.学科,课程,学位：美国关于高等教育专业研究生培养的争论及其启示[J].高等教育研究,2002,(4).
[8]张建功,张振刚.美国专业学位研究生教育的学位结构及启示[J].高等教育研究,2008,(7).
[9]宋鲁郑,只有去中国才能看到未来----中国正迎来自信时代.求是[J],2013,(9).
[10]胡艳.迎接知识经济的挑战,深化改革我国的高等师范教育----面向21世纪高等师范教育国际研讨会综述[J].高等师范教育研究,1998,(6).
[11]陈霞.基于课程标准的教育改革----美国的行动与启[D],上海：华东师范大学,2004.
[12]乐中保.美国优秀高中语文教师专业教学标准概述[J].现代教育论坛,2008,(1).
[13]时芸.美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)优秀教师标准探析[D].重庆：西南大学,2007.
[14]李静.美国国家层面的科学教师专业标准探析[D].上海：华东师范大学,2009.
[15]洪明.美国教师质量保障体系历史演进研究[D].福州：福建师范大学,2008.
[16]施克灿.国际教师专业标准的三种模式及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004,(12).
[17]姜勇.美国“以标准为基础”的教师证照制度的改革与启示[J].比较教育研究,2011,(2).
[18]曾国强.美国教师培训标准述评----美国全国专业教学标准委员会(NBPTS)与美国全国教师教育资格认证委员会(NCATE)教师教育标准解析[D].北京：首都师范大学,2009.
[19]吴姗,洪明.当代美国教师认证组织的对峙与互补----全美专业教学标准委员会与美国
[20]优质教师证书委员会之比较研究.教育研究,2007,(4)
[21]袁锐锷,易轶.美国大学以优秀教师标准重设教育硕士课程[J].学位与研究生教育,2005,(11).
[22]杨艳梅.美国新任教师教学能力培养研究[D].重庆：西南大学,2011.
[23]徐今雅.美国教育硕士培养变革的经验及启示—从基于课程到基于标准[J].比较教育 研究,2008(5)
[24]周钧.能力本位的教师教育----美国阿文诺学院教师培养案例研究[J].外国中小学教育,2009,(8).
[25]索磊.美国小学教师职前培养体制的演变与启示[J].外国教育研究,2009,(7).
[26]赵卫菊.教师评价与教师专业发展----来自美国NBPTS等优秀教师评价的启示[J].高等教育与改革,2007,(5).
[27]周钧.当前美国大学教育学院教师教育改革[J].教师教育研究,2010,(1).
[28]祝怀新,许啸.美国研究型大学教育学院人才培养模式探析----以哈佛、斯坦福大学为例[J].高等教育研究.2009,(5).
[29]朱旭东.教师教育专业化与质量保障体系[J],中国高等教育,2001,(18).
[30洪成文.质量认证框架下的美国教师教育质量保证研究[J].比较教育研究,2004,(10).
[31]陈珊.二十一世纪美国高质量教师的标准及其实施策略[J].当代教育科学,2006(17).
[32]许明.美国“大学本位”教师教育改革的新尝试----“新时代教师计划”述评[J].比较教育研究,2010,(4).
[33]洪明.当前美国教师教育思想的主要流派[J].国外社会科学,2009,(6).
[34]郑东辉,施莉.国外教育实习发展概况及启示[[J].高等师范教育研究,2003,(5).
[35]徐志伟.国外高师教育实习改革的主要经验[J].黑龙江高教研究,1994,(2).
[36]肖美良.国外教师教育实习特点分析[J].教师教育,2006,(4).
[37]李崇爱,王昌善.欧美发达国家教育实习的模式与理念[J].教育评论,2005,(4).
[38]陈建华.西方发达国家教育实习的时间安排及其启示[J],外国中小学教育2002,(3).
[39]那茂菊.中外教育实习改革的趋势[J],西南师范大学学报,1999,(1).
[40]崔允漷,夏雪梅.试论基于课程标准的学生学业成就评价[J].课程教材教法,2007,(1).
[41]唐玉霞,马兰.教学评估量规的编制及应用[J].评价与管理,2012,(1).
[42]周钧.美国联邦政府对改革现行教师资格证书制度的政策[J]教师教育研究,2003,(6).
[43]赵德成,夏靖.表现性评价在美国教师资格认定实践中的应用及其启示[J].外国教育研究,2008,(2).
[44]焦建利.教育技术学研究的历史演化与未来趋势----从2975篇博士学位论文题目看研究选题与方法的变化.电化教育研究,2003,(1).
[45]钟志贤,王觅,林安琪.量规：一种现代教学评价的方法[J].中国远程教育,2007,(10).
[1]M.Ed. Graduate Programs Handbook, Cameron University Department of Education,http://www.cameron.edu/graduate.evised spring 2009.
[2]Susan, Bkack. Building a Better Teacher[J]. The American School Board Journal,1999,(04).
[3]Denis Diderot. French Libralism and Education in the Eighteenth Century:the Writings of La Chalotais, Turgot, Digerot, and Condurcet on National Education, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York,1932.
[4]Theodore Brameld, Education as Power, Holt, Rinehart an Winston, Inc., New York,1965.
[5]Gary R. Galluzzo:Performance Assessment and Renewing Teacher Education:The Possibilities of the NBPTS Standards, Clearing House 78 no.4, Mr/AP,2005.
[6]Carol A. Mullen, Josb Farinas, What Constitutes a "Highly qualified" Teacher? A Review of Teacher Education Standards and Trends,2003.
[7]F. M. Hess, Tear down this wall:The case for a radical overhaul of teacher certification. Washington, D.C.:Progressive Policy Institute.2001.
