![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextgreen.png)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextred.png)
![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextgreen.png)
![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltext_open_medium.gif)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextred.png)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltext_restricted_medium.gif)
Innovative Practices and Opposing Components in Teacher Education
Subscribe/Renew Journal
Instructor training framework is an essential vehicle to enhance the nature of school training. The renewal and fortifying of the instructor training framework i s an effective means for the upliftment of instructive standards in the nation. There are numerous issues that need earnest consideration for enhancing the nature of educator training program. One of them is the need of advancements in educator training program. Inventiveness implies the capacity to think past the limits and make something which is not the same as that which as of now exists. Without advancements, no advance is conceivable. Instructors must be inventive and their preparing needs to begin from their preparation organizations. Advancements in instructor training incorporate IT proficiency, intelligent remotely coordinating and so on. NPE (1986) expressed "The current arrangement of educator training should be redesigned or redone." Unfortunately, the auxiliary instructor instruction foundations in India are expressed to be generally not imaginative. There are some opposing variables in our training framework which keeps the instructor instruction establishment from being creative, for example, absence of physical offices and assets, absence of dissemination of advancements among instructor teachers, unbending system, absence of research introduction and so on. In this paper the creators have endeavored to toss light on the need of developments required in educator instruction, the opposing components and have additionally offered proposals to conquer those elements.
Keywords
Teacher Education, Innovation, Opposing Components.
Subscription
Login to verify subscription
User
Font Size
Information
- Boles, K., & Troven, V. (1996). Teacher leaders and power: Achieving school reform from the classroom. In G. Moller and M. Katzenmeyer (Eds.), Every teacher as a leader, new directionsfor schoolleadership (Issue 1). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Central Advisory Board of Education (1972). Committee on school buildings report New Delhi, Ministry of Education and Social Welfare.
- Cheng, Y. C. (2005). Anew paradigm for re-engineering education: Globalization, localization and individualization. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
- Cheng, Y. C, Chow, K. W., & Mok, M. M. C. (Eds.) (2004). Reform of teacher education in Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges (pp. 123-128). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Das, B.C. (2011). What prevents teacher education institutions from being innovative. Edutracks, 10(6), 15-186.
- Dash, S. (2006). Quality improvement in teacher education: An analysis of present and future. Edutracks, 7, Issue 9.
- Fessler, R., & Ungaretti, A. (1994). Expanding opportunities for teacher leadership. In D. R. Walling (Ed.), Teachers as leaders: Perspectives on the professional development of teachers (pp. 211-222). Indiana, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
- Goel, D.R., & Chhaya, G. (2010). Innovations in teacher education. Journal of Engineering, Science and Management Education, 1, 24-28.
- Goble, N.M., & James, F. P. (1977). The changing role of the teacher: International perspectives. UNESCO Paris, p. 234.
- Kothari, R.G. (2009). Teacher education programme at secondary level: Some issues. University News, 47(25), 22-28.
- Ministry of Education (1966). Education and national development. Report of the Indian Education Commission (1964-66). New Delhi.
- Murphy, J. (1995). Changing role of the teacher. In M. J. O'Hair and S. J. Odell (Eds.), Educating teachers for leadership and change, teacher education yearbook III. Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin Press.
- Mok, M. M. C, & Cheng, Y C. (2001). Teacher self-learning in a networked environment. tnY C. Cheng, K.W. Chow, andK. T.Tsui (Eds.), New teacher education for the future: International perspectives (pp. 109-144). HongKong and the Netherlands: HongKong Institute of Education andKluwerAcademic Publishers.
- Rout, S.K. (2008). Quality of teacher education programme: A few problems and strategies.Edutracks, 7, Issue 9.
- Yadav, S.K. (2006). Teacher of education in India: Issues and concerns. University News,44(3&),18-24.
- www.mhrd. gov. in retrieved on 18/02/2018 at 4:15pm
- www.nep.edu@gov.inretrirvedon 18/02/2018 at 4:45pm
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/abstractview.png)
Abstract Views: 286
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/pdfview.png)
PDF Views: 1