ERIC Number: ED209172
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1977-Jul
Reference Count: 0
Collaboration and Power Bases in Inservice Teacher Education.
Hauserman, Billy D.
Every agency with a responsibility for teacher education has a legitimate role in inservice education, and these roles should be formalized in cooperative arrangements. Five types of power which affect an institution's ability to motivate teachers to continue inservice education are: (1) expert (innovation and research, management and organizational ability); (2) reward (salary increments, certification, portfolio enhancement); (3) coercive (dismissal, reassignment, litigation); (4) referrent (giving prerogatives to others closely allied professionally); and (5) legalistic (school law, certification, mandated evaluation, and bargaining procedures). Four education agencies possess power in one or more of these areas to provide incentives for teachers to participate in inservice education. State education agencies (SEAs) typically have a legalistic power base. The primary inservice activity of the SEA should be to implement the spirit and letter of the laws and policies of the state in inservice programs. The SEA should provide and coordinate "low interest high need" inservice programs. Local education agencies (LEAs) have their main power base in inservice education in the rewards they are able to provide: employment, salary increments, promotions, and stipends for continuing education. Institutions of higher education (IHEs) have, as their primary power base, expertise in the field. Professional teacher associations also have a power base which consists of referrent power as well as expert and legalistic power. These organizations should work together in a collaborative arrangement to implement and reinforce inservice programs and to motivate teachers. A consortium formed by the SEA, IHE, LEA and the professional teacher association to promote inservice teacher education would enjoy a sixth source of power, that of a network. One of the prime assets of the consortium would be that the representatives for the various agencies would be privy to inservice teacher education efforts, would understand the source and nature of priorities, and would be in a position to marshall all of their resources for common objectives. (JD)
Descriptors: Consortia, Delivery Systems, Educational Cooperation, Inservice Teacher Education, Institutional Cooperation, Organizational Effectiveness, Power Structure, School Districts, Schools of Education, State Departments of Education, Teacher Associations, Teacher Attitudes, Teacher Motivation
Publication Type: Reports - Descriptive; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Paper presented at the Leadership Training Institute of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (July 13-15, 1977).