See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/250394390

The Instructional Planning Experiences Of Beginning Teachers

Article  in  Journal of Agricultural Education · June 2007

DOI: 10.5032/jae.2007.02056

CITATIONS READS
14 2,254

3 authors, including:

Anna Ball Neil A. Knobloch

University of Missouri Purdue University
41 PUBLICATIONS   274 CITATIONS    73 PUBLICATIONS   470 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Integrating Agriculture into the K-12 Curriculum View project

Equine Extension View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Neil A. Knobloch on 23 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Agricultural Education
Volume 48, Number 2, pp. 56 – 65
DOI: 10.5032/jae.2007.02056

THE INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING EXPERIENCES OF BEGINNING TEACHERS

Anna L. Ball, Assistant Professor

University of Florida
Neil A. Knobloch, Assistant Professor
University of Illinois
Sue Hoop, Agriculture Teacher
Barnesville High School, Ohio

Abstract

The purpose of this collective case study was to understand the nature of planning and the
influences on planning among intern and novice teachers in Illinois. Sixteen intern teachers and
15 novice teachers participated in reflections, focus group interviews, and individual interviews.
In regard to the nature of planning, both intern and novice teachers planned as a mental
process, conceptualized and prioritized content, and utilized a daily or hourly planning
approach. Interns differed from novices in the use of adaptation of lesson planning approaches.
In regard to influences on planning, both interns and novices noted knowledge and experience,
schedules, school administrators, facilities, technology, and resources, students, personality, and
impracticality of planning methods. Further, intern teachers and novice teachers had unique
influences on planning based upon their differing contexts, expectations, and teaching
experiences.

Introduction and Theoretical Framework reasoning of both experienced and

inexperienced teachers to codify
Despite the best efforts of teacher the wisdom of practice into a scientific
preparation programs, learning to teach is as knowledge base in teacher
often guided by craft knowledge and policy education.
constraints as it is by a sound knowledge The study of the wisdom of teacher
base in the practice of teaching practice is embedded in the notion that
(Shulman, 1987). It has been theorized that teachers are reflective practitioners, making
teachers derive their knowledge about professional judgments and decisions
teaching from four sources including: regarding practice (Schön, 1983). As such,
(1) content knowledge, (2) knowledge the conceptual framework for this study is
of the materials and settings of the informed by Clark and Peterson’s (1986)
institution, (3) knowledge of the school and model of teacher thought and action
nature and purposes of schooling, and (4) (Figure 1). This model represents a
the wisdom or knowledge of practice bidirectional relationship between
itself. This wisdom of practice is the least teachers’ thought processes and their actions
codified aspect of the knowledge base for and their observable effects as they are
teachers (Schön, 1983; Schulman). Yet, influenced or shaped by the constraints and
research regarding the widening gap opportunities within the context of
between theories espoused in teacher teaching.
education programs and the real-world Within this model, the constraints and
practice of teachers indicates that opportunities within the context of teaching
teacher education should be better directly influence what teachers think and
informed by such wisdom of practice. how they act. This model was specifically
Therefore, the practice of teaching adapted to indicate the constraints and
could be transformed from a craft to a opportunities as they related to the action of
science by examining the pedagogical teacher planning. Teacher thought

Journal of Agricultural Education 56 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

processes include: teacher planning observable effects include: students’

(thinking prior to and after teaching), classroom behavior, student achievement
teachers’ interactive thoughts and decisions and outcomes, and teachers’ classroom
(decisions that teachers make while behavior, and specifically the outcomes
teaching), and teacher’s theories and beliefs. and nature of teachers’ lesson plans.
Finally, teacher actions and their
Constraints and Opportunities
for Planning

Thinking about and Resulting Teacher

Planning for Plans
Teaching

Figure 1. Adapted model of teacher thought and action of instructional planning (Clark &
Peterson, 1986, p. 257).

