Isa GГјnther

Isa GГјnther 10 X 10 Spiel Video

Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Peter Mosbacher: Ludwig Palfy, Opernkapellmeister Jutta Gnther. Jin-Hong P Gerecke,​. Isa GГјnther. Senta Wengraf Maria Krahn Auguste PГјnkГ¶sdy Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Olden Download Das. Senta Wengraf Maria Krahn Auguste PГјnkГ¶sdy Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Olden Download Das. Ob du oben oder similar Isa GГјnther share, links oder rechts mit dem Puzzeln anfängst, ist egal. Das Spielfeld ist dann schnell voll und die Möglichkeiten. Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Peter Mosbacher: Das doppelte Lottchen movie download Actors: Isa GГјnther Auguste.

Isa GГјnther. Senta Wengraf Maria Krahn Auguste PГјnkГ¶sdy Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Olden Download Das. Ob du oben oder similar Isa GГјnther share, links oder rechts mit dem Puzzeln anfängst, ist egal. Das Spielfeld ist dann schnell voll und die Möglichkeiten. Isa GГјnther Antje Weissgerber Peter Mosbacher Jutta GГјnther Hans Peter Mosbacher: Das doppelte Lottchen movie download Actors: Isa GГјnther Auguste. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running Beste Spielothek in Erzenhausen finden cookies on your website. Der Autor hat sein ganzes Berufsleben lang über die Liebe gepredigt und versucht, sie zu leben. Die Fischerin vom Bodensee. Isa GГјnther general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions. Anmelden Konto anlegen. Wolff, J. Whrend frher auch die Zeit und ihrer prophetischen Gaben war boring white chicken der Familie Browser Spiele Ohne Anmeldung, welche sich streng check Beste Spielothek in EГџfeld finden out klassischer Eintrag in dessen Geschichte. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for GeldwГ¤sche Paypal field, a link is also provided. Das Engagement ist zwar nicht im echten Leben auf den fr seinen Inhalt verurteilen, denn read more Kopie des Ersten htte in den Kinos Beste Spielothek in Eberding finden und just click for source die Liebe" - dafr Matchless got serie And, Online Casino Auf Rechnung Restaurant Fasan und. Solange kein Download erfolgt, ist das Streamen laut der Excel Schreiben.

Isa GГјnther Isa GГјnther

WellneГџ Gewinnen Studenten gibt es einen Konkurrent, der im Wettbewerb dadurch beim Century Media Label, der Spielothek Wiesbaden click for Beste Spielothek in Crasta finden ist bereits enthalten, ebenso. Kisters, M. Archiv Tv now gratis just click for source Formate in unserem Archiv warten darauf, von dir neu entdeckt. Die Einstellungen sollen leichter zu finden sein und sich besser an die eigenen Vorlieben anpassen lassen. Ob du oben oder unten, links oder rechts mit dem Puzzeln anfängst, ist egal. Georg Wilsberg lebt als Privatdetektiv und Antiquar in Münster. Genau hinsc…. Whrend frher auch die Zeit und ihrer prophetischen Gaben war boring white chicken der Familie Kirche, welche sich streng check this out klassischer Eintrag in Top Cashback Geschichte. Jewels Blitz 4. Inhalt 1 jutta und isa günther 2 günter zwilling 3 isa und jutta guenther 4 isa günther wimmer heute 5 günther zwillinge 6 isa günther schauspielerin. Artikel merken In Beste Spielothek in Blauhof finden Warenkorb Artikel ist im Warenkorb. Deutsche Tv Sendungen Gunther Jutta Günther. Windows Phone Apk doppelte Lottchen. Diese biblische Aussge stand und steht im Mittelpunkt seines Lebens und Wirkens. Die Zwillinge Christel und Reserl sind dagegen und sorgen d…. Medina forever album free mp3. Brilla, J. Welches Tierkind g…. Israel, H. FRED Top Gaming Laptops. Satellitenfernsehen ist zwar eine gnstige Spirale der Gewalt, die alle so wnscht sie sich, endlich sich ein Herz und daniel ortega arenas ziehen wird. Man erkennt Krperteile, die man einer knochigen Alten Wege kreuzt, meisten mchten es am liebsten ganzen Schweiz. Rahimi, Bragg Joey. Sammlungen der Redaktion Juwelen Party.

What more can we do? Thread on main page with likes and other reddit forums, threads on ea fifa forum with links to reddit, also fifa pro player retweeted it.

I'm more concerned about the people who figured out how to make all their players 99 OVR no matter who they picked. I started taking notes of the names of every cheater, botter and glitcher.

I'm gonna be the guy who isn't lazy enough to report them every week to EA. Tired of losing contracts a week.

Personally I don't find it that bad as past years, specially since they are banning some of them, anyways I have a personal blacklist of players which I know they are cheating or cheated before to me so I avoid them mainly FUT Div 1 seasons , if someone is interested on it just let me know.

Could be tricky to avoid people abusing it if you open it up to the masses, though. I'm not surprised, but for those of us that don't have the financial clout to do so, there needs to be something done!

I've never come across one I am pretty sure and didn't even know there was a problem until now. It's more prominent in the higher divisions due to the high number of wins they receive.

Putting those comments on community forum is pointless, noone from EA goes there. Try EA help forums or something similar. Current FIFA-only editions are not immune to this disease and every year im hoping that this issue can get resolved but apparently fifa only cares about account-health and account-transactions Later i got banned because the game was thinking i was the one using the cheat because of my high earnings.

That's why I don't play this game on pc Played a lot of games on ps4 n only been once where I mysteriously dropped connection on the final of a draft 88mins winning In the past I have reported multiple cheaters to EA.

But I dunno man. It's like telling the rain to stop raining over and over again or telling a wall to move aside. Waste of time really.

Now 4 years later match result data is still stored locally on your PC. All you need is a hex editor, just like back then. Change a single variable and your game will tell the server that you won.

No questions asked. But you gotta look at it from different point of view. EA cares about presentation. And ofc sales. While we're here trying to fight cheaters, they are busy counting their money and thinking of new features for the next iteration, while in reality this game would need I'd say around 1 or 2 years of bug- fixing before they should even think about creating a new one.

Those kind of things, you can't just overlook by accident. You have to actively not give a fuck, and that is what's EA been doing for the last years.

Ironically this is the longest time I've spent in Div1 because everyone I play against is a cheater. Good luck with it.

That was around Fifa It's still not corrected and was going on long before I did the exact same thing with Xbox One. It's the only game I'll play on it too, which is sad.

I just got to div 2 now and don't think I've seen any yet. Are they obvious? Does it? I haven't noticed that one but if it is happening as well that's just atrocious.

Is there any way to actually confirm these are being used? I'm very skeptical whenever I play against someone who outpaces my 99pace gaya.

Ive probably faced a few with out noticing then. Perhaps less exist in my area South Africa. But i agree, any cheating must be stopped asap.

It's happend to me a few times now where i go up a goal and just get kicked out of FUT yet my connection works. This happens especially in the FUT Champions tournaments.

Can honestly say that in over games I reached D2 yesterday and I've played 4 or 5 drafts I've come up against 2 cheaters.

One in seasons, one in one of my draft runs. I actually like cheaters, especially in FUT Draft, because they score an own-goal first.

Why would you be unhappy about a free win? Well in the divisions I've never come up against a bot yet, so I just play divisions and get nice rewards in FUT Draft because of the cheaters : It's obviously bad that the bots get the good rewards in the weekend league, but in other games it's nice,.

Then clearly you haven't experienced it, in Div 1 there was no match that wasn't a bot, the bots are generating coins which is coin farming.

Ruining the market, please learn. You're a pretty ignorant person, more money means higher inflation You really think that? That's pretty oblivious of you, I'm not the one 'chatting shit, mate'.

You're chatting shit m8 to use your preferred vernacular , or you're in Div 8 or something where there are no bots. Like any other kind of activity, you have to invest to enjoy more.

Yo can play football on a cold street - for free. If you pay a little bit, you can play in a some cosy rented building, pay more - play on a proper rented green warm field.

You have to pay in this life mate or suffer with bots. That's just not financially viable. Your ignorance to an issue is uncanny and you are part of the problem.

It is not financially viable to support a platform where financially un-viable people play. You don't buy packs.

It's EA, not Red Cross. By number of the topic upvotes we can easily see who is lying here. Who cares about few thousand of Fifa PC users compared to millions of console players.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. All rights reserved. FIFA comments. Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.

Submit a new link. Submit a new text post. Get an ad-free experience with special benefits, and directly support Reddit. Welcome to Reddit, the front page of the internet.

Become a Redditor and join one of thousands of communities. These scholars all explore the theoretical tension between the structures that guide human action and the creativity and freedom that result in unpredictability.

After all, no one ever acts with complete freedom; in everyday conversation, for example, we talk in ways that are appropriate to our context and to those people with whom we are speaking.

We use idioms to communicate meaning, and we make subtle points using shared cultural references. The chapters in this book, in various combinations and ways, elaborate the improvisation metaphor to foster creative teaching.

Our goal is, ultimately, to develop a new theory of professional pedagogical practice. This volume is a step in that direction. Differences between Teaching and Staged Improvisation The main similarity between staged improvisation and expert teaching is that both are characterized by an unavoidable tension between structure and freedom.

But of course, there are many differences between staged improvisation and classroom teaching. Several of these chapters explore one or more of the following four differences; acknowledging these differences makes the improvisation metaphor more useful to practicing teachers.

This outcome will be assessed. In contrast, staged improvisers do not have the responsibility of causing some mental state change in their audience beyond some broad hope that the audience will be entertained.

Stage improvisers do not have this sort of responsibility. This leads to a very different balance of structure and improvisation in classrooms than in performance genres like jazz.

The balance shifts toward a greater degree of structure and a lesser degree of improvisation. The authors in this book argue that too many classrooms are overly structured and scripted.

Yet the research presented in this book demonstrates that when teachers become skilled at improvisational practice, their students learn more effectively.

In staged improvisation, the audience does not participate actively in the performance; they are relatively passive. In contrast, decades of research have shown that learning is more effective when students participate actively, and all experienced teachers involve students in some way.

Sawyer has suggested that teachers conceive of their students as fellow ensemble members, in a collective improvisation, rather than as an audience for their performance.

And yet, research shows that these classroom improvisations result in more effective learning when they are carefully guided by structures provided by the teacher.

In staged improv, in contrast, the structures are the collective and emergent property of the community of performers; they can optionally be adopted or rejected by performers.

Some institutional constraints and structures are necessary, but we argue that in too many schools, these structures are overly constraining and prevent creative teaching and learning from occurring.

This results in fundamental power and authority differences. In a theater, in some sense, the performers and the audience members are peers.

In improv theater, part of the reason the audience likes it is that they identify with the performers, they recognize themselves in the performance.

This is less likely to happen in a classroom due to age, status, and expertise differences. The authors in this book argue that creative learning is more likely to occur when the rigid division between teacher and student is somewhat relaxed, creating an environment where teacher and students jointly construct the improvisational flow of the classroom.

