{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03415924945874429, 'fraction_numerical': 0.019485205677171036, 'mean_word_length': 5.6528, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Teacher as Researcher: A Synonym for Professionalism

Goodlad (1990) believes four conditions necessary for teaching to be a viable profession: (a) a reasonably coherent body of necessary knowledge and skills; (b) considerable measure of `professional' control over admissions to teacher education programs and of autonomy in determining relevant knowledge, skills, and norms; (c) a degree of homogeneity in groups of program candidates with respect to expectations and curricula; and (d) rather clear borders demarcating qualified candidates from unqualified, legitimate programs of preparation from shoddy and entrepreneurial, and fads from innovations grounded in theory and research (Goodlad, 1990, pp. 70-71). Professions like engineering and medicine employ similar parameters (American Society for Engineering Education, 1995; Association of American Medical Colleges, 1994). A large, complex, rapidly growing body of professional lore requiring years of sustained study for its mastery characterizes strong professions. The vigor of knowledge production creates tensions for the practitioner to keep up and for licensing agencies to ensure public protection. Professional programs in strong professions respond to knowledge production and scholarly norms, monitoring the validation of research in practice and changing requirements for licensure. Response to relevant inquiry affects practice and tests for licenses in professional programs, in contrast to programs determined by the conventions of practice. This is the professional model (Goodlad, 1990, p. 266). To be professionals, teachers require a foundation of professional knowledge upon which to base instructional decisions (National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE], 1995, p. 4). As professionals, teachers must base decisions on systematic knowledge ... foster inquiry and the discovery of new knowledge (Hazlett, as cited in Dill, 1996, p. 933). A scholarly knowledge base of teaching exists (Christensen, 1996; Cruickshank, 1990). Strong professional programs respond to knowledge production and scholarly norms rather than intuition and expediency. In strong professions, the arbiter of standards is the validation of research in practice, not the vagaries of the licensing agency. Providing teachers with professional skills consisting of education (knowledge of) and training (skill in) called for as a result of research on teaching (Cruickshank & Metcalf, 1990) is a promising vehicle for achieving the connection between knowledge production and professional teacher preparation. Sarason (1996) contends that a goal of professional training is to instill a sense of uniqueness among those with similar knowledge and skills. A teacher basing instructional decisions on an ever-expanding knowledge base, reflecting in order to know (LaBoskey, 1993), and bound by the moral imperative of teaching all children (Goodlad, 1990) exemplifies this professional uniqueness. Preparing Teachers as Researchers Scholars have variously defined a commitment to inquiry in teaching to teacher as researcher (see Henson, 1996; Noffke, 1997, for reviews). Definitions of teacher as researcher range from discussions of classroom practice to data-based interventions. In this article, we suggest that one approach to professionalism in teaching lies in the tenets Dewey outlined at the turn of the century. Dewey, following in the social science tradition of Hall and other contemporaries, approached teaching and learning as a science with an emphasis on grounded theory, quantification, and results of observation (Dewey, 1910). Using the scientific method as a scaffold for teaching and reflection, he defined reflection as a three-step process including problem definition, means/end analysis, and generalization (Dewey, as cited in LaBoskey, 1993; p. 10). LaBoskey asserts that Dewey's theory of grounded belief distinguishes reflection from subsequent applications of the term. Reflection thus implies that something is believed in (or disbelieved in), not on its own direct account, but through something else which stands as witness, evidence, Proof, voucher . …