As indicated in this model, what teachers (Wood & Miederhoff, 1988). According to
think and believe and what teachers do Hoover and Hollingsworth (1975), a good
interacts in a bidirectional relationship. lesson plan has many educational benefits:
Therefore, this study was conceptualized to (a) it provides teacher guidelines, (b) allows
seek understanding specifically regarding time for the teacher to motivate students and
what teachers think about planning and the to prepare for individual differences, and (c)
ways in which they actually plan or engage allows teachers to evaluate their activities
in the planning process. As such, literature and improve their teaching skills. Even
regarding the thought processes of how though it is widely believed that
teachers planned and the influences that instructional planning skills are critical for
shaped their planning practices served as the instructional effectiveness in the classroom
theoretical framework of the study. (Clark & Dunn, 1991), there is no strong
Teacher planning, as a critical evidence that teachers actually use these
component of the pedagogical reasoning of processes (Martin, 1990; Young, Reisner, &
teachers has been denoted in the research Dick, 1998). Teachers typically do not
base in one of two ways: (1) the set of follow the planning procedures acquired in
psychological processes in which a person their teacher education programs (Clark &
visualizes the future, inventories means and Yinger, 1980; Kagan & Tippins, 1992;
ends, and constructs a framework to guide Morine-Dershimer & Vallance, 1976;
his or her action or (2) the “things that Peterson, Marx, & Clark, 1978; Reynolds,
teachers do when they say that they are 1993; Zahorik, 1975).
planning” (Clark & Peterson, 1986, p. 260). The most widely espoused method of
Instructional planning is essential to planning in teacher education programs is
teaching because it is the process by which the Tylerian, objectives-based model.
teachers link curriculum to learning (Clark Within this linear model, intern teachers are
& Yinger, 1987). taught to begin the planning process by first
Lesson plans are concrete listing learner objectives, by planning
representations of the day’s events that content and activities appropriate to the
guide teacher-student interactions and objectives, and by constructing assessments
instructional outcomes. Effective teaching informed by the objectives. Yet, research
usually springs from a well-planned, well- regarding the ways in which teachers
organized, and well-presented lesson plan actually plan indicates that planning is a

Journal of Agricultural Education 57 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

continual, nested process, which is contrary novice agriculture teachers plan. Planning is
to the traditional Tylerian model of being a key component of the wisdom of teacher
discrete and linear (Eggen & Kauchak, practice. A more codified knowledge base
2003). regarding this wisdom of practice through
Research on teachers’ thought processes studying the planning practices of novice
indicates that teachers tend to think about teachers in agricultural education could
content and instructional strategies before serve to inform teacher educators about the
objectives when they planned for classes ways in which teachers plan (thought
(Peterson et al., 1978; Morine-Dershimer & processes and actions) and the influences on
Vallance, 1976). Teachers spend more time teacher planning (contextual constraints and
thinking about the student needs and opportunities), in order to decrease the
interests, available resources, and other widening gap between theory and practice in
aspects of the instructional context rather their teacher education programs.
than objectives and assessment. Factors
such as teacher experience (Sardo, 1982), Purpose and Research Questions
the age of the learners (Berk, 1997),
students’ interests and experiences (Eggan The purpose of this study was to explore
& Kauchak, 2001), the nature of the content and understand the planning experiences of
(Eggan & Kauchak, 2003), administrator intern teachers and novice teachers in
demands (McCutcheon, 1980), materials and agricultural education. The research
resources (Blumenfeld, Hicks, & Krajcik, questions of the study were: (a) How did
1996), and time (White & Williams, 1996) intern teachers and novice teachers plan? (b)
all influence teacher planning. Further, What influenced intern teachers’ and novice
teacher planning tends to be a very teachers’ planning?
individualized process, teachers practice
many different approaches to planning, and Methods and Procedures
plans tend to reflect the teacher’s
personality and instructional style (Wilen, This study was a collective case study of
Ishler, Hutchinson, & Kindsvatter, 2000). 16 intern and 15 novice teachers in Illinois.
On average, teachers spend about 12 The interns consisted of an accessible
hours a week engaged in instructional sample of students enrolled in a 12-week
planning. They begin the planning process student teaching internship and a 4-week
with a general idea and then move through professional development seminar in the
planning phases of continual modification spring semester of 2003. Eight of the interns
and elaboration. Further, written plans were male and the remaining eight were
reflected a small proportion of the whole female. For novice teachers, the purposive
lesson and most of the plan remains in the sample was an accessible group of first and
minds of the teacher (Clark & Yinger, second year teachers enrolled in a graduate
1980). While many teachers do not write out course for beginning teachers for the 2002-
detailed lesson plans, and inexperienced 2003 academic year. Of the 15 participants,
teachers are less likely to see the benefits of five were female and ten were male. Three
detailed lesson plans (Wilen et al., 2000), teachers were in their second year of
sound planning has been attributed to good teaching, and the remaining 12 were first
teaching (Wilen et al.). Research indicates year teachers.
that teachers who had daily lesson plans had The intern teachers participated in a one-
higher student achievement (Brophy & hour focus group interview and completed
Good, 1986). an open-ended reflection within two to three
Since the 1970’s, many studies and weeks after completing their 12-week
reviews have concentrated on the processes student teaching internships in the spring
of planning (Bellon, Bellon, & Blank, 1992; semester of 2003. The novice teachers
Clark & Peterson, 1986; Sanchez & reflected in two, on campus focus group
Valcarcel, 1999). Yet, there is a paucity of discussions which consisted of large group
the research in agricultural education processing, and small group reflective
regarding the ways in which intern and activities. Further, focus groups were

