Formative Questions1 What Are The Concurrent And Consecutive Methods ✓ Solved

Formative Questions: 1. What are the concurrent and consecutive methods of teacher training? What are their strengths and weaknesses? 2. What do you think are some of the features of the best systems for teacher preparation?

3. What features do you believe could China and or the US best adapt for their own use? Synthesis Question: Introduction to the issue: Why teacher preparation is important for educational success. What are the two systems and what are their strengths and weaknesses? Reference research findings as much as possible.

2. What kind of system is used in the decision makers’ province? 3. What kinds of adaptations and modifications you would recommend and why? 4.

Conclusion – Discuss whether the benefits outweigh the costs and provide a final reasoned and well supported recommendation. Executives and directors at Pfizer Inc., Moderna Inc. and other companies developing Covid-19 vaccines sold approximately 6 million of stock last year, reaping rewards of positive vaccine developments that drove up the value of the drugmakers' shares. Executives and directors at the same 13 companies sold about 2 million of stock in 2019, according to insider transaction data from research firm Kaleidoscope. More than 8.5 million shares were sold last year by insiders at these companies, compared with 4.7 million shares in 2019. In dollar terms, much of the sales came at a single company, Moderna, maker of one of two Covid-19 vaccines authorized for use in the U.S.

Executives and a director there sold more than 1 million of their stock in more than 700 transactions. Merck & Co. insiders sold million of their shares. At Novavax Inc., executives sold more than million of their shares after the company's vaccine hit milestones in August and September . Merck, which last May said it was pursuing two vaccines, scrapped those efforts last month after data showed disappointing immune responses. Novavax announced positive results of its clinical trials last month.

Some of the sales toward the end of last year have drawn the attention of government officials, with the then-head of the Securities and Exchange Commission calling for new restrictions on the trading plans under which many of the sales were made. Corporate compensation experts say these kinds of sales are the natural consequence of a long-term shift to using stock for a greater share of executive pay, with the goal being to tie pay to performance—in this case the development of life-saving vaccines. Top company officials, like other investors, may be disinclined to leave profits on the table, as long as they adhere to insider-trading rules, some consultants say. "This is behavior that I would expect to see in most of these companies," said Ben Silverman, director of research at InsiderScore, which analyzes transactions by corporate insiders.

While Mr. Silverman described some of the selling as aggressive, he said it isn't unusual, particularly for young companies like Moderna whose executives have seen the value of their holdings jump dramatically. Some of the selling was part of preset trading plans that were established before the pandemic. The rest was mostly part of preset trading plans that were changed or adopted after vaccine development was under way. Those changes allowed for more selling in the second half of the year when positive news about the vaccines was coming out.

Preset trading plans often are set up to allow officers who might have access to nonpublic information to sell shares without exposing themselves to charges of insider trading. The so-called 10b5-1 plans can set prices or other thresholds that trigger automatic sales when reached. Some plans require a "cooling-off period" between the time the plan is implemented and the first trade. Novavax said its executives adhere to the laws of company stock sales and have sold a fraction of their overall holdings in the company. Pfizer didn't respond to requests for comment.

Merck didn't provide any comment. Companies aren't required to disclose these plans, though they often disclose when a transaction is tied to a plan in the interest of providing legal protection for the seller, said Mr. Silverman. "As an investor, what you want to look out for is that opportunistic behavior where people are targeting specific prices, increasing the pace of selling at a higher price or these examples where there are significant changes in behavior," he said. Executives sell stock for a variety of reasons that can be unrelated to developments at their companies, including diversification, estate planning and setting aside money for college tuition.

At Moderna, 17% of the dollar amount of the transactions, or about million, was part of 10b5-1 trading plans established before 2020 that weren't updated last year, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of securities filings. Some Moderna executives amended their 10b5-1 trading plans or established new ones in March, May and June of last year, after trials for the vaccine started and after the company received government funding to speed up its development. A spokesman for Moderna said all executive sales are made under 10b5-1 trading plans. In August, executives and directors agreed not to enter into new plans, add shares to existing plans or engage in additional unscheduled sales, the spokesman said.