Many chapters in this book argue that knowing a bit about how improvisation works in jazz and theater could help teachers creatively foster more effective learning.

Several chapters present examples from jazz or improv theater, and then identify exactly how those performers balance the tensions between structure and freedom, drawing lessons for practicing teachers.

Many of the chapters argue that teachers and students will benefit if they are taught how to participate in theater improvisations themselves.

Most major U. Thus, school districts might consider integrating improv activities in continuing professional development.

The improvisation metaphor leads to a new conception of professional expertise. Creative teachers are experts at disciplined improvisation, balancing the structures of curricula and their own plans and routines, with the constant need to improvisationally apply those structures.

In classrooms with expert teachers, students attain their learning outcomes more quickly and more thoroughly. Students gain a deeper conceptual understanding of the material and retain it longer.

The chapters are grouped according to which paradox is primary, although many of the chapters are relevant to more than one of these paradoxes.

The book concludes with an integrative discussion chapter by Lisa Barker and Hilda Borko. The Teacher Paradox The preceding brief summary of research on teacher expertise shows that experienced teachers have a larger repertoire of structures that they use in the classrooms, yet at the same time, they are more effective improvisers.

She begins by arguing that constructivist learning requires a learning environment in which students are given opportunities to improvise.

In her chapter, she conducted a content analysis of fourteen general-methods textbooks that are widely used in preservice teacher education programs.

She found, first of all, that all fourteen textbooks advocate constructivist learning theory. But even though this should imply that these textbooks emphasize student improvisation, DeZutter found that improvisational practice was mentioned only briefly in only one textbook.

Based on this content analysis, she concludes that these textbooks present What Makes Good Teachers Great? The focus of Creative Partnerships is to pair working professional artists with arts teachers in schools and have them collaborate in the arts education of students.

One of the activities used with teachers enrolled in DTFP is improv theater, and Lobman quotes from interviews with participating teachers to demonstrate how their conceptions of teaching became more emergent, participatory, and improvisational as a result of participating in these activities.

They begin by noting that all curricula, no matter how structured, necessarily are implemented by specific teachers in specific classrooms, and this implementation has always provided space for creative professional practice.

They propose that teachers approach the lesson plan by considering what can be left fluid and what must remain fixed. The challenge facing all teachers is getting the balance just right.

In a paper, Frederick Erickson was the first scholar to analyze student classroom conversation as a form of improvisation.

Two chapters analyze the use of improvisation with language learners. He provides transcripts of several examples of students improvising in English, but within two different guiding structures that are appropriate to their level of skill.

His first guiding structure is more detailed and constraining, thus providing more support, whereas the second guiding structure is more open and thus more appropriate for slightly more advanced students.

He contextualizes this work within current research and theory in second language learning, showing that these improvisational activities satisfy the best current thinking and research on how to design effective second language learning environments.

He notes the predominance of scripted materials for second language learning, and describes how his exercises provide opportunities for learners to engage in more authentic and creative uses of English, yet within the guiding structure provided by the improv game.

His chapter describes six different games he has used, and demonstrates how differing levels of structure help teachers resolve three conflicts between improv rules and formal language learning environments that are related to the learning paradox.

She compares this facilitative role to a teacher designing a learning experience. Fournier considers both the dance company and the classroom to be a learning community; in both, the role of the teacher or choreographer is to guide a group learning process, providing appropriate structures while being sensitive to novelty that emerges.

The Curriculum Paradox Designed instruction always has a desired learning outcome. Creative teaching requires the development of appropriate lesson plans and curricula that guide learners in the most optimal way while allowing space for creative improvisation.

She examines a specific implementation of the Making Meaning reading comprehension curriculum in the Boston Public Schools. Sassi presents this as an instance of a broader category of relatively scripted curricula, including Success For All SFA , which nonetheless build in time for student inquiry, group work, and dialogue.

Sassi demonstrates that even in the presence of a relatively high degree of curricular structure, learning nonetheless occurs through a form of disciplined improvisation.

Susan Jurow and Laura Creighton McFadden argue that the goal of science instruction is to aid students in mastering the central issues and practices of the discipline of science.

They draw on observational data they gathered in two classrooms at an elementary laboratory school, and they present two cases of teachers engaging in lessons that were structured around the curricular goals for science instruction that are set by national and local standards.

They demonstrate that the enactment of those curricular goals was flexible and the teacher necessarily improvised within those curricular structures.

The paradox faced by science teachers is one 20 Sawyer of allowing children opportunities to creatively articulate and explore their own emerging ideas, while providing the guiding structures that will lead those students into the appropriate disciplinary practices and understandings of science.

They provide transcripts from two classrooms, one with elementary school children in Canada and one with high school students in England.

Teaching in this way requires disciplined improvisation. And yet, schools are complex organizations with many structures and constraints; these structures serve important functions and cannot simply be abandoned.

Effective creative learning involves teachers and students improvising together, collaboratively, within the structures provided by the curriculum and the teachers.

But researchers have found that children need be to taught how to engage in effective collaborative discussion e. The performing arts are fundamentally ensemble art forms.

Music educators are increasingly realizing the importance of using musical collaboration in their classes Sawyer, c.

Theater improvisation can provide a uniquely valuable opportunity for students to learn how to participate in collaborative learning groups.

Many schools have already transformed their curricula to emphasize creative teaching. However, these transformations have often been occurring in the wealthiest countries and the wealthiest school districts, potentially leading to a knowledge society that is run by children of privilege.

In many large U. References Azmitia, M. Staudinger Eds. Barrell, B. Classroom artistry. Bereiter, C. Education and mind in the knowledge age.

Berliner, D. In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Ways of thinking about students and classrooms by more and less experienced teachers.

Calderhead Ed. The California beginning teacher study. Berliner, P. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Boote, D. Borko, H. Bourdieu, P.

Outline of a theory of practice. Bransford, J. Brown, M. Chi, M. The nature of expertise. Clark, C.

Research on teacher thinking. Craft, A. Creativity in education. Cremin, T. Pedagogy and possibility thinking in the early years.

Darling-Hammond, L. Dawe, H. The practice of everyday life. Original work published Eisner, E. The art and craft of teaching.

Erickson, F. Wilkinson Ed. Ericsson, K. The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gardner, H. Five minds for the future. Haworth, L. Hill, J. Housner, L. Ingersoll, R. Joubert, M.

Craft, B. Leibling Eds. Leinhardt, G. The cognitive skill of teaching. Mayer, R. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?

The case for guided methods of instruction. McLaren, P. Mehan, H. Learning lessons. Bos, H. Holtappels Eds. Olson, D. Psychological theory and educational reform.

Palincsar, A. Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Spence, J. Foss Eds. Park-Fuller, L. Partnership for 21st Century Skills.

The intellectual and policy foundations of the 21st century skills framework. Pineau, E. Rogoff, B. Cognition as a collaborative process.

Siegler Eds. Rubin, L. Artistry in teaching. Sarason, S. Teaching as a performing art. Sawyer, R. Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences.

The new science of learning. New York: Basic Books. Shavelson, R. Smith, R. Is teaching really a performing art? Timpson, W. Torrance, E. Interscholastic futuristic creative problem solving.

Trilling, B. Yinger, R. Routines in teacher planning. A study of teacher planning. By this I mean that we should liken teaching to other explicitly improvisational professions such as unscripted theater and jazz music, where conscious efforts are made to develop improvisational expertise, and where a body of knowledge has been built up for doing so.

This reconceptualization of teacher expertise will be an important move toward supporting the kinds of teaching that are needed to meet the demands of our society in the twenty-first century.

The assertion that good teaching involves improvisation is a statement of the obvious to any experienced classroom teacher.

But improvisation has rarely been an explicit part of conversations about teaching, and because we do not talk much about our improvisation, we limit our ability as a profession to advance our knowledge and capacity for improvising well.

Unlike other improvisational professions, we do not have a well-elaborated, shared notion of what constitutes excellent improvisation, nor do we know much about how teachers learn to improvise or what teacher educators can do to facilitate that learning.

Yet, as I explain later in the chapter, many scholars In R. This chapter focuses on teacher education because these programs are important sites for conversations about teaching; this is where we can pass on to our next generation of teachers ideas about what we hope teaching will be.

I identify two barriers to the reconceptualization of teaching as disciplined improvisation. First, I show that few teacher educators have thought systematically about the role of improvisation in teaching or have adopted it as a learning goal for their students.

Second, I argue that teacher education students do not naturally come to the view that teaching should be improvisational, due to certain deeply held, culturally based beliefs about teaching that I identify in this chapter.

To overcome these two barriers, I describe how familiar methods in teacher education can be easily adapted for the purpose of helping future teachers understand the improvisational nature of teaching.

I begin the chapter by explaining the importance of an improvisational view of teaching to the educational needs of the twenty-first century.

I then discuss what we can expect to gain by viewing teaching as not just improvisational, but as professionally improvisational. Next, I examine how improvisation currently figures in conversations within teacher education, as evidenced by a content analysis of methods textbooks; this content analysis helps us understand why the improvisational dimension of teaching may be less obvious to pre-service teachers than it is to those with experience in the classroom.

In the final section of the chapter, I propose strategies that teacher educators can use to help their students think productively and professionally about the improvisation that teachers do.

I join with other authors in the volume in arguing for a new conception of teacher expertise that includes expertise in improvisation. However, I focus on teacher expertise as seen not through the eyes of scholars but through the eyes of pre-service teachers.

I examine the tension between teaching viewed as a form of professional improvisation and the planning-centric view of teaching that teacher education students often bring to their programs, and that those programs implicitly reinforce.

I address this tension by presenting strategies for moving pre-service teachers away from a view of teaching as desirably scripted toward a view of teaching as desirably improvisational.

Like many authors, I use the improvisational metaphor to analyze teacher expertise. As Sawyer points out , this volume , this metaphor has limits, because there are important ways in which the aims and circumstances of teaching differ from those of artistic performance.

In this chapter, my assertion is that the key feature that teaching should share with jazz music and theatrical improvisation, although it currently does not, is the availability of an explicitly held and deliberately taught body of knowledge about how to successfully improvise in order to accomplish the intended aims of the profession.

It is my hope that this chapter and this volume will serve as catalysts for the development of explicit professional knowledge for improvisational teaching.

The schooling needs of the knowledge society, however, are different from those of an industrial society. To prepare our young people to participate in the knowledge society, we need to develop more than just their factual knowledge base.

In addition, students need to have many experiences involving collaborative work. In these respects, schooling for the knowledge society rests firmly on a constructivist vision of teaching.

Constructivist learning theory views learning as a process in which individuals construct new knowledge by reorganizing their existing knowledge in light of experiences that challenge their present understandings.

Whereas constructivism is a descriptive theory of the learning process, and therefore makes no prescriptions for teaching, there is a wealth of scholarship that considers how we might leverage a constructivist understanding of learning in order to optimize the teaching process.

Specific recommendations vary across content areas, but there are some general features that have emerged as hallmarks of constructivist-based teaching Richardson, ; Windschitl, To begin, the core idea behind constructivist-inspired teaching is that students should be placed in situations that challenge their prior conceptions and press them to develop more sophisticated ones.

To do this successfully, teachers need lots of opportunities to find out what and how students are thinking, and this in turn means that instructional time should involve a great deal of teacher-student interaction.

Improvisation is implicated in constructivist-based teaching in a number of ways. This will depend on how they connect Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 31 the new aspects of the lesson to their prior knowledge.

Teachers must make instructional decisions on the fly, based on careful observation and diagnosis of student thinking.

Although Simon observed this teaching cycle in the context of a mathematics classroom, the basic features of the teaching process he describes would hold for constructivist-based teaching in other disciplines.

Based on this hypothesis, the teacher selects learning goals for the lesson and chooses activities designed to accomplish these goals.

Then, as the teacher interacts with and observes students during the lesson, two things happen simultaneously and continuously.

At the same time, the teacher observes what is happening in the interactions and assesses student thinking. Based on these assessments, she modifies her hypothetical learning trajectory, which in turn requires modification of the immediate learning goals and activities.

To develop new, more sophisticated ways of thinking, students need opportunities to encounter the limitations of their existing understandings, to actively work with unfamiliar ideas, and to generate and explore new possibilities for their own thought.

This is not just a matter of providing activities in which students can improvise new understandings, but also of establishing certain social and intellectual norms in the classroom.

On this view, the aim of teaching should not be simply for individual students to do individual thinking, but rather for students to engage in conceptual interchange with their peers and their teacher.

Through collaborative dialogue, students work collectively toward more robust understandings. The flow of the lesson needs to be collaboratively determined, perhaps guided in strategic ways by the teacher, but at the same time necessarily emergent from the interactive give-and-take between teacher and students and between students and each other.

It is important for teachers to think of teaching as improvisational so that they do not attempt to control too tightly the flow of the lesson; this would circumvent the co-construction process Sawyer, Teaching improvisationally emphasizes knowledge generation rather than knowledge acquisition.

For example, Kelley, Brown, and Crawford argue that teaching improvisationally is crucial in science education because students need to experience science as a process rather than as a product.

This same principle holds for other subjects as well. In descriptions of constructivist-based teaching, the themes of teacher flexibility and responsiveness appear frequently.

Second, considering teaching in terms of improvisation can help teachers think not only about their own responsiveness and flexibility, but also about generating successful student improvisation and effective collaboration between teachers and students.

Third, thinking of teaching as improvisation may be more productive within teacher education than simply asserting that teachers need to be flexible and responsive.

Telling someone to be responsive is not very useful; professional improvisation is a valuable model because improvisers in jazz and theater are taught exactly how to be flexible and responsive.

Teaching Improvisation as Professional Improvisation For the previously outlined reasons, it is important that we begin to attend explicitly to the improvisational nature of teaching.

Simply becoming aware that teaching is improvisational is not enough, however. When seen from the perspective of constructivist learning theory and the educational demands of the knowledge society, improvisation is not something that is incidental in teaching; it is central, and therefore we need to focus our efforts on doing it expertly.

We need to think of ourselves as professional, rather than incidental, improvisers. Consider what might be gained for the teaching profession if we begin to think of ourselves as professional improvisers.

To begin, seeing ourselves as professional improvisers creates an imperative to take our improvisation seriously, to attend to our successes and failures, and to strategize about how to improvise better.

Further, viewing teaching as an improvisational profession will lead to the development of a body of professional knowledge to support our improvisation.

Established improvisation communities such 34 DeZutter as jazz music and unscripted acting have well-elaborated, shared notions of what constitutes successful improvisation, from which are derived clear learning goals for newcomers and accompanying techniques for helping learners accomplish those goals.

Improv actors have a detailed set of criteria for evaluating the success of a performance. As this list suggests, alongside an elaborated vision of what constitutes successful improv comes a vocabulary that provides a shorthand for talking about the components of that success and for talking about failures.

These things then translate into learning goals for those who are new to the profession. These guidelines reflect the accumulated wisdom of the community about what works to make a satisfying experience for the audience.

And because the guidelines are teachable, they prevent newcomers from having to create from scratch the strategies and skills needed for success.

No one expects novice actors to be good at improv right away. Over its sixty-year Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 35 history, the improv community has developed a wealth of methods for teaching improv acting, and the great improv teachers such as Paul Sills and Del Close are venerated as much, if not more, than the great performers.

Methods books for teaching improv abound e. Similar types of knowledge can be found in the jazz community; see Berliner, We need a similar body of knowledge in the teaching profession, including a well-elaborated vision of good improvisational teaching, a shared vocabulary, learning goals for new teachers, and accompanying techniques for developing improvisational ability.

One way to make progress toward these ends is to mine the wisdom of other improvisational communities. Several scholars have already begun work of this type.

Improv actors use games and other frameworks as scaffolds for successful improvisational performances. Such structures impose parameters within which the improvisation occurs, and this serves to cut down to a manageable range the amount of improvisation necessary to produce a coherent performance.

Sawyer suggests that teachers need to design classroom activities with a similar idea in mind. Activities need to allow students intellectual space to construct their own knowledge while at the same time scaffolding the construction process.

Sawyer 36 DeZutter also notes that it will be helpful to train teachers in some of the techniques used by theatrical improvisers.

There are a few such efforts currently underway. The work of Sawyer, Donmeyer, and Lobman demonstrates the value in attending to the knowledge for improvisation found in the theater community.

There is also some interesting work using insights from dance improvisation; see Fournier, this volume. However, drawing wisdom from other improvisational professions should not be our only strategy.

As Sawyer notes, the demands of teaching in a K school differ significantly from the demands of creating a performance in the arts. If we are to advance the ability of the teaching profession to improvise, we will need to develop a vision, a vocabulary, and pedagogical techniques that are specific to teaching.

Indeed, that is where much of the current scholarship on teaching-as-improvisation will likely lead. At the same time, though, we need to engage in a parallel effort that will establish an audience for such scholarship, and extend the conversation about improvisation to others besides education scholars.

We need to take steps to help teachers understand why such scholarship matters, why it is important to understand teaching as improvisational, and why we should strive to improvise well.

Textbooks offer a reasonable proxy for the topics that are included in teacher education classes because to be adopted, a textbook must present the ideas Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 37 and concepts that teacher educators deem important.

I analyzed fourteen general-methods texts see Table 2. All generalmethods texts texts not focused on a particular grade level or content area were included, except for one text from Cengage that could not be acquired at the time of the study.

Texts devoted only to a single aspect of teaching, such as classroom management, were not included. The textbooks I examined treat constructivism in a variety of ways.

Several e. Others mention constructivism only long enough to link it to other terms or ideas that are used more frequently. Still others e. It would be reasonable, then, to expect these texts to deal with teacher improvisation as a necessary feature of teaching that accomplishes such aims.

In a discussion of differences between expert and novice teachers, in which they cite Borko and Livingston , see below , Ornstein and Lasley explain, Experts engage in a good deal of intuitive and improvisational teaching.

They begin with a simple plan or outline and fill in the details as the teaching-learning process unfolds.

The act of teaching 5th ed. Another text, Frieberg and Driscoll , includes a section on using theatrical improvisation as a teaching technique but does not mention or suggest that improvisation should be an integral part of every teaching process.

In fact, the presence of this section may contribute to an impression that improvisation is not a normal part of teaching, but rather a special technique to be employed only in certain situations.

I then examined the possibility that teaching-as-improvisation is present in these texts, even though the term is not used.

Even though all of the texts give at least passing nods to concepts such as teacher flexibility, responsiveness, and in-the-moment revision of plans, the lack of sustained discussion of such issues, accompanied by an emphasis on detailed lesson planning and vignettes of teaching in which the improvisational elements are not made salient, means that readers new to the profession are unlikely to take away the message that teaching is necessarily and always improvisational.

Student reactions may make it necessary or desirable to elaborate on something included in the plan or to pursue something unexpected that arises as the lesson proceeds.

Topics that we might expect to be associated 40 DeZutter with teacher improvisation, such as attending to individual student needs, teaching students with differing rates of learning, and accounting for diverse student backgrounds, tend to be addressed with advice on how lessons should be planned, and that advice rarely includes planning for improvisational teaching.

All of the texts do at least mention that lesson plans must at times be revised on the fly, but there is an absence of sustained discussion about the necessary give-and-take between pre-lesson work and during-the-lesson decision making.

But the vignettes and case studies presented in these books rarely demonstrate the improvisational essence of teaching.

Such descriptions also create the sense that the teacher is the only one who is shaping the direction of the lesson, because it is almost never made explicit that the flow of the lesson emerges from collaborative classroom dialogue.

These books do not show pre-service teachers the essential improvisational nature of teaching. And we know that pre-service teachers do not start teacher education programs with improvisational beliefs about teaching.

This is done chiefly by telling the information to the students. In one interesting example of research on this issue, Weber and Mitchell asked children, pre-service teachers, and practicing teachers to draw a picture of a teacher.

Weber and Mitchell concluded that this traditional image was widespread among not only pre-service Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 41 teachers but most people in our culture p.

Students, if depicted, were shown sitting passively, in orderly rows, eyes on the teacher. This experiment reveals the dominant image of teaching that teacher education students bring with them to their education classes.

Indeed, such transmissionist views have been shown to conflict with the learning of constructivist-based principles of teaching. It makes sense under the transmission model to depict a teacher speaking in the front of a classroom to a group of silent or invisible students.

It makes far less sense, however, to depict a teacher this way under a constructivist-inspired model of teaching. From a constructivist perspective, the act of teaching cannot be depicted without including the students in the image, because the intellectual activity of the students is what is important.

Such beliefs often act as a barrier to accurately understanding constructivistinspired approaches to teaching, and will very likely also be a barrier to inferring the improvisational nature of teaching.

From the transmissionist perspective, there is little reason for improvisation in teaching. Rather, planning exactly what the teacher will say and do during a lesson, even down to 42 DeZutter the minute details, seems advisable to ensure that all the important ideas get said and in the right order.

If new teachers understand the value of improvisational teaching to student learning, they are more likely to plan for improvisation instead of planning a script.

If they learn to think critically about the role of improvisation in teaching and to reflect on their own successes and failures in improvisation, they will become better classroom improvisers, and therefore, better teachers.

In addition, such conversations may generate a demand for more scholarly work on teaching as improvisation, which can then be incorporated into teacher education, further advancing the cause of excellence in improvisational teaching.

I would like to see improvisation addressed directly and substantively in forthcoming teacher education textbooks, but in the absence of such discussions, teacher educators should fill in the gaps by exploring the topic with their students.

Bringing Improvisation into Conversations within Teacher Education For guidance on incorporating conversations about improvisation into teacher education, we can turn first to the already well-developed body of literature on addressing teaching beliefs in teacher education.