[8]Linda Darling-Hammond:Reforming Teacher Preparation and Licensing:Debating the Evidence, Teachers College Record Volume 102 Number 1,2000, pp.28-56.
[9]U.S. Department of Education Office of Postsecondary Education. Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants.2000.
[10]U.S. Department of Education, Promising Practices:New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality, September 1998.
[11]Thornton S.J. Teaching social studies that matters:Curriculum for active learning. New York: Teachers College Press.2005.
[12]National Education Association WEB:Confronting the Crisis:Who's Teaching Our Children?[R].Washington,DC.1993. (11),
[13]James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher
[14]Preparation for Urban Schools. Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol.25,No.1,1999.
[15]The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). What Teachers Should Know and Be Able to Do-Policy Position (Five Core Propositions).
[16]The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE)Accreditation of Schools, Colleges, and Departments of Education.2000.
[17]Tyler, R.W. Basic princeples of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.1949.
[18]Goldhaber Dan. A Descriptive Analysis Of the Distribution Of NBPT5 Certified Teachers In North Carolina[J]. Economics of Education Review,2006,(2):22-23.
[19]Elliott, J. (1992)Action Research for Educational Change. [M]. Milton Keynes:Open University.
[20]James A. Johnson. Secondary Student Teaching:Readings. Scott, Foresman and Company,1971.
[21]Cuban, L. Curriculum stability and change. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.216-247). New York:Macmillan.1996.
[22]Eisner, E. W. Curriculum ideologues. In. P. W. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp.302-326). New York:Macmillan.1996.
[23]Jackson, P. W. Life in classrooms. New York:Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.1968.
[24]Dewey, J. Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.1916.
[25]James Comer&Valerie Maholmes,'Creating Schools of Child Development and Education in the USA:Teacher
[26]Preparation for Urban Schools'c Journal of Education for Teachine,Vol.25,No.1,1999.
[27]Fenwick W.English.Deciding What to Teach and Test:Developing,Aligning,and Auditing the Curriculum [M].Thousand Oaks,California:Corwin Press,Inc.,2000.
[28]Stephen Chappuis, Richard J.S. Assessment for Learning [M].Portland, Oregon:Assessment Training Institution,2005.
[29]Cornbleth, C. Curriculum in context. London:Falmer.1991.
[30]Eisner, E. W. The educational imagination:On the design and evaluation of school programs (2nd ed.)(pp.97-98). New York:Macmillan.
[31]Sizer, T.R. Horace's Compromise:The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.1984.
[32]Kliebard, H. The struggle for the American curriculum 1893-1958. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.1987.
[33]Schubert, W. H. Curriculum:Perspective, paradigm and possibility. New York:Macmillan. 1986.
[34]Hirsch, E.D. Cultural Literacy. Boston:Houghton Mifflin.1987.
[35]Marzaro, R& Kendall, Curriculum Frameworks NASSP Bulletin 1997 81:590.
[36]Ornstein, A. Curriculum:Foundations, principles, and issues(4th ed.). Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
[37]Garcia, J., Spalding, E., & Powell, R.R. Contents of teaching:Methods for middle and high school instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill/Prentice-Hall.2001.
[38]Borthwick. A&Nolan. K. Performance standards:How Good is Good Enough. Pre-summit
[39]Briefing Materials:1996 National Education Summit. Palisades, NY.
[40]National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk:The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC:U.S. Government Printing Office.1983.
[41]Mayer R.E. Applying the Science of Learning [M].Upper Saddle River,NJ:Pearson,2010:94.
[42]Wise, A. E. & Leibbrand, J. A.. Standards and teacher quality:Entering the new millennium[J]. Phi Delta Kappan,2000,81(8):612-621.
[43]Kuligowske, B., Holdzkom, D. & French, R.. Teacher performance evaluation in southeastern states:Forms and functions [J]. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,1993, (1):335-358.
[44]Pecheone, R. L. & Chung R. R.. Evidence in teacher education:the performance assessment for California teachers (PACT) [J]. Journal of Teacher Education,2006,57(1):22-36.
[45]Jill B. Farrell:National Board Certified Teachers:An Untapped Resource for School Improvement? Childhood Education, Spring,3,2005.
[46]Dennis Jennifer. Syllabus of Advanced Methods in Secondary Education. Department of Education of Cameron University.2009.
[47]Hall R.A. Syllabus of Introduction to Graduate Research.Department of Education of Cameron University.2009.
[48]卡梅隆大学教育学院M.Ed.Graduate Programs Handbook.Cameron University Department of Education.http://www.cameron.edu/graduate
[49]美国教育部http://ed.gov/hclb
[50]美国外语教学委员会http://www.actfl.org.
[51]美国俄克拉荷马州教育部http://www.sde.state.ok.us.
[52]全美专业教学标准委员会http://www.nbpts.org/promoting-student-learning-growth-achievement.2006,(6).
[53]College Board, Chinese Guest Teacher Summer Institute. Stanford University,2008.
[1]国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年).http://www.moe.gov.cn.2010.
[2]关于深入推进专业学位研究生培养模式改革的意见.教育部与人力资源社会保障部.http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_823/201311/159870.html
[3]New No Child Left Behind Flexibility:Highly Qualified Teachers[EB/OL]http:// www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/tea-chers/hqtftexibility.html,2010-07-12.
[4]Heidi Goodrich A. Understanding Rubrics. http://www.middleweb.com/rubricsHG.html,1997.
[5]English as a New Language Standards [EB/OL]. http://www.nbpts.org.2002
[6]Content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,924217,00.html.
[7]Joan,P.I. Using National Board Standards to Redesign Master's Degree for Teachers:A Guide for Institutions of Higher Education, http://www.nbpts.org.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |