Patricia S. Cunningham, Eastern Illinois University

Traditionally, the concern in teacher education has been that beginning teachers have a strong grasp of content knowledge. It was (and still is) important that beginning teachers know as much as possible about their area of specialization, application of technical skills, and theories of teaching and learning. Customarily, knowledge and the application of technical skills and theories have been stressed and expected from beginning teachers.

In her book The Case for Cases in Teacher Education (1991), Katherine Merseth outlines four general types of teacher knowledge and expertise:

The first two are the types of knowledge we have traditionally stressed and expected from beginning teachers. It is fairly easy to quantify aspects of this knowledge, assess them, and give a grade for demonstrating some predetermined level of "understanding". In conferring such importance upon these skills, there is a propensity for reliance upon mechanistic, reductionistic, "checklist" assessment. In examining expert teachers, content and theoretical knowledge are certainly present. Is this what makes them exemplary, or is it something more intricate?

The second two aspects of knowledge and expertise, however, speak to the elaborate complexity, interactivity, and contextuality of teaching. These are not easily taught, but experts have been able to incorporate critical analysis and formulation of deliberate plans for action into their teaching. The result is a synthesis of all four types of teacher expertise.

I would suggest that although the first two (knowledge and application of technical skills, theories, principles and concepts) are equally complex, they are more easily shaped to fit a reductive bias model. These knowledge bases lend themselves to oversimplification and close-ended models of assessment. The result is a neat looking package without much depth of understanding and applicability.

This tendency toward a mechanistic, reductive world view has permeated teacher education in the past. The trend toward simplification and generalizeability grew out of that reductive bias. However, failure to comprehend complex, ill-structured domains is the result of taking this analytic approach when a synthetic approach is necessary in order to apprehend the whole.

An alternative to a linear approach to teacher education must acknowledge the "messiness" of advanced knowledge acquisition. Furthermore, it must be designed in such a way that allows the preservice teacher to begin thinking like an expert teacher. Many in the field seem to agree that case-based learning is a viable and suitable approach to the teacher education.

Case-study technique is useful for several reasons. It presents rich scenarios for examination. It provides the preservice teacher the luxury of revisiting the same site a limitless number of times. The case-study approach bridges the gap between theory and practice. Students are actively involved in analyzing, predicting, inferring, interpreting and determining courses of action. By imagining themselves in the situation, they can make decisions and explain their rationale for their choices. Additionally, students begin to see the existence of multiple solutions.

The richness and depth of cases chosen are of paramount importance. Each case must be complex enough to accurately portray the characters, the situation, and their interconnectedness. It must provide the student with several opportunities for revisiting the case from several different angles. The case cannot represent a simple line of argument. To do so would be to fall into the trap of linear thinking in a non-linear domain.

A linear approach to teacher education does not encompass learning how to think like an expert teacher. Advanced knowledge acquisition requires the learner to think in multidimensional terms with a high degree of abstraction. There are unusual demands on prior knowledge. Additionally, advanced knowledge acquisition places demands on notions of regularity. Perhaps most important is the realization that concepts can be ill-structured, highly variable, and contextual (Feltovitch, Spiro, & Coulson, 1989). In teacher preparation, it is this contextuality and ill-structuredness that has been (traditionally) difficult to teach outside an actual classroom.

In any ill-structured domain (ISD), knowledge has to be learned and used in a variety of ways. The generalities of complex knowledge acquisition lie not in the domain specific knowledge, but in the application of domain general principles of exploring. It is with these thoughts in mind that I address teacher education and the application of Cognitive Flexibility Theory (CFT) to the design of a case-based hypertext environment.

CFT seems tailor-made to teacher education. In light of what we know about the complexity of learning to become a teacher, it is a short leap to see the applicability of CFT to teacher pedagogy.

Expert teachers are able to do the following:

7. Engage in active participation and provide tutorial guidance. Expert teachers are active participants in the environment. They function as facilitators for the learner's knowledge acquisition.

In short, teacher knowledge is messy, complex, and difficult to learn. Teacher knowledge requires flexibility of application, potential for juxtaposition of seemingly disparate knowledge, and the ability to analyze critically and decide a course of purposeful action. Thinking like an expert teacher demands a new way of thinking. Linear, close-ended, over generalized thinking is not appropriate for the domain of teaching.

Hypertext provides an environment for developing new ways of thinking, new ways of asking questions, and new ways of examining the feasibility of proposed solutions. When combined with content knowledge, theory, and technical skills, this added dimension of unfettered explorative thinking should provide some creative solutions to pedagogical conundrums.

Hypertext environments are uniquely suited to support teacher education programs through the use of case-based learning programs. Hypertext provides a "convenient and efficient mean. . . [for] teaching courses in a single discipline that need the support of other disciplines" (Landow, 1992, p. 124).

Imagine collecting all of the printed sources used in teacher education into one easily accessed, cross-referenced, simultaneously retrievable environment: learning theories, educational psychology, classroom management, current events, educational policy, history of education, domain specific discourse, sample lesson plans, philosophical foundations, popular books about education, opposing theories, research, and journals, all given equal voice and status in the learning environment.

Next, add the features unique to an electronic environment: bulletin boards, on-line access, networking, video-taped classrooms, real-time "see you/see me" technology, interactivity, real-time communication. It is difficult to see anything "close-ended" about such a recipe for teacher education.

Hypertext requires the reader to be an active participant in the evolution of the learning path. Boyce (1993) points to the potentiality for relevancy of learning for preservice teachers when using a case-based methodology. The learner's involvement in the process is essential, but Hypertext takes the involvement to a new level.

Hypertext can help students learn to formulate questions. Landow (1992) says: "Until students know how to formulate questions, particularly about the relation of primary material so other phenomena, they're unlikely to perceive a need to investigate context..." (p. 126). Although that statement refers to students' use of libraries, it is equally applicable to students navigating in a hypertext environment. If the case is not sufficiently rich and meaning-full, the student will have no motivation for searching through the program or data-base for additional, supporting materials.

Case-based learning has been proven effective in text form and in video form. Due to Hypertext's limitless random access and linking capabilities, great potential exists for effective case-based instruction in a hypertext environment. Hypertext demands that the learner, in active participation, exercise critical thinking skills, and reflective thinking. A "what if...?" attitude is fostered in a hypertext environment. The preservice teacher is encouraged to explore and play with possibilities, rather than search for the "right" answer.

Taking what is believed about teacher knowledge (it is complex and difficult to learn), Cognitive Flexibility Theory and case-based learning (they are well suited to complex, advanced knowledge acquisition), and Hypertext (its flexible environment is tailor-made for teaching based on CFT), it is possible to envision how they may be integrated and used in teacher education.

A hypertext program (HTP) for teacher education would benefit from the technology's ability to access literature, quick-time videos of cases for rich description and analysis, QuickTime videos of class discussions and lectures.

Due to the linking and random access capabilities of the HTP, large scenarios as well as mini-cases can be available for students to examine. The HTP should enable students to annotate and comment upon their own conclusions and decisions, thus enabling them to triangulate their findings with other observers and class members.

There should be the capability for the teachers in the cases used to respond to the preservice teachers' questions about what they see in the cases. As discussed previously, so much of what happens in the classroom is contextual, and this opportunity for dialogue could prove helpful for the inservice teacher as well. At the very least, a link to a protocol analysis done by the teacher should be included. This could be an audio protocol, listened to simultaneously as the student is viewing the case. The protocol may also be in text form, available for downloading into hard copy.

Presently, preservice teachers are limited in their populations available for observation. One strength of using cases in a HTP is the diversity of scenarios available to the preservice teacher. Cases may represent not only different age-levels, but also diverse ethnic, social, and economic populations. Rural as well as urban schools can be examined by preservice teachers. Mainstreamed classes, special learners, and gifted programs can be presented for analysis. Non-traditional and international pedagogical settings can all be included (McNergney, 1994).

A HTP allows students to study cases outside their own area of specialization. This may enable them to look beyond the specifics of content to the overarching themes of excellent teaching. How do excellent teachers, in any domain, engage students? How is praise used? What are the dynamics of a purposeful classroom? How does learning "feel"? Simultaneous retrieval of supporting information about theories of excellent teaching allows the student to analyze what they see in terms of what the research says.

Another component might be termed "environmental cases". What does the school itself "say" about learning? What do the grounds, building maintenance, posters, artwork, and general attitude of staff and students reveal about the school's philosophy of teaching and learning? Cases like these reinforce student's ability to use rich description to defend their inferences, as well as help them identify their own biases.

The list of possible themes for a case-based HTP is limited only by the amount of time one wishes to put into the design of the program. However, by putting the program on-line, once the initial shell is in place, one can foresee an aggregate program developing. As more cases are chosen and put on-line, the program will be under constant revision. This state of flux, of open-endedness will continue as issues emerge from students' annotations and questions.

It is difficult to argue with the belief that there are bodies of knowledge teachers must have, both general knowledge and domain-specific knowledge. They must know the discourse of their specialization. Beyond this "body of knowledge", though, lie the real Truths (capital "T") of expert teaching; Expert teaching is complex. Expert teaching is contextual and fluid. Expert teachers never look for definitive conclusion, only definitive possibilities. Expert teachers make unique and novel juxtapositions. Expert teachers shun reductivism in favor of synergism.

It is this state of flux and elasticity which points to the use of hypertext and cases for teacher education. The term "Hypertext environments" could be satisfactorily substituted for "expert teachers" in the previous paragraph. Until a program is designed and implemented which has preservice teachers actually functioning as inservice teachers (a Vygotskian, long-term mentoring model or a Gardnerian apprenticeship model), we must use tools that most closely resemble the complexity of teacher thought. A case-based hypertext program, designed on the theory of cognitive flexibility, is not only a viable option, but an exciting and preferable option.