As suggested by the earlier discussion, the initial step in helping pre-service teachers understand the role of improvisation in teaching will be to address their assumptions about the teaching-learning process, some of which may conflict with the idea that effective teaching involves successful improvisation.

Asking students to articulate and examine their beliefs about teaching helps them be more deliberate learners as they encounter new, challenging ideas, and it sets the stage for the career-long reflective consideration of the teachinglearning process that many teacher education programs strive to foster.

The skillful teacher educator will listen carefully to the notions of teaching that her students express and then find ways to link those notions to the ideas she hopes they will come to understand.

Such activities can be used as opportunities to open conversations about the improvisational nature of teaching as well. Blumenfeld, Hicks, and Kracjik suggest that lesson-planning activities, which are a mainstay of methods courses, can be an important site for students to articulate and examine beliefs about the relationship between particular pedagogical choices and student learning.

Woolfolk Hoy and Murphy note that having students write philosophies of learning can be a valuable tool for unearthing assumptions.

Students can be asked to revise these at later points in their preparation, and can thereby track the evolution of their beliefs.

Such themes can then be included in the discussions that arise around these activities, so that students not only begin to unearth their assumptions relating to teacher improvisation, but also begin to learn that improvisation is an important issue in teaching.

Programs that address beliefs only briefly or in a piecemeal fashion are unlikely to be effective in moving students toward robust, research-based understandings.

Thus, conversations about the improvisational nature of teaching should be integrated throughout a teacher education program as well, so that teacher education students have multiple, recurring opportunities to reflect on this aspect of their teaching beliefs.

In inviting pre-service teachers to think about teaching as improvisation, teacher educators can expect to encounter certain challenges.

I have mentioned that transmissionist beliefs held by many pre-service teachers are likely to create difficulties for thinking about teaching as improvisation, because teaching understood as transmission seems to require scripting more than improvising.

Lortie makes the point that upon entering a teacher education program, pre-service teachers have had twelve or more years of observing teaching from the vantage point of the student.

As apprentice observers, people gain many images of teachers that they carry into preparation programs, but these images only include the parts of teaching a student can see.

Teacher planning and on-the-fly decision making are mostly invisible to the student, and this masks the nature of teaching as skilled improvisation.

From the student perspective, routines and order are salient, but improvisation is not Labaree, The aim is not just that they understand that teaching is improvisational, but that they begin to think of themselves as professional improvisers who are deliberate about developing and employing improvisational skill.

Attaining this understanding is likely to be difficult, because teacher education students are not likely to have a well-developed sense of what might constitute improvisational excellence or what might be involved in achieving it.

Along with the other authors represented in this book, I argue that teacher educators can make an analogy to other professional improvisational communities, although this will require more than simply pointing out the commonalities between teaching and, for example, theatrical improvisation.

It is not obvious that professional improv performers engage in substantial training and preparation to become successful at their craft.

Therefore, teacher educators might ask students to consider such questions as what might be involved in learning to improvise at a professional level and what kinds of knowledge professional improvisers draw on.

It may even be useful to have students investigate some of the many books available on learning to improvise, and ask them to draw their own analogies between the skills explored in those texts and the skills involved in teaching.

In addition, narrative case studies are a common feature in methods texts. By discussing these examples of teaching with their peers and their professors, education students learn to think analytically about teaching, which is an important step toward becoming a professional educator.

As a part of these conversations, students should be invited to think about improvisation. When discussing their own teaching experiences, students can be asked about the role of improvisation in their teaching, and challenged to consider ways to make their teaching more successfully improvisational.

When discussing observations and case studies, the role of improvisation may be less apparent, and so it may be useful for teacher educators to pose questions that will make this more salient.

For example, a video case study can be paused to ask the viewers what the teacher is likely thinking about at a given moment and how she might respond to different contingencies, or to brainstorm about many possible directions in which the lesson may go depending on student responses.

Cases can also be evaluated in terms of what kinds of improvisational demands were placed on students What sort of knowledge construction opportunities were present?

In addition to including improvisation in discussions of examples of teaching, it should also be included in discussions of lesson planning. Borko and Livingston established that experienced teachers teach more improvisationally than novices do because experienced teachers have more highly integrated knowledge structures relating to pedagogical strategies and content knowledge.

This finding cautions us that to some degree, improvisational skill may be a function of classroom experience.

On the other hand, this work has implications for how we teach new teachers to plan their lessons.

Specifically, it might be valuable for teacher education students to consider what it means to plan to improvise. Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 47 In addition, teachers may wish to attend more to the design of activities than to predetermining the flow of a lesson; this would help them attend to what kinds of explorations students will be supported to do.

As constructivist approaches to teaching emphasize, in order to build deep, conceptual understandings, students need opportunities for supported intellectual exploration.

Not only does teaching need to allow space for teachers to respond to evolving student thinking; it must be designed to allow teachers and students to improvise new understandings together.

Teachers need to be willing and effective improvisers, and this means that, as a profession, we must begin to explicitly examine the improvisation that we do.

The authors represented in this book are developing a body of knowledge for expert teaching improvisation that will parallel the kinds of knowledge found in other professional improvisation communities.

But at the same time as this work proceeds, we need to open the conversation about improvisational teaching to our next generation of teachers.

Future teachers will need to embrace improvisation as an important component in their professional work, and think deliberately and analytically about how to improvise better.

The idea that teaching is a form of professional improvisation may be a challenging one for many pre-service teachers, due to implicit transmissionist beliefs that make scripting a lesson seem more desirable than improvisation.

Therefore, it will be important for teacher educators to help future teachers unearth their assumptions about teaching, including those related to improvisation, and to create opportunities for them to develop more robust understandings of the teaching process and of why improvisation is central to it.

References Anderson, L. Sternberg Eds. Blumenfeld, P. Teaching educational psychology through instructional planning.

Bryan, L. Davis, B. Working through the regressive myths of constructivist pedagogy. Donmoyer, R. Pedagogical improvisation.

Fishman, B. Hargreaves, A. Holt-Reynolds, D. Personal history-based beliefs as relevant prior knowledge in course work.

What does the teacher do? Johnstone, K. Labaree, D. Life on the margins. Lobato, J. Initiating and eliciting in teaching: A reformulation of telling.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36 2 , Lobman, C. Lortie, D. Folk psychology and folk pedagogy.

Torrance Eds. Patrick, H. Renninger, A. Learning as the focus of an educational psychology course. Richardson, V.

The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. Sikula, T. Guyton Eds. Constructivist pedagogy.

Firsthand learning through intent participation. Emergence in creativity and development. Educating for innovation. Scardamalia, M. Siegler, R. Simon, M.

Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Spolin, V. Improvisation for the theater. Strauss, S.

Folk psychology, folk pedagogy, and their relations to subjectmatter knowledge. Torff, B. Horvath, Eds. Tudge, J. Bruner, Eds. Wideen, M. Windschitl, M.

Review of Educational Research, 72 2 , Woolfolk Hoy, A. Teaching educational psychology to the implicit mind. Under the accountability agenda, teachers are required to measure and test students, to report using mandated standards and systems, and to teach in state sanctioned ways.

Under the creativity agenda, teachers are expected to act effortlessly, fluidly, to take risks, be adventurous, and to develop pedagogy and classroom creativity in order to develop their own knowledge and skills as creative professionals.

They are expected to develop creative learners who can succeed in a twenty-first-century economy that rewards creativity and innovation.

The accountability agenda makes it difficult for teachers to work more creatively. Teachers get overwhelmed by a constant barrage of accountability demands standards, tests, targets, and tables by government.

There is general agreement that governments are increasingly taking control of the teaching profession Alexander, Teachers are expected to perform in specific and regulated ways.

In contrast, the creativity agenda encourages teachers to take risks, be adventurous, and explore creativity themselves.

Yet, what constitutes creativity in education remains ambiguous. Whereas important research conducted a decade ago by Woods and Jeffrey identified how teachers cope with tensions surrounding In R.

The conflict between the creativity and accountability agendas in education causes tensions for teachers given the effect of all the tough talk of standards Ball, There is wide acceptance that teaching is a complex task involving a high degree of professional expertise see Sawyer, this volume.

In the United Kingdom, a government emphasis on creativity in learning has led to an expansion of artist-teacher partnerships.

In these partnerships, working professional artists visit the classroom for a limited time period and work side by side with the full-time teacher.

Partnerships have become a delivery model in education, which offers a forum for creative opportunities. There is a long history of collaborations between teachers and professional artists in participatory arts activities, both in schools and communities.

Models of practice in partnerships between artists and teachers vary considerably. However, effective partnerships between artists and teachers in schools suggest it is in the act of creativity itself that empowerment lies.

Teaching is a subtle and complex art, and successful teachers, like artists, view their work as a continuing process of reflection and learning.

These partnerships directly benefit students, but they also have the potential to indirectly benefit students by increasing teacher expertise.

For a partnership to work well, either for students or for teacher professional development, Wenger , p.

Under these conditions, a collaborative partnership potentially can develop, where teachers and artists are engaged in a dialogue and are dialogic in their teaching.

For this to happen, they need to have time for thinking, to encourage and maintain ambiguity, and to share understanding concerning what they are doing and what this means within the community Galton, When teachers and artists collaborate, they often have different conceptions concerning the organization of space, material, and time in the classroom.

The visiting artist typically uses a more improvisational, openended approach, whereas the classroom teacher typically uses a more structured style.

Thus, these teacher-artist partnerships provide us with an opportunity to study the teaching paradox in action: How do these dyads resolve this paradox to balance the more unpredictable, improvisational approach of the visiting artist with the more predictable, normative, and accountable style of the teacher?

If this paradox can be resolved, the result would be improved teacher expertise; research tells us how important it is for teachers to alter traditional school boundaries of time and space to allow for unpredictable, rigorous, reflective, and improvisational teaching Jeffrey, This resonates with the notion of Nardone who considered the lived experience of improvisation to be a coherent synthesis of the body and mind engaged in both conscious and prereflective activity.

When teachers and artists work together, particularly over sustained periods, their tacit knowledge and practice can be examined, reflected on, shared, and new practices created.

From the outset of each performance, improvisers enter an artificial world of time in which reactions to the unfolding events of their tales must be immediate.

Furthermore, the consequences of their actions are irreversible. Few experiences are more deeply fulfilling. My goal is to understand how they resolve this tension to create a shared space for teaching that enables the emergence of improvisational forms of teaching.

What takes them from teaching together, independently and side by side, to coconstructing an emergent pedagogy? I focus on two questions: When is it that artists enable teachers by working in classrooms?

When teachers and artists collaborate, their different conceptions of teaching and different paradigms of expertise must be resolved before they can construct an effective learning environment.

This examination sheds light on the teaching paradox because the visiting artist represents a more creative, improvisational end of the paradox, whereas the classroom teacher represents the more constrained, scripted end.

Artists, in contrast, are stereotypically presented and seen as artists or arts practitioners, professionals involved in cultural production.