Journal of Agricultural Education 58 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

conducted at each of three area meetings the intern teachers emerged and are reported
that were geographically distributed as follows.
throughout the state. Teachers were visited
for an hour one-to-one interview at their Instructional Planning Themes for Intern
respective schools. Finally, teachers were and Novice Teachers
asked to respond to a reflective writing In regard to the ways in which intern
assignment related to teaching. and novice teachers planned, the
The researchers were informed by an following three themes emerged as
interpretivist epistemology and served as the common themes between both groups,
instruments for the study. All focus group including planning as a mental process,
transcriptions, one-to-one interviews the prioritization and conceptualization of
transcriptions, and teacher reflections were content, and planning on a daily or hourly
coded for emerging themes based on the basis (Table 1).
research questions. Credibility,
transferability, dependability, and Mental Process
confirmability were established through the Both intern and novice teachers
use of peer debriefing, transcriptions of discussed their lesson planning as a mental
interviews, direct quotes, triangulation, process, involving thinking about what they
description of the participants, thick wanted to accomplish versus writing formal
description, process trail, audit trail, and lesson plans. Many intern and novice
content trail (Donmoyer, 2001; Lincoln & teachers commented that they did not need a
Guba, 1985). All interview and reflection detailed lesson plan and that doing so was a
questions were constructed from a review of waste of time.
the literature and were evaluated by a panel
of experts for credibility. Although the Prioritizing and Conceptualizing Content
researchers attempted to collect, analyze, Intern and novice teachers noted the
and interpret the evidence objectively, there need to either learn or re-conceptualize
is no certainty that some of the findings content in order to decide what was
were not influenced by the researchers’ important to teach. The abundance of
biases (Fontana & Frey, 2000). The findings Internet, state curriculum resources, and
from this study should not be generalized even National FFA Organization resources
beyond the sample. This study was limited in the absence of a standardized curriculum
because the intern teachers were from one of created the need for both intern and novice
the four university teacher preparation teachers to prioritize content.
programs and represented half of the student
teaching interns in the state. Daily or Hourly Planning
Although novice and intern teachers
Results/Findings manifested the notion of “just in time”
planning in different ways, this theme
The first research question was to remained constant for both groups.
understand the ways in which intern and Some interns used a daily approach to
novice teachers planned. On average, intern planning. Novice teachers were more
and novice teachers spent 10 hours per week forthcoming in regard to the fact that
planning. Interns had a range of one to 40 they utilized a daily or even hourly
hours. Novice teachers planned for a range approach to planning by indicating that
of one to 18 hours. Three planning themes they utilized movies, worksheets, or
emerged that were common to both novice informal activities as a “just in time”
and intern teachers, and one theme unique to plan.

Journal of Agricultural Education 59 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Table 1
Similarities in the Nature of Planning Between Intern and Novice Teachers
Planning Theme Intern Teachers Novice Teachers
Mental Process “To me as much as anything was “It might not be necessarily writing out
going through the process and what I’m going to do, but thinking
thinking about it while you were about it, which is the great thing about
writing it down was good and enough working on the farm ‘cause you’re
to engrain it in your brain.” always busy, but you’ve got time to
think about things too.”

Prioritizing and “I started by looking for content. “I’ve used my notes from those classes
Conceptualizing Often this came from the [state and combined them for my teaching
Content curriculum resources]. I then materials so I’m putting back into notes
conceptualized what I felt was most the stuff that I’d taken as notes as a
important and filled in any gaps that I student and teaching that to my kids.”
thought existed…”

Daily/Hourly “… I think about what we did today, “….right now, I kind of go day to day.
Planning and where we should move on to It bugs me to do that though.”
tomorrow…”

Instructional Planning Themes Unique to Instructional Planning Influences Common

Intern Teachers to Intern and Novice Teachers
While the nature of planning as a mental The following themes emerged as
process, the need to prioritize content, and common influences on planning for both
the necessity of “just in time” planning were intern and novice teachers including,
common to intern and novice teachers, one knowledge and experience, schedules,
unique theme in regard to planning emerged school administrators, facilities, technology,
among the interns. This theme was labeled and resources, students, personality, and
coping strategies and adaptations for impracticality of planning methods (Table
planning. 2).

Coping and Adaptations for Planning Knowledge and Experience

Some interns describe a developmental Interns and novices expressed that
process of starting their internship by having little knowledge in a content area
creating lesson plans similar to the way they and/or teaching experience involved more
were taught in the teaching methods class. daily planning. Teachers planned lessons in
After about two weeks, the interns expressed terms of their own knowledge and
that they adapted their plans to a more comfort levels with the subject matter at
informal process that typically resulted in hand.
outlines or instructional resources. One
intern shared, “Initially, I used lesson plans, Schedules
but then I did content plans.” It appeared Intern and novice teachers planned
that interns adjusted the ways in which they according to schedules and calendars. Both
planned because they did not have the time the school’s daily schedule, the time of year,
to develop written, detailed lesson plans. and the calendar of local, state, or National
The second research question focused on FFA Organization activities influenced the
the particular influences on planning for way in which and what teachers planned. In
both intern and novice teachers. For this addition, school routines as well as the
question, seven common themes and four routines within a particular class in terms of
unique themes emerged that were reported expectations and tasks to be conducted
as follows. influenced the planning process.

Journal of Agricultural Education 60 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Table 2
Similarities in the Influences on Planning Between Intern and Novice Teachers
Planning
Theme Intern Teachers Novice Teachers
Knowledge & “…some of us have had more experience “I go through the approved list of state
Experience than other people. Some of these people courses and use that stuff as a
do not feel as comfortable…Now me, I’m guide…..but right now, I’m teaching
used to going on the fly.” what I know…”

Schedules “I know I would have been [more “…you’re going to see what we’re
organized] in a block schedule. I would going to cover today and who’s getting
have been putting more time in my to water the plants today, and do
planning…” different jobs and then that way it saves
me time…”

School “It’s good when you are giving it [lesson “…what our principal wants is…a
Administrators plan] to a supervisor.” template where you need to write down
the class activities.”

Facilities, “I just didn’t realize the technology was “So everything was on PowerPoint and
Technology, going to be there.” it was so nice...”
and Resources
Students “I tried to set units up and was like, ‘we “I pretty much let the students decide
need to do this and this and this,’ but what we want to do and then I will get
obviously you couldn’t do a unit if they the material ready for it.”
[students] didn’t know anything about it.”

Personality “I think that it is personality thing, like “If you procrastinate something in that
everything I do in my life, I plan, so I classroom you have twenty people
would need a plan…some people can do critiquing you. They’re going to know
really well without one.” if you mess up.”

Impracticality “Yeah, if I used that form that we were “I don’t even do those anymore, please,
of Planning taught to use, I kind of spend a lot of time you don’t have time to do that. Oh my
Methods with my head down trying to figure out g[osh].”
what question I was going to be asking at
10 minutes and it’s ridiculous.”

School Administrators planning. Intern and novice teachers adapted

A few intern and novice teachers said their lesson plans to be technology based
that their principals required them to turn in because they did not realize the technology
lesson plans. Teachers noted the value in would be available in the classroom.
doing lesson plans for academic
accountability to the school administration. Student
Lesson plans were formatted according to Intern and novice teachers both indicated
administrator requirements. student interests, prior knowledge, and
experiences as guides to their instructional
Facilities, Technology, & Resources planning. Planning was influenced by what
A few interns and novices commented students wanted to learn in particular
how the absence or presence of facilities, courses, to maintain positive classroom
technology, and resources influenced their interactions.

Journal of Agricultural Education 61 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Personality cooperating teachers were supportive and

Some interns and novices thought that expected their interns to have lesson plans.
their personalities influenced how they For example, “My cooperating teacher was
planned. Some felt the need to be more very impressed with the outline that I
organized and systematic in their planning presented to him.” Other cooperating
while others felt that lesson plans restricted teachers undermined what the university
their personal teaching styles and flexibility teacher preparation program taught the
in the classroom. interns, communicated negative messages,
encouraged the interns to do whatever they
Impracticality of Planning Methods wanted to do, had no discussions about
Interns and novices both mentioned that planning or had informal discussions or
they did not plan how they were taught in glances at the intern’s plans. One intern
the teaching methods course. Further, some commented,
interns mocked the way they had been
taught how to plan because they did not see He [cooperating teacher] discouraged me
them practical. Novice teachers discussed from doing lesson plans and he
the differences in how they were taught to discouraged me from doing unit
plan as preservice teachers and how they calendars because he said, ‘it is a waste
planned as practitioners. of your time. You are never going to
stick to it, so don’t bother.’ And so I
Divergent Instructional Planning Themes didn’t.
for Intern and Novice Teachers
While common themes emerged in Planning for a Substitute
regard to influences on planning between Novice teachers discussed that how and
intern and novice teachers, four divergent what they planned, and even their planning
themes emerged among the two groups of style looked very different based upon
teachers. Intern teachers indicated the whether they or a substitute was teaching the
teaching methods course, university lesson. “I’m planning for subs, if I don’t
supervisors, and cooperating teachers as have enough for them to do while I’m here, I
influencing their planning whereas planning can make up something for them to do, but
for a substitute teacher was an influencing if a sub’s here they’re clueless on what I
factor unique to novice teachers. have been doing.” Lesson plans or even
lesson topics that a teacher would consider
Teaching Methods Course acceptable in a class were not what they
The interns mentioned that they adapted would allow a substitute to teach.
the way they were taught in the teaching
methods course to work for them. The Conclusions/Implications/
teaching methods course gave the interns the Recommendations
mechanics to think about the teaching
behind the lesson plan, “The lesson plans in In regard to the nature of planning
[the teaching methods] class were good for among novice and intern teachers, it was
organizational planning but we were in an concluded that there were many similarities
ideal setting.” in the ways in which both groups of teachers
planned. Interns and novices both spend
University Supervisors and Cooperating nearly the same amount of time on
Teachers instructional planning at 10 hours per week,
Some interns mentioned their university which is consistent with previous literature
teacher helped them clarify their planning or indicating an average of 12 hours per week
felt accountable to have plans because of spent on instructional planning for teachers
them. One intern said, “I made them because overall (Clark & Yinger, 1980). Further,
I thought we had to turn them in at the end novices and intern teachers as consistent
of the semester.” Cooperating teachers also with previous literature, spend more time
had various influences on the intern thinking about planning versus writing
teachers’ planning experiences. Some formal lesson plans (Clark & Yinger, 1980;

Journal of Agricultural Education 62 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Willen et al., 2000). This implies that teachers plan to teach the knowledge
novices and interns are more focused on the base.
internal process of lesson planning rather The planning processes of intern and
than the external process of writing a formal novice teachers were influenced by personal
lesson plan. Teacher educators should and contextual factors as consistent with
instruct lesson planning techniques that Clark and Peterson’s (1986) model for
consider the nature of this inherent process teacher thinking. The specific planning
and the ways in which beginning teachers influences for intern and novice teachers
adapt the ways in which they were taught in were different because the contexts were
teacher education courses to their unique different. For example, the constraints and
contexts in the real world of teaching. opportunities of completing a student
Further studies should incorporate think- teaching internship for intern teachers versus
aloud protocols to study the internal thought managing one’s agricultural education
processes that novice teachers employ while program for novice teachers created
planning for instruction. unique contextual influences on planning for
It was further concluded that while there both groups. Intern teachers were influenced
appeared to be a gap in how teachers by and planned for teaching in the context of
indicated that they were instructed to plan in developing themselves as teachers versus
their university teaching methods courses novices who planned in the context of
and how they actually planned, both novices developing their programs. Further, interns
and interns planned for lessons through were concerned about student learning or
similar thought processes. Novices and outcomes of the lesson while novices were
interns first internalized the content or concerned about their own competence in
learned the material and prioritized learning the material, the students, and the
important information themselves; they then system on a daily basis. The implication of
planned in ways that connected the content this finding is that regardless of the
to students; and finally their plans authenticity of the student teaching
operationalized the content, or adapted internship, teachers will face and be
content to the nature of the context in which influenced by different contexts and thus
they were teaching including considering the different constraints and opportunities
student needs, nature of schedules, with different teaching experiences. It is
technology and facilities, and external recommended that this study and other
demands on the planning process. The lines of inquiry be replicated with expert
implication of this finding is that the agriculture teachers to investigate the
planning of novice teachers might not occur wisdom of expert practice, and explore
in the traditional, Tylerian-based system of the novice-expert continuum. As such,
planning objectives, instruction, and then researchers in agricultural education
assessment. Further, intern and novice should conduct future studies that develop a
teachers practiced planning on a daily or more codified knowledge base for teaching
hourly basis. The nature of this “just in high school agriculture and instruct
time” method of planning for beginning preservice teachers on planning methods
agriculture teachers implies that it could be more specific to the context of that
easier for novice teachers to teach to a knowledge base.
schedule that demands tasks that need to be
done immediately and can be taught based References
on content rules rather than trying to
conceptualize content for five to six Bellon, J. J., Bellon, E. C., & Blank, M.
different classes simultaneously. It is A. (1992). Teaching from a research
recommended that further studies be knowledge base: A development and
conducted that develop a greater renewal process. New York: Macmillan.
understanding of the pedagogical content
knowledge and planning strategies specific Berk, L. (1997). Child development
to the practice of teaching high school (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
agriculture as well as ways in which Bacon.

Journal of Agricultural Education 63 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Blumenfeld, P., Hicks, L., & Krajcik, J. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
(1996). Teaching educational psychology research (2nd ed.) (pp. 645-672). Thousand
through instructional planning. Educational Oaks, CA: Sage.
Psychologist, 31(1), 51-61.
Hoover, K. T., & Hollingsworth, P. M.
Brophy, J. J. & Good, T. (1986). (1975). Learning and teaching in the
Teacher behavior and student achievement. elementary school. Boston: Allyn and
In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Bacon.
research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 328-
375). New York: Macmillan. Kagan, D. M., & Tippins, D. (1992).
The evolution of functional lessons among
Clark, C. M., & Dunn, S. (1991). twelve elementary and secondary student
Second generation research on teacher teachers. Elementary School Journal, 92(4),
planning. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. 477- 489.
Walberg (Eds.), Effective teaching: Current
reearch (pp. 183-201). Berkeley, CA: Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985).
McCuthan. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986).
Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Martin, B. (1990). Teachers’ planning
Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on processes: Does ISD make a difference?
teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 255-296). New Performance Improvement Quarterly, 3(4),
York: Macmillan. 53-73.

Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1980). McCutcheon, G. (1980). How do

The hidden world of teaching: Implications elementary school teachers plan? The
of research on teacher planning (Research nature of planning and influences on it.
Series 77). East Lansing, MI: Institute for Elementary School Journal, 81, 4-23.
Research on Teaching.
Morine-Dershimer, G., & Vallance, E.
Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1987). (1976). Teacher planning (Beginning
Teacher planning. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Teacher Evaluation Study, Special Report
Exploring teachers’ thinking. (pp. 84-103). C). San Francisco: Far West Laboratory.
London: Cassell.
Peterson, P. L., Marx, R. W., & Clark,
Donmoyer, R. (2001). Paradigm talk C. M. (1978). Teacher planning, teacher
reconsidered. In V. Richardson, Handbook behavior, and student achievement.
of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp. 174- American Educational Research Journal,
197). Washington, D.C.: American 15, 417-432.
Education Research Association.
Reynolds, A. (1993). What is competent
Eggan, P., & Kauchak, D. (2001). beginning teaching? A review of the
Educational psychology, windows on literature. Review of Educational Research,
classrooms (5th ed.). NJ: Merrill, Prentice 62, 1-36.
Hall.
Sanchez, G., & Valcarcel, V. M. (1999).
Eggan, P., & Kauchak, D. (2003). Science teachers’ views and practices in
Educational psychology, windows on planning for teaching. Journal of
classrooms (6th ed.). NJ: Merrill, Prentice Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 493-
Hall. 513.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The Sardo, D. (1982, October). Teacher
interview: From structured questions to planning styles in the middle school.
negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Paper presented to the Eastern

Journal of Agricultural Education 64 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

 Ball, Knobloch, & Hoop The Instructional Planning Experiences…

Educational Research Association, effective teaching (4th ed.). New York:

Ellenville, NY. Longman.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective Wood, J. W., & Miederhoff, J. W.

practitioner: How professionals think in (1988). Adapting lesson plans for the
action. USA: Basic Books. mainstreamed student. Clearing House, 61,
269-273.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and
teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Young, A. C., Reisner, R. A., &
Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. Dick, W. (1998). Do superior teachers
employ systematic instructional
White, B., & Williams, H. (1996). planning procedures? A descriptive
Construction in action: From understanding study. Educational Technology
to pedagogy. Paper presented at the Research and Development, 46(2), 65-
annual meeting at the American Educational 78.
Research Association, New York.
Zahorik, J. A. (1975). Teachers’
Wilen, W., Ishler, M., Hutchinson, J., & planning models. Educational Leadership,
Kindsvatter, R. (2000). Dynamics of 33, 134-139.

ANNA L. BALL is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural Education and

Communicaion at the University of Florida, 305-C Rolfs Hall, P.O. Box 110540, Gainesville, FL
32611. E-mail: [email protected].

NEIL A. KNOBLOCH is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Human and Community

Development at the University of Illinois, 139 Bevier Hall, MC-180, Urbana, IL 61801. E-mail:
[email protected].

SUE HOOP is an Agriculture Teacher at Barnesville High School, 910 Shamrock Drive,
Barnesville, OH 43713. E-mail: [email protected].

Journal of Agricultural Education 65 Volume 48, Number 2, 2007

View publication stats