In December, the company once again allowed trading through new or modified preset trading plans, following the disclosure of efficacy numbers for its Covid-19 vaccine . Chief Executive Stéphane Bancel sold million of his shares last year. He had been selling an average 86,000 shares a month last year until June, after which the pace of share sales doubled. Mr. Bancel's sales represented less than 10% of his holdings, the company said.

In November, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla sold about .6 million in company shares— about 60% of his holdings at the time—on the same day the company announced positive results from its Covid-19 vaccine, which the FDA authorized for emergency use in the U.S. in December. Pfizer said at the time that the sale was part of Mr. Bourla's personal financial planning and relied on a 10b5-1 plan. Mr. Bourla authorized the sale in February 2020 and renewed the authorization in August with identical price and volume terms, the company said.

Big-ticket stock sales at Pfizer, Moderna and elsewhere have come under scrutiny from some investors and government officials. In November, the head of the SEC called for new restrictions on trading under these plans. "For senior executive officers using 10b5-1 plans to sell stock, I do believe that a cooling-off period from the time that the plan is put in place or is materially changed, until the first transaction, is appropriate," then-SEC Chairman Jay Clayton said at a Senate hearing. More Covid-19 Coverage Merck Chairman and CEO Kenneth Frazier sold million in stock in November, while the company's vaccine candidate was in clinical trial. His trades weren't attributed to a trading plan, unlike all of his other transactions since October 2015.

The selloff represented 40% of his vested stock at the time. Novavax executives sold million of shares in August a day after the company announced the beginning of the second phase of its clinical trial. The August sales weren't attributed to a trading plan in securities filings. In late September, executives at Novavax sold another million in shares days after entering phase three of the clinical trial for its vaccine candidate. Securities filings from the last week of September tied the sales to a trading plan but didn't disclose when the plan was set up.

Moderna and Pfizer insiders who set up preset trading plans last year all had cooling-off periods of less than three months. Novavax insiders didn't disclose dates for the adoption of their preset trading plans. Most of Merck insiders' sales weren't tied to such trading plans, and the ones that were didn't include dates for the plans. Moderna's spokesman said the company requires that any new or revised 10b5-1 plans are subject to a significant cooling-off period before any transactions under those plans can be triggered, but didn't say how long. Theo Francis contributed to this article. Write to Inti Pacheco at [email protected] Insiders at Covid-19 Vaccine Makers Sold Nearly 0 Million of Stock Last Year Credit: By Inti Pacheco

Paper for above instructions

Introduction: The Importance of Teacher Preparation

Teacher preparation is crucial for educational success, as it directly influences the quality of instruction that students receive. Effective teacher training systems ensure that educators are equipped with the necessary pedagogical skills, subject knowledge, and practical experience critical for fostering student learning and development (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). This paper delves into two prominent teacher training systems—concurrent and consecutive methods—highlights their strengths and weaknesses, and discusses potential adaptations for education systems in China and the United States.

Concurrent and Consecutive Methods of Teacher Training

The concurrent and consecutive approaches to teacher training represent two different philosophies regarding the preparation of educators.
Concurrent Teacher Training involves concurrently completing a degree in education alongside the practical aspects of teaching (e.g., internships, field experiences). This method allows pre-service teachers to engage directly with the classroom while learning educational theories and methodologies. Programs typically integrate coursework and hands-on training, providing aspiring teachers with an immersive experience in their chosen fields (Corcoran et al., 2018).
Strengths:
1. Immediate Application: Teachers can apply theoretical knowledge right away, reinforcing learning (Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2015).
2. Ongoing Feedback: Real-time feedback from mentors and instructors during practicum experiences can enhance skill development.
3. Stronger Connections: This approach encourages a stronger connection between theory and practice, resulting in more competent initial educators (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).
Weaknesses:
1. Time Constraints: Concurrent programs can be overwhelming, limiting the depth of content coverage (Snyder et al., 2016).
2. Quality Variation: The quality and effectiveness of mentoring can vary greatly, potentially impacting student outcomes (Lindsay & McGhee, 2019).
Consecutive Teacher Training requires students to complete an undergraduate degree in their subject area before pursuing a separate teacher preparation program. This model often involves an intensive postgraduate program or a master's degree focusing on pedagogical training.
Strengths:
1. In-Depth Subject Knowledge: Aspiring teachers possess strong content knowledge before undergoing pedagogical training, promoting confidence and proficiency in specific subjects (Lindsay & McGhee, 2019).
2. Greater Flexibility: Generally offers more flexibility in terms of the amount of time spent learning theory before applying it in a classroom setting (Kunter et al., 2021).
Weaknesses:
1. Delayed Entry into Teaching: Time taken to complete a degree and then a separate teacher training program can delay educators’ entry into the classroom, contributing to shortages (Corcoran et al., 2018).
2. Disjointed Learning Experience: The gap between completing a subject degree and pursuing teacher training can lead to a disconnect from educational practices and methodologies (Snyder et al., 2016).