The artist in education is frequently an outsider who comes into an education space and acts as a catalyst or challenger of learning and who provides ways of exploring the world which involve more sensory, immersive, and improvisatory rooted ways of working than are customary in classroom settings.

I conclude by generalizing from these specific examples to propose a set of necessary conditions that must be met to resolve the teaching paradox.

Pedagogic Partnerships and Teaching for Creativity For many years, schools have employed visiting professional artists, in music, dance and theater, to work in educational partnerships with teachers in schools.

In the years after this influential document was published, many subsequent government policies and advisory documents have indirectly increased the interest in artist partnerships with artists in schools.

The vision and the hope are that the learning of pupils, pedagogic practices of teachers, and schools as organizations will be changed by educational partnerships and the significance they have in school improvement.

The vision and number of educational partnerships was increased dramatically in the United Kingdom as a result of the policy initiative, Creative Partnerships a, b.

With more than , young people and more than 4, teacher-artist collaborations, partnerships are acknowledged to have great potential to enhance arts education and creative education in schools.

One goal is to help pupils learn more creatively. A second goal is to help teachers teach more creatively; a third is to help schools become more innovative organizations.

A fourth is to forge strong and sustained partnerships between schools and artists. This chapter provides evidence of how the teaching paradox is resolved in these collaborative pedagogic practices between teachers and artists working in partnership in schools.

Isa GГјnther Video

These writers make the important point that good teaching has an undeniably aesthetic dimension. Je pa zdrava osnova. No one expects novice actors to be good at improv right away. There is Johnny, the student who refuses Beste Spielothek in Neidenfels finden learn. Woolfolk Hoy, A. Beste Spielothek in Alt Kentzlin finden you pay a little bit, you can play in a some cosy rented building, Beste Spielothek in Kleinkmehlen finden more - play on a proper rented green warm field. I think learners gain a lot of 62 Burnard understanding through this collaboration but through these exchanges and with students working along teachers. But I dunno man. Creativity and arts-based knowledge creation in diverse educational partnership practices: Lessons from two case studies in rethinking traditional spaces for learning.

Much of this research explicitly contrasted novices with experts Ericsson, et al. In one classic study, novice and expert chess players were shown chess positions that had occurred in the middle of a game.

Experts were much better at remembering the locations of all of the pieces. Emerging from this research, the cognitive elements of expertise were thought to be some combination of learned rules, plans, routines, conceptual frameworks, and schemas.

Greeno In exchange, this tradition of research on teacher expertise largely downplayed teacher improvisation and decision making in the classroom.

The focus on the fixed structures of teacher expertise was valuable, given the tendency in the broader culture to devalue the teaching profession.

Shulman and others presented brilliant examples of teachers demonstrating astonishing expertise. One goal of these researchers was to demonstrate that content knowledge alone is not enough to make a good teacher.

A second goal was to identify a set of skills and competencies that could be used in a national board exam for the teaching profession. The research of Shulman, Berliner, and others, showing that teaching depends on a knowledge base of expertise, was used to argue that teaching was not just an art based on intuition.

The teachers studied seem to be monitoring student involvement as their primary index of smoothness of the instructional process.

When interruptions of the instructional process occur, teachers occasionally consider alternatives but hardly ever implement those alternatives.

That is, for various reasons, teachers tend not to change the instructional process in midstream, even when it is going poorly. These studies observed quite a bit more classroom improvisation than did Clark and Yinger In studies of classroom discourse, Hugh Mehan and Frederick Erickson noted that classroom discourse was often improvisational.

The improvisation metaphor also provides insights into what I have called the curriculum paradox. Procedural professional discretion is simply the ability to devise a coherent curriculum and teach it.

At this level of expertise, teachers are creating curriculum and assessment, not merely implementing them.

Novice and expert teachers resolve the curriculum paradox in very different ways, and increasing expertise is reflected by a shift in how this paradox is resolved, as demonstrated by Borko and Livingston This book extends teacher expertise research by acknowledging that both structures and improvisation are essential to good teaching.

Creative Teaching and Learning The study of creative teaching and learning has traditionally been associated with arts educators, but many contemporary scholars have argued that creative learning should be embedded in all subject areas e.

This is not a new idea; one of the core features of the progressive education movement has always been an emphasis on student creativity throughout the curriculum.

One of the most influential modern scholars to study creativity in education was the late E. This test was based on J. The Torrance test resulted in several scores.

The three most important ones are ideational fluency, the sheer number of ideas generated; originality, the number of ideas generated that were not usually suggested by similar-aged students; and flexibility, the number of different categories that the ideas fell into.

First, these scholars emphasized that creativity was not limited to arts classes, but that it was important to all subjects, including mathematics and sciences.

Second, these scholars argued that creativity was not limited to gifted and talented students, but that creative potential should be nurtured in all students.

According to this report, teaching for creativity involves encouraging beliefs and attitudes, motivation and risk taking; persistence; identifying across subjects; and fostering the experiential and experimental.

Creative teaching involves using imagination, fashioning processes, pursuing processes, being original, and judging value. Twenty-first-century skills are thought to include creativity and innovation creative thinking, collaboration, and implementation ; What Makes Good Teachers Great?

The chapters in this book extend this research by providing concrete, specific examples of classrooms and techniques that experienced teachers use to teach creatively, and to teach for creativity.

Extending Previous Research This book is meant to be a contribution to all three of these existing strands of research. Our shift to improvisation also moves us away from the teacher as a solo performer, to a conception of teacher and students improvising together.

Third, we extend the creative teaching and learning tradition by providing specific theories and empirical examples of exactly what teachers and students do in creative classrooms.

Great teaching involves a knowledge base of rules, plans, and structures that are developed over years, even decades. And every teacher likewise knows that great teaching is more than this knowledge base of rules, plans, and routines.

In other words, how do the fixed structures of expertise become realized in the everyday improvisation of a real-world classroom practice? Improvisation and creative teaching The chapters in this book are unified by their belief that improvisation provides an invaluable perspective on creative teaching.

Improvisation is generally defined as a performance music, theater, or dance in which the performers are not following a script or score, but are spontaneously creating their material as it is performed.

At the other extreme, in some forms of improvisation, the performers start without any advance framework and create the entire work on stage Sawyer, There is a common misconception that improvisation means anything goes; for example, that jazz musicians simply play from instinct and intuition, without conscious analysis or understanding.

There are parallels between this misconception and the teacher artistry perspective I reviewed earlier.

Standards are typically based on the thirty-two-bar pop song, with four subsections of eight bars each. A standard is outlined on a lead sheet, a shorthand version of the song, with only the melody and the chord changes written.

In addition to these shared understandings, most jazz performers also develop their own personal structuring elements. In private rehearsals, they develop licks, melodic motifs that can be inserted into a solo for a wide range of different songs.

Still, the choice of when to use one of these motifs, and how to weave these fragments with completely original melodic lines, is made on the spot.

In group rehearsals, jazz groups often work out ensemble parts that can be played by the entire band at the end of a solo.

Improvisation provides a valuable perspective because both staged improvisation and teaching require an artful balance between structure and creativity.

The study of human action in social context is typically associated with the discipline of sociology, and several scholars have explored the ways in which human social action is improvised Bourdieu []; de Certeau, []; Erickson, ; Sawyer, These scholars all explore the theoretical tension between the structures that guide human action and the creativity and freedom that result in unpredictability.

After all, no one ever acts with complete freedom; in everyday conversation, for example, we talk in ways that are appropriate to our context and to those people with whom we are speaking.

We use idioms to communicate meaning, and we make subtle points using shared cultural references. The chapters in this book, in various combinations and ways, elaborate the improvisation metaphor to foster creative teaching.

Our goal is, ultimately, to develop a new theory of professional pedagogical practice. This volume is a step in that direction.

Differences between Teaching and Staged Improvisation The main similarity between staged improvisation and expert teaching is that both are characterized by an unavoidable tension between structure and freedom.

But of course, there are many differences between staged improvisation and classroom teaching. Several of these chapters explore one or more of the following four differences; acknowledging these differences makes the improvisation metaphor more useful to practicing teachers.

This outcome will be assessed. In contrast, staged improvisers do not have the responsibility of causing some mental state change in their audience beyond some broad hope that the audience will be entertained.

Stage improvisers do not have this sort of responsibility. This leads to a very different balance of structure and improvisation in classrooms than in performance genres like jazz.

The balance shifts toward a greater degree of structure and a lesser degree of improvisation. The authors in this book argue that too many classrooms are overly structured and scripted.

Yet the research presented in this book demonstrates that when teachers become skilled at improvisational practice, their students learn more effectively.

In staged improvisation, the audience does not participate actively in the performance; they are relatively passive. In contrast, decades of research have shown that learning is more effective when students participate actively, and all experienced teachers involve students in some way.

Sawyer has suggested that teachers conceive of their students as fellow ensemble members, in a collective improvisation, rather than as an audience for their performance.

And yet, research shows that these classroom improvisations result in more effective learning when they are carefully guided by structures provided by the teacher.

In staged improv, in contrast, the structures are the collective and emergent property of the community of performers; they can optionally be adopted or rejected by performers.

Some institutional constraints and structures are necessary, but we argue that in too many schools, these structures are overly constraining and prevent creative teaching and learning from occurring.

This results in fundamental power and authority differences. In a theater, in some sense, the performers and the audience members are peers.

In improv theater, part of the reason the audience likes it is that they identify with the performers, they recognize themselves in the performance.

This is less likely to happen in a classroom due to age, status, and expertise differences. The authors in this book argue that creative learning is more likely to occur when the rigid division between teacher and student is somewhat relaxed, creating an environment where teacher and students jointly construct the improvisational flow of the classroom.

Many chapters in this book argue that knowing a bit about how improvisation works in jazz and theater could help teachers creatively foster more effective learning.

Several chapters present examples from jazz or improv theater, and then identify exactly how those performers balance the tensions between structure and freedom, drawing lessons for practicing teachers.

Many of the chapters argue that teachers and students will benefit if they are taught how to participate in theater improvisations themselves. Most major U.

Thus, school districts might consider integrating improv activities in continuing professional development. The improvisation metaphor leads to a new conception of professional expertise.

Creative teachers are experts at disciplined improvisation, balancing the structures of curricula and their own plans and routines, with the constant need to improvisationally apply those structures.

In classrooms with expert teachers, students attain their learning outcomes more quickly and more thoroughly. Students gain a deeper conceptual understanding of the material and retain it longer.

The chapters are grouped according to which paradox is primary, although many of the chapters are relevant to more than one of these paradoxes.

The book concludes with an integrative discussion chapter by Lisa Barker and Hilda Borko. The Teacher Paradox The preceding brief summary of research on teacher expertise shows that experienced teachers have a larger repertoire of structures that they use in the classrooms, yet at the same time, they are more effective improvisers.

She begins by arguing that constructivist learning requires a learning environment in which students are given opportunities to improvise.

In her chapter, she conducted a content analysis of fourteen general-methods textbooks that are widely used in preservice teacher education programs.

She found, first of all, that all fourteen textbooks advocate constructivist learning theory. But even though this should imply that these textbooks emphasize student improvisation, DeZutter found that improvisational practice was mentioned only briefly in only one textbook.

Based on this content analysis, she concludes that these textbooks present What Makes Good Teachers Great? The focus of Creative Partnerships is to pair working professional artists with arts teachers in schools and have them collaborate in the arts education of students.

One of the activities used with teachers enrolled in DTFP is improv theater, and Lobman quotes from interviews with participating teachers to demonstrate how their conceptions of teaching became more emergent, participatory, and improvisational as a result of participating in these activities.

They begin by noting that all curricula, no matter how structured, necessarily are implemented by specific teachers in specific classrooms, and this implementation has always provided space for creative professional practice.

They propose that teachers approach the lesson plan by considering what can be left fluid and what must remain fixed. The challenge facing all teachers is getting the balance just right.

In a paper, Frederick Erickson was the first scholar to analyze student classroom conversation as a form of improvisation. Two chapters analyze the use of improvisation with language learners.

He provides transcripts of several examples of students improvising in English, but within two different guiding structures that are appropriate to their level of skill.

His first guiding structure is more detailed and constraining, thus providing more support, whereas the second guiding structure is more open and thus more appropriate for slightly more advanced students.

He contextualizes this work within current research and theory in second language learning, showing that these improvisational activities satisfy the best current thinking and research on how to design effective second language learning environments.

He notes the predominance of scripted materials for second language learning, and describes how his exercises provide opportunities for learners to engage in more authentic and creative uses of English, yet within the guiding structure provided by the improv game.

His chapter describes six different games he has used, and demonstrates how differing levels of structure help teachers resolve three conflicts between improv rules and formal language learning environments that are related to the learning paradox.

She compares this facilitative role to a teacher designing a learning experience. Fournier considers both the dance company and the classroom to be a learning community; in both, the role of the teacher or choreographer is to guide a group learning process, providing appropriate structures while being sensitive to novelty that emerges.

The Curriculum Paradox Designed instruction always has a desired learning outcome. Creative teaching requires the development of appropriate lesson plans and curricula that guide learners in the most optimal way while allowing space for creative improvisation.

She examines a specific implementation of the Making Meaning reading comprehension curriculum in the Boston Public Schools.

Sassi presents this as an instance of a broader category of relatively scripted curricula, including Success For All SFA , which nonetheless build in time for student inquiry, group work, and dialogue.

Sassi demonstrates that even in the presence of a relatively high degree of curricular structure, learning nonetheless occurs through a form of disciplined improvisation.

Susan Jurow and Laura Creighton McFadden argue that the goal of science instruction is to aid students in mastering the central issues and practices of the discipline of science.

They draw on observational data they gathered in two classrooms at an elementary laboratory school, and they present two cases of teachers engaging in lessons that were structured around the curricular goals for science instruction that are set by national and local standards.

They demonstrate that the enactment of those curricular goals was flexible and the teacher necessarily improvised within those curricular structures.

The paradox faced by science teachers is one 20 Sawyer of allowing children opportunities to creatively articulate and explore their own emerging ideas, while providing the guiding structures that will lead those students into the appropriate disciplinary practices and understandings of science.

They provide transcripts from two classrooms, one with elementary school children in Canada and one with high school students in England.

Teaching in this way requires disciplined improvisation. And yet, schools are complex organizations with many structures and constraints; these structures serve important functions and cannot simply be abandoned.

Effective creative learning involves teachers and students improvising together, collaboratively, within the structures provided by the curriculum and the teachers.

But researchers have found that children need be to taught how to engage in effective collaborative discussion e. The performing arts are fundamentally ensemble art forms.

Music educators are increasingly realizing the importance of using musical collaboration in their classes Sawyer, c. Theater improvisation can provide a uniquely valuable opportunity for students to learn how to participate in collaborative learning groups.

Many schools have already transformed their curricula to emphasize creative teaching. However, these transformations have often been occurring in the wealthiest countries and the wealthiest school districts, potentially leading to a knowledge society that is run by children of privilege.

In many large U. References Azmitia, M. Staudinger Eds. Barrell, B. Classroom artistry. Bereiter, C. Education and mind in the knowledge age.

Berliner, D. In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Ways of thinking about students and classrooms by more and less experienced teachers.

Calderhead Ed. The California beginning teacher study. Berliner, P. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Boote, D. Borko, H. Bourdieu, P. Outline of a theory of practice. Bransford, J. Brown, M. Chi, M. The nature of expertise.

Clark, C. Research on teacher thinking. Craft, A. Creativity in education. Cremin, T. Pedagogy and possibility thinking in the early years.

Darling-Hammond, L. Dawe, H. The practice of everyday life. Original work published Eisner, E. The art and craft of teaching.

Erickson, F. Wilkinson Ed. Ericsson, K. The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gardner, H.

Five minds for the future. Haworth, L. Hill, J. Housner, L. Ingersoll, R. Joubert, M. Craft, B. Leibling Eds. Leinhardt, G.

The cognitive skill of teaching. Mayer, R. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction.

McLaren, P. Mehan, H. Learning lessons. Bos, H. Holtappels Eds. Olson, D. Psychological theory and educational reform. Palincsar, A.

Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Spence, J. Foss Eds. Park-Fuller, L.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. The intellectual and policy foundations of the 21st century skills framework. Pineau, E.

Rogoff, B. Cognition as a collaborative process. Siegler Eds. Rubin, L. Artistry in teaching. Sarason, S.

Teaching as a performing art. Sawyer, R. Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. The new science of learning. New York: Basic Books.

Shavelson, R. Smith, R. Is teaching really a performing art? Timpson, W. Torrance, E. Interscholastic futuristic creative problem solving.

Trilling, B. Yinger, R. Routines in teacher planning. A study of teacher planning. By this I mean that we should liken teaching to other explicitly improvisational professions such as unscripted theater and jazz music, where conscious efforts are made to develop improvisational expertise, and where a body of knowledge has been built up for doing so.

This reconceptualization of teacher expertise will be an important move toward supporting the kinds of teaching that are needed to meet the demands of our society in the twenty-first century.

The assertion that good teaching involves improvisation is a statement of the obvious to any experienced classroom teacher. But improvisation has rarely been an explicit part of conversations about teaching, and because we do not talk much about our improvisation, we limit our ability as a profession to advance our knowledge and capacity for improvising well.

Unlike other improvisational professions, we do not have a well-elaborated, shared notion of what constitutes excellent improvisation, nor do we know much about how teachers learn to improvise or what teacher educators can do to facilitate that learning.

Yet, as I explain later in the chapter, many scholars In R. This chapter focuses on teacher education because these programs are important sites for conversations about teaching; this is where we can pass on to our next generation of teachers ideas about what we hope teaching will be.

I identify two barriers to the reconceptualization of teaching as disciplined improvisation. First, I show that few teacher educators have thought systematically about the role of improvisation in teaching or have adopted it as a learning goal for their students.

Second, I argue that teacher education students do not naturally come to the view that teaching should be improvisational, due to certain deeply held, culturally based beliefs about teaching that I identify in this chapter.

To overcome these two barriers, I describe how familiar methods in teacher education can be easily adapted for the purpose of helping future teachers understand the improvisational nature of teaching.

I begin the chapter by explaining the importance of an improvisational view of teaching to the educational needs of the twenty-first century.

I then discuss what we can expect to gain by viewing teaching as not just improvisational, but as professionally improvisational.

Next, I examine how improvisation currently figures in conversations within teacher education, as evidenced by a content analysis of methods textbooks; this content analysis helps us understand why the improvisational dimension of teaching may be less obvious to pre-service teachers than it is to those with experience in the classroom.

In the final section of the chapter, I propose strategies that teacher educators can use to help their students think productively and professionally about the improvisation that teachers do.

I join with other authors in the volume in arguing for a new conception of teacher expertise that includes expertise in improvisation.

However, I focus on teacher expertise as seen not through the eyes of scholars but through the eyes of pre-service teachers.

I examine the tension between teaching viewed as a form of professional improvisation and the planning-centric view of teaching that teacher education students often bring to their programs, and that those programs implicitly reinforce.

I address this tension by presenting strategies for moving pre-service teachers away from a view of teaching as desirably scripted toward a view of teaching as desirably improvisational.

Like many authors, I use the improvisational metaphor to analyze teacher expertise. As Sawyer points out , this volume , this metaphor has limits, because there are important ways in which the aims and circumstances of teaching differ from those of artistic performance.

In this chapter, my assertion is that the key feature that teaching should share with jazz music and theatrical improvisation, although it currently does not, is the availability of an explicitly held and deliberately taught body of knowledge about how to successfully improvise in order to accomplish the intended aims of the profession.

It is my hope that this chapter and this volume will serve as catalysts for the development of explicit professional knowledge for improvisational teaching.

The schooling needs of the knowledge society, however, are different from those of an industrial society. To prepare our young people to participate in the knowledge society, we need to develop more than just their factual knowledge base.

In addition, students need to have many experiences involving collaborative work. In these respects, schooling for the knowledge society rests firmly on a constructivist vision of teaching.

Constructivist learning theory views learning as a process in which individuals construct new knowledge by reorganizing their existing knowledge in light of experiences that challenge their present understandings.

Whereas constructivism is a descriptive theory of the learning process, and therefore makes no prescriptions for teaching, there is a wealth of scholarship that considers how we might leverage a constructivist understanding of learning in order to optimize the teaching process.

Specific recommendations vary across content areas, but there are some general features that have emerged as hallmarks of constructivist-based teaching Richardson, ; Windschitl, To begin, the core idea behind constructivist-inspired teaching is that students should be placed in situations that challenge their prior conceptions and press them to develop more sophisticated ones.

To do this successfully, teachers need lots of opportunities to find out what and how students are thinking, and this in turn means that instructional time should involve a great deal of teacher-student interaction.

Improvisation is implicated in constructivist-based teaching in a number of ways. This will depend on how they connect Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 31 the new aspects of the lesson to their prior knowledge.

Teachers must make instructional decisions on the fly, based on careful observation and diagnosis of student thinking. Although Simon observed this teaching cycle in the context of a mathematics classroom, the basic features of the teaching process he describes would hold for constructivist-based teaching in other disciplines.

Based on this hypothesis, the teacher selects learning goals for the lesson and chooses activities designed to accomplish these goals. Then, as the teacher interacts with and observes students during the lesson, two things happen simultaneously and continuously.

At the same time, the teacher observes what is happening in the interactions and assesses student thinking.

Based on these assessments, she modifies her hypothetical learning trajectory, which in turn requires modification of the immediate learning goals and activities.

To develop new, more sophisticated ways of thinking, students need opportunities to encounter the limitations of their existing understandings, to actively work with unfamiliar ideas, and to generate and explore new possibilities for their own thought.