Features of Effective Teacher Preparation Systems

The best systems for teacher preparation possess several essential features. These include:
1. Rigorous Curriculum: Programs must offer a curriculum that balances theory and practice, fostering educators’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).
2. Extensive Field Experience: Aspiring teachers should be immersed in diverse learning environments for prolonged periods to develop adaptive teaching skills (Kunter et al., 2021).
3. Strong Mentorship: Access to experienced educators for mentorship and guidance is fundamental; it promotes professional growth and confidence (Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2015).
4. Continuous Professional Development: Opportunities for ongoing professional development ensure educators remain current with pedagogical advancements and educational reforms (Lindsay & McGhee, 2019).

Adaptations for Teacher Preparation in China and the US

Both China and the United States can benefit from certain elements of the other’s teacher preparation systems.
China: The Chinese education system predominantly relies on a consecutive model, which emphasizes deep content knowledge. However, China can adapt the concurrent approach by promoting integrated programs that provide pre-service teachers with a simultaneous education in pedagogy and practical teaching experience. This adaptation can cultivate teachers who are better prepared to meet diverse student needs in rapidly evolving classrooms (Huang & Liu, 2019).
United States: While the US has made strides in concurrent teacher preparation, many programs can benefit from the rigorous content focus of consecutive models. Integrating an emphasis on subject matter expertise along with pedagogical training can help address existing gaps in teacher stock, improving both teacher competence and student performance (Snyder et al., 2016).

Conclusion: Assessing Benefits versus Costs

In conclusion, both concurrent and consecutive teacher preparation methods have strengths and weaknesses that significantly impact the quality of education. Advanced systems must balance practical experience with subject knowledge while providing ongoing mentorship and professional development. Implementing changes based on international best practices could help refine teacher preparation systems in both China and the US, ultimately enhancing educational outcomes. The benefits of these adaptations are significant and far outweigh the costs, paving the way for a generation of highly equipped, capable, and adaptive teachers.

References

1. Cochran-Smith, M., & Villegas, A. M. (2015). Teacher Education for Social Justice: A Critical Review of the Literature. Review of Research in Education, 39(1), 297-322.
2. Corcoran, T., D'Agostino, J., & Fenton, A. (2018). The Role of Teacher Preparation in Teacher Quality. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(3), 258-269.
3. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
4. Huang, F., & Liu, A. (2019). Teacher Preparation in China: Current Problems and Future Directions. International Journal of Educational Development, 68, 28-36.
5. Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Kolb, P., & Baumert, J. (2021). Professional Competence of Teachers: Effects on Students’ Motivation and Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(3), 454-473.
6. Lindsay, J. J., & McGhee, R. (2019). A Framework for Educators: Professional Development and Teacher Preparation. Teachers College Record, 121(7).
7. Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics 2015. National Center for Education Statistics.
8. Tichnor-Wagner, A., & Zuckerman, S. (2018). Improving Teacher Preparation for High-Need Schools: Lessons from the Field. Educational Policy, 32(2), 398-433.
9. Wilson, S. M., & Floden, R. E. (2003). Creating Effective Teacher Education Programs. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(1).
10. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the Relationships Between Campus Courses and Field Experiences in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 118-128.