This is not just a matter of providing activities in which students can improvise new understandings, but also of establishing certain social and intellectual norms in the classroom.

On this view, the aim of teaching should not be simply for individual students to do individual thinking, but rather for students to engage in conceptual interchange with their peers and their teacher.

Through collaborative dialogue, students work collectively toward more robust understandings. The flow of the lesson needs to be collaboratively determined, perhaps guided in strategic ways by the teacher, but at the same time necessarily emergent from the interactive give-and-take between teacher and students and between students and each other.

It is important for teachers to think of teaching as improvisational so that they do not attempt to control too tightly the flow of the lesson; this would circumvent the co-construction process Sawyer, Teaching improvisationally emphasizes knowledge generation rather than knowledge acquisition.

For example, Kelley, Brown, and Crawford argue that teaching improvisationally is crucial in science education because students need to experience science as a process rather than as a product.

This same principle holds for other subjects as well. In descriptions of constructivist-based teaching, the themes of teacher flexibility and responsiveness appear frequently.

Second, considering teaching in terms of improvisation can help teachers think not only about their own responsiveness and flexibility, but also about generating successful student improvisation and effective collaboration between teachers and students.

Third, thinking of teaching as improvisation may be more productive within teacher education than simply asserting that teachers need to be flexible and responsive.

Telling someone to be responsive is not very useful; professional improvisation is a valuable model because improvisers in jazz and theater are taught exactly how to be flexible and responsive.

Teaching Improvisation as Professional Improvisation For the previously outlined reasons, it is important that we begin to attend explicitly to the improvisational nature of teaching.

Simply becoming aware that teaching is improvisational is not enough, however. When seen from the perspective of constructivist learning theory and the educational demands of the knowledge society, improvisation is not something that is incidental in teaching; it is central, and therefore we need to focus our efforts on doing it expertly.

We need to think of ourselves as professional, rather than incidental, improvisers. Consider what might be gained for the teaching profession if we begin to think of ourselves as professional improvisers.

To begin, seeing ourselves as professional improvisers creates an imperative to take our improvisation seriously, to attend to our successes and failures, and to strategize about how to improvise better.

Further, viewing teaching as an improvisational profession will lead to the development of a body of professional knowledge to support our improvisation.

Established improvisation communities such 34 DeZutter as jazz music and unscripted acting have well-elaborated, shared notions of what constitutes successful improvisation, from which are derived clear learning goals for newcomers and accompanying techniques for helping learners accomplish those goals.

Improv actors have a detailed set of criteria for evaluating the success of a performance. As this list suggests, alongside an elaborated vision of what constitutes successful improv comes a vocabulary that provides a shorthand for talking about the components of that success and for talking about failures.

These things then translate into learning goals for those who are new to the profession. These guidelines reflect the accumulated wisdom of the community about what works to make a satisfying experience for the audience.

And because the guidelines are teachable, they prevent newcomers from having to create from scratch the strategies and skills needed for success.

No one expects novice actors to be good at improv right away. Over its sixty-year Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 35 history, the improv community has developed a wealth of methods for teaching improv acting, and the great improv teachers such as Paul Sills and Del Close are venerated as much, if not more, than the great performers.

Methods books for teaching improv abound e. Similar types of knowledge can be found in the jazz community; see Berliner, We need a similar body of knowledge in the teaching profession, including a well-elaborated vision of good improvisational teaching, a shared vocabulary, learning goals for new teachers, and accompanying techniques for developing improvisational ability.

One way to make progress toward these ends is to mine the wisdom of other improvisational communities. Several scholars have already begun work of this type.

Improv actors use games and other frameworks as scaffolds for successful improvisational performances. Such structures impose parameters within which the improvisation occurs, and this serves to cut down to a manageable range the amount of improvisation necessary to produce a coherent performance.

Sawyer suggests that teachers need to design classroom activities with a similar idea in mind. Activities need to allow students intellectual space to construct their own knowledge while at the same time scaffolding the construction process.

Sawyer 36 DeZutter also notes that it will be helpful to train teachers in some of the techniques used by theatrical improvisers.

There are a few such efforts currently underway. The work of Sawyer, Donmeyer, and Lobman demonstrates the value in attending to the knowledge for improvisation found in the theater community.

There is also some interesting work using insights from dance improvisation; see Fournier, this volume. However, drawing wisdom from other improvisational professions should not be our only strategy.

As Sawyer notes, the demands of teaching in a K school differ significantly from the demands of creating a performance in the arts.

If we are to advance the ability of the teaching profession to improvise, we will need to develop a vision, a vocabulary, and pedagogical techniques that are specific to teaching.

Indeed, that is where much of the current scholarship on teaching-as-improvisation will likely lead. At the same time, though, we need to engage in a parallel effort that will establish an audience for such scholarship, and extend the conversation about improvisation to others besides education scholars.

We need to take steps to help teachers understand why such scholarship matters, why it is important to understand teaching as improvisational, and why we should strive to improvise well.

Textbooks offer a reasonable proxy for the topics that are included in teacher education classes because to be adopted, a textbook must present the ideas Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 37 and concepts that teacher educators deem important.

I analyzed fourteen general-methods texts see Table 2. All generalmethods texts texts not focused on a particular grade level or content area were included, except for one text from Cengage that could not be acquired at the time of the study.

Texts devoted only to a single aspect of teaching, such as classroom management, were not included. The textbooks I examined treat constructivism in a variety of ways.

Several e. Others mention constructivism only long enough to link it to other terms or ideas that are used more frequently. Still others e.

It would be reasonable, then, to expect these texts to deal with teacher improvisation as a necessary feature of teaching that accomplishes such aims.

In a discussion of differences between expert and novice teachers, in which they cite Borko and Livingston , see below , Ornstein and Lasley explain, Experts engage in a good deal of intuitive and improvisational teaching.

They begin with a simple plan or outline and fill in the details as the teaching-learning process unfolds.

The act of teaching 5th ed. Another text, Frieberg and Driscoll , includes a section on using theatrical improvisation as a teaching technique but does not mention or suggest that improvisation should be an integral part of every teaching process.

In fact, the presence of this section may contribute to an impression that improvisation is not a normal part of teaching, but rather a special technique to be employed only in certain situations.

I then examined the possibility that teaching-as-improvisation is present in these texts, even though the term is not used.

Even though all of the texts give at least passing nods to concepts such as teacher flexibility, responsiveness, and in-the-moment revision of plans, the lack of sustained discussion of such issues, accompanied by an emphasis on detailed lesson planning and vignettes of teaching in which the improvisational elements are not made salient, means that readers new to the profession are unlikely to take away the message that teaching is necessarily and always improvisational.

Student reactions may make it necessary or desirable to elaborate on something included in the plan or to pursue something unexpected that arises as the lesson proceeds.

Topics that we might expect to be associated 40 DeZutter with teacher improvisation, such as attending to individual student needs, teaching students with differing rates of learning, and accounting for diverse student backgrounds, tend to be addressed with advice on how lessons should be planned, and that advice rarely includes planning for improvisational teaching.

All of the texts do at least mention that lesson plans must at times be revised on the fly, but there is an absence of sustained discussion about the necessary give-and-take between pre-lesson work and during-the-lesson decision making.

But the vignettes and case studies presented in these books rarely demonstrate the improvisational essence of teaching. Such descriptions also create the sense that the teacher is the only one who is shaping the direction of the lesson, because it is almost never made explicit that the flow of the lesson emerges from collaborative classroom dialogue.

These books do not show pre-service teachers the essential improvisational nature of teaching. And we know that pre-service teachers do not start teacher education programs with improvisational beliefs about teaching.

This is done chiefly by telling the information to the students. In one interesting example of research on this issue, Weber and Mitchell asked children, pre-service teachers, and practicing teachers to draw a picture of a teacher.

Weber and Mitchell concluded that this traditional image was widespread among not only pre-service Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 41 teachers but most people in our culture p.

Students, if depicted, were shown sitting passively, in orderly rows, eyes on the teacher. This experiment reveals the dominant image of teaching that teacher education students bring with them to their education classes.

Indeed, such transmissionist views have been shown to conflict with the learning of constructivist-based principles of teaching.

It makes sense under the transmission model to depict a teacher speaking in the front of a classroom to a group of silent or invisible students.

It makes far less sense, however, to depict a teacher this way under a constructivist-inspired model of teaching. From a constructivist perspective, the act of teaching cannot be depicted without including the students in the image, because the intellectual activity of the students is what is important.

Such beliefs often act as a barrier to accurately understanding constructivistinspired approaches to teaching, and will very likely also be a barrier to inferring the improvisational nature of teaching.

From the transmissionist perspective, there is little reason for improvisation in teaching. Rather, planning exactly what the teacher will say and do during a lesson, even down to 42 DeZutter the minute details, seems advisable to ensure that all the important ideas get said and in the right order.

If new teachers understand the value of improvisational teaching to student learning, they are more likely to plan for improvisation instead of planning a script.

If they learn to think critically about the role of improvisation in teaching and to reflect on their own successes and failures in improvisation, they will become better classroom improvisers, and therefore, better teachers.

In addition, such conversations may generate a demand for more scholarly work on teaching as improvisation, which can then be incorporated into teacher education, further advancing the cause of excellence in improvisational teaching.

I would like to see improvisation addressed directly and substantively in forthcoming teacher education textbooks, but in the absence of such discussions, teacher educators should fill in the gaps by exploring the topic with their students.

Bringing Improvisation into Conversations within Teacher Education For guidance on incorporating conversations about improvisation into teacher education, we can turn first to the already well-developed body of literature on addressing teaching beliefs in teacher education.

As suggested by the earlier discussion, the initial step in helping pre-service teachers understand the role of improvisation in teaching will be to address their assumptions about the teaching-learning process, some of which may conflict with the idea that effective teaching involves successful improvisation.

Asking students to articulate and examine their beliefs about teaching helps them be more deliberate learners as they encounter new, challenging ideas, and it sets the stage for the career-long reflective consideration of the teachinglearning process that many teacher education programs strive to foster.

The skillful teacher educator will listen carefully to the notions of teaching that her students express and then find ways to link those notions to the ideas she hopes they will come to understand.

Such activities can be used as opportunities to open conversations about the improvisational nature of teaching as well. Blumenfeld, Hicks, and Kracjik suggest that lesson-planning activities, which are a mainstay of methods courses, can be an important site for students to articulate and examine beliefs about the relationship between particular pedagogical choices and student learning.

Woolfolk Hoy and Murphy note that having students write philosophies of learning can be a valuable tool for unearthing assumptions. Students can be asked to revise these at later points in their preparation, and can thereby track the evolution of their beliefs.

Such themes can then be included in the discussions that arise around these activities, so that students not only begin to unearth their assumptions relating to teacher improvisation, but also begin to learn that improvisation is an important issue in teaching.

Programs that address beliefs only briefly or in a piecemeal fashion are unlikely to be effective in moving students toward robust, research-based understandings.

Thus, conversations about the improvisational nature of teaching should be integrated throughout a teacher education program as well, so that teacher education students have multiple, recurring opportunities to reflect on this aspect of their teaching beliefs.

In inviting pre-service teachers to think about teaching as improvisation, teacher educators can expect to encounter certain challenges.

I have mentioned that transmissionist beliefs held by many pre-service teachers are likely to create difficulties for thinking about teaching as improvisation, because teaching understood as transmission seems to require scripting more than improvising.

Lortie makes the point that upon entering a teacher education program, pre-service teachers have had twelve or more years of observing teaching from the vantage point of the student.

As apprentice observers, people gain many images of teachers that they carry into preparation programs, but these images only include the parts of teaching a student can see.

Teacher planning and on-the-fly decision making are mostly invisible to the student, and this masks the nature of teaching as skilled improvisation.

From the student perspective, routines and order are salient, but improvisation is not Labaree, The aim is not just that they understand that teaching is improvisational, but that they begin to think of themselves as professional improvisers who are deliberate about developing and employing improvisational skill.

Attaining this understanding is likely to be difficult, because teacher education students are not likely to have a well-developed sense of what might constitute improvisational excellence or what might be involved in achieving it.

Along with the other authors represented in this book, I argue that teacher educators can make an analogy to other professional improvisational communities, although this will require more than simply pointing out the commonalities between teaching and, for example, theatrical improvisation.

It is not obvious that professional improv performers engage in substantial training and preparation to become successful at their craft.

Therefore, teacher educators might ask students to consider such questions as what might be involved in learning to improvise at a professional level and what kinds of knowledge professional improvisers draw on.

It may even be useful to have students investigate some of the many books available on learning to improvise, and ask them to draw their own analogies between the skills explored in those texts and the skills involved in teaching.

In addition, narrative case studies are a common feature in methods texts. By discussing these examples of teaching with their peers and their professors, education students learn to think analytically about teaching, which is an important step toward becoming a professional educator.

As a part of these conversations, students should be invited to think about improvisation. When discussing their own teaching experiences, students can be asked about the role of improvisation in their teaching, and challenged to consider ways to make their teaching more successfully improvisational.

When discussing observations and case studies, the role of improvisation may be less apparent, and so it may be useful for teacher educators to pose questions that will make this more salient.

For example, a video case study can be paused to ask the viewers what the teacher is likely thinking about at a given moment and how she might respond to different contingencies, or to brainstorm about many possible directions in which the lesson may go depending on student responses.

Cases can also be evaluated in terms of what kinds of improvisational demands were placed on students What sort of knowledge construction opportunities were present?

In addition to including improvisation in discussions of examples of teaching, it should also be included in discussions of lesson planning. Borko and Livingston established that experienced teachers teach more improvisationally than novices do because experienced teachers have more highly integrated knowledge structures relating to pedagogical strategies and content knowledge.

This finding cautions us that to some degree, improvisational skill may be a function of classroom experience. On the other hand, this work has implications for how we teach new teachers to plan their lessons.

Specifically, it might be valuable for teacher education students to consider what it means to plan to improvise.

Professional Improvisation and Teacher Education 47 In addition, teachers may wish to attend more to the design of activities than to predetermining the flow of a lesson; this would help them attend to what kinds of explorations students will be supported to do.

As constructivist approaches to teaching emphasize, in order to build deep, conceptual understandings, students need opportunities for supported intellectual exploration.

Not only does teaching need to allow space for teachers to respond to evolving student thinking; it must be designed to allow teachers and students to improvise new understandings together.

Teachers need to be willing and effective improvisers, and this means that, as a profession, we must begin to explicitly examine the improvisation that we do.

The authors represented in this book are developing a body of knowledge for expert teaching improvisation that will parallel the kinds of knowledge found in other professional improvisation communities.

But at the same time as this work proceeds, we need to open the conversation about improvisational teaching to our next generation of teachers.

Future teachers will need to embrace improvisation as an important component in their professional work, and think deliberately and analytically about how to improvise better.

The idea that teaching is a form of professional improvisation may be a challenging one for many pre-service teachers, due to implicit transmissionist beliefs that make scripting a lesson seem more desirable than improvisation.

Therefore, it will be important for teacher educators to help future teachers unearth their assumptions about teaching, including those related to improvisation, and to create opportunities for them to develop more robust understandings of the teaching process and of why improvisation is central to it.

References Anderson, L. Sternberg Eds. Blumenfeld, P. Teaching educational psychology through instructional planning.

Bryan, L. Davis, B. Working through the regressive myths of constructivist pedagogy. Donmoyer, R. Pedagogical improvisation.

Fishman, B. Hargreaves, A. Holt-Reynolds, D. Personal history-based beliefs as relevant prior knowledge in course work.

What does the teacher do? Johnstone, K. Labaree, D. Life on the margins. Lobato, J. Initiating and eliciting in teaching: A reformulation of telling.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36 2 , Lobman, C. Lortie, D. Folk psychology and folk pedagogy.

Torrance Eds. Patrick, H. Renninger, A. Learning as the focus of an educational psychology course. Richardson, V. The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach.

Sikula, T. Guyton Eds. Constructivist pedagogy. Firsthand learning through intent participation. Emergence in creativity and development.

Educating for innovation. Scardamalia, M. Siegler, R. Simon, M. Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective.

Spolin, V. Improvisation for the theater. Strauss, S. Folk psychology, folk pedagogy, and their relations to subjectmatter knowledge.

Torff, B. Horvath, Eds. Tudge, J. Bruner, Eds. Wideen, M. Windschitl, M. Mary gets a proposal from Gideon, with a promise from Elizabeth attached.

But a chat with Lord Darnley's mother makes her think twice about accepting. Mary gets to know Darnley.

To avoid being sent to a nunnery, Claude accepts an arranged marriage. Charles's behavior becomes increasingly disturbing. A child's disappearance in the woods leads to alarming rumors about Charles.

To win over the clan leaders, Darnley accepts a boxing challenge. Elizabeth orders Darnley's return to England -- by force, if necessary.

Catherine and Narcisse try to hide the Charles's disappearance from Leeza. Catherine tracks down a revitalized Charles, who makes a shocking announcement upon his return home.

James finds Darnley in a compromising situation. Nicole is tasked with bringing Charles back to Catholicism. Mary learns the identity of the Loyal Watchman, and later receives a mysterious prophecy.

Mary gets news that all but seals her fate with Darnley, but later learns he's secretly meeting with the Vatican. Knox discovers his wife's affair.

Elizabeth seeks a Catholic husband. A hostage situation decides whether Charles must abdicate. S3, Ep2. As Francis' condition worsens he has plans for Mary's future and the next King of France.

Knox's wife reveals an assassination plot to James. When Darnley is again denied the Crown Matrimonial, he threatens to reveal Mary's plan to seize England.

Henry drops a bombshell that rattles Charles. Elizabeth and Gideon's romance is discovered. Desperate to appear strong, Charles commits a serious diplomatic error.

Knox makes Darnley an offer. Those conspiring against Mary accuse her of adultery and make a scapegoat of a man close to her.

Henry opens Nicole's eyes to Narcisse's true nature. Against Bothwell's advice, Mary entrusts Darnley to help her capture the Privy Council members for arrest.

Narcisse avenges his wife's death. When Mary goes into labor, Darnley's mother takes advantage of her absence to influence her son, who exhibits troubling mental and physical symptoms.

Knowing her mentally ill husband could get legal custody of her son, Mary accepts Bothwell's offer to eliminate him, a decision which seals her fate.

Call Netflix Netflix. This vivid historical drama series tells of the rise to power of Mary, Queen of Scots, amid a court full of sexual and political intrigue.

Watch all you want for free. Episodes Reign. Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4. Release year: Pilot 43m.

Snakes in the Garden 42m. Kissed 42m. Hearts and Minds 41m. A Chill in the Air 42m. Chosen 40m. Left Behind 42m. Fated 42m. For King and Country 42m.

Sacrifice 41m. Inquisition 42m. Royal Blood 42m. The Consummation 42m. Dirty Laundry 41m. The Darkness 42m. Monsters 42m. Liege Lord 42m.

No Exit 42m. Toy Soldiers 40m. Higher Ground 42m. Long Live the King 42m. Slaughter of Innocence 42m. The Plague 42m. Drawn and Quartered 42m.

Coronation 42m. The Lamb and the Slaughter 42m. Blood for Blood 40m. Three Queens 41m. The Prince of the Blood 42m. Rose Williams.

Craig Parker. Adelaide Kane. Megan Follows. Rachel Skarsten. Nach meiner Meinung sind Sie nicht recht. Es ich kann beweisen.

Schreiben Sie mir in PM, wir werden umgehen. Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Menu Startseite Kontakt.

Add to Watchlist Format: Prime Video streaming online video. Seine Mätresse Lola wird schwanger - schnell ist klar, wer der Vater escort sex.

Reign Sie spielt Lola. Ben Geurens. Spencer MacPherson. Jonathan Goad. Sollte dieser zudem Elizabeths Heiratsantrag annehmen, könnte dieser Umstand den Status quo zwischen Frankreich und England für immer verändern.

Die Episode "Alles nur ein Spiel" ist die 7. Originaltitel: Bis dass der Macgyver staffel 2 euch scheidet Erstausstrahlung: Weitere beliebte Sendungen.

Click here Strange Bedfellows. Reign In finsterer Nacht. Für den Fall, dass du eine Folge verpasst hast, kannst du sie bei sixx sieben Tage nach TV-Ausstrahlung online anschauen.

Die finale Staffel 4 In der vierten und letzten Staffel kehrt Mary nach Schottland zurück, um dort ihre Pflichten als Königin von Schottland zu erfüllen.

Reign Falsches Getreide. Reign Strippenzieher. Bettgeflüster Strange Read more. Staffel der Serie Reign. Die Episode "Die Verlobung" ist die 2.

Home Reign - Staffel article source. Bilder anzeigen. Mary ist schockiert - nun soll Charles der neue König von Frankreich werden.

Wie sich später jedoch herausstellt, sollten diese Boten ihr Ziel niemals erreichen. KG, Kopernikusstr. Die Episode "Kein Land in Sicht" ist die 5.

Alle anzeigen. Blood in the Water 42m. Mary becomes involved with an imprisoned pregnant woman with ties check this out Bash, while Mary's friends are entangled in Catherine's assassination attempts.

TV Shows I Watched. Chabrol to your account Remember Me Register a new account Lost your password? Sheila Nazarian use the latest procedures to bring out their clients' best selves.

A Box. Leave a comment Cancelar source. Error: please check this out. Reign jetzt legal online anschauen. Bereits als Aktuell 3 Staffeln verfügbar.

Jetzt Folge 18 von Reign Staffel 3 online schauen.

2 comments

Ich entschuldige mich, aber meiner Meinung nach sind Sie nicht recht. Schreiben Sie mir in PM.

Hinterlasse eine Antwort