Contributed by:
The focus of the study is:
What does cooperating [supervising] teachers actually do to teach their pre-service teachers to teach within a secondary classroom? and,
To what extent are these practices enhancing the learning of pre-service teachers, in order that they might, in turn, provide their pupils with opportunities to learn.
1.
Mentoring to enhance the
learning of pre-service
teachers on practicum
Dr Ngaire Hoben
Faculty of Education,
University of Auckland
January 2008
2.
Conventional wisdom is that
school-based teaching practice
is where PSTs learn to teach
• Both in-service [practicing] and pre-service
teachers report that this was where they
learned to teach
3.
When asked: “How did you learn to
teach?”
“In the classroom, definitely…I learnt a lot
more in the classroom than I ever did at
teachers’ training college. It’s very
valuable… you get to experience what it’s
really like…to see what a teacher really
does”
4.
But:
• What did they learn about teaching?
• What were the practices of their
cooperating [supervising] teachers that
helped them learn this?
• Was this what was intended they should
learn?
5.
Focus of study became:
What do cooperating [supervising] teachers
actually do to teach their pre-service teachers to
teach within a secondary classroom?
To what extent are these practices enhancing the
learning of pre-service teachers, in order that
they might, in turn, provide their pupils with
opportunities to learn.
6.
In this presentation:
• Some background information about
becoming a teacher in NZ
• Features of this particular teacher
education programme
• School-based teaching practice
[practicum]
• The project: data sources and sample
• Opportunities to learn to teach
7.
This presentation continued……
• A tale of two placements: Kate’s story
• Examining the mentoring practices that Kate
experienced
• A model for mentoring which provides
opportunities for a PST to learn to teach
• Conditions and experiences which allow that to
occur on practicum
• Practices of exemplary cooperating
teachers/mentors
8.
Becoming a secondary teacher in
NZ
• Main route into secondary teaching in NZ: 3 year
undergraduate degree plus
• one year post-graduate diploma
• Teacher education now undertaken at university.
• Should have a “major” in a subject taught at
secondary school.
• School-based teaching experience [practicum] a
long-established feature [14 weeks]
• Working as a cooperating [supervising] teacher
with pre-service teachers restricted to registered
teachers [3rd year+] & is entirely voluntary
9.
Becoming a secondary teacher
continued…
• Small payment to individual cooperating
[supervising] teacher, but no time allowance &
no preparation for the role
• Graduating Teaching Standards to be introduced
2008
• No national testing of literacy, numeracy or ICT
skills of pre-service teachers [PSTs]
• No curriculum for teacher education & no
inspection of teacher ed. providers
10.
Some key features of the
programme in this study
• Underpinned by theory of effective
teaching as the provision of opportunities
for pupils to learn.
• Students assessed against the criteria
supporting opportunities to learn
11.
Opportunities to learn
Effective teachers provide opportunities for their
pupils to learn what they need to learn ( Berliner,
1987).
Opportunities to learn occur when:
1] lessons are aligned to appropriate and important
curriculum objectives
2] pupils are cognitively and behaviourally
engaged with these objectives
3] pupils enjoy a high rate of success with learning
tasks, and
Sufficient time is allocated for all this to happen.
12.
Practicum or school-based
teaching practice
• A school-based coordinator liaises between
school and university: arranges cooperating
[supervising] teachers and timetables
• Two seven-week blocks
• PST typically placed with 2-3 cooperating
[supervising] teachers
• usually three classes in total, maximum 4
• 12 [16 maximum] hours timetabled per week
• Cycle of observe/teach/ reflect/ teach etc
13.
Data sources for this study
• Semi-structured interviews with 55
school-based personnel, 18 pre-service
teachers [PSTs] and 5 teacher educators
• Document analysis
1. Reports on PST teaching practice by
cooperating teachers [CTs]
2. Journal entries by PSTs
3. Feedback written by CTs
4. Observation notes by researcher as VL
14.
The sample
• 12 state co-ed schools in Auckland, NZ
• Geographical spread
• Decile range 1-10 [ where 1 = low SES]
[lower = 3, middle = 5, upper =4]
• Range of school size:
Small [roll under 1000, n = 2]
Medium [roll 1000-1500, n = 5],
slightly larger [roll1500-2000, n = 2] and
large [roll greater than 2000, n = 3]
15.
A framework [or simple model] for
evaluating practicum
Process of developing research questions
revealed teacher educators involved had no
means of knowing what PSTs gained from
practicum - yet
• PSTs spending 44% time on practicum
• university paying relatively large sums to host
schools, but with no evaluation of outcomes
Resulted in design of framework/model for
evaluating practicum as an opportunity for PSTs
to learn to teach
16.
Incorporated within this model:
• the criteria associated with opportunities to learn
(Berliner, 1987, 1990), and
• the values of “Model II” dialogue (Argyris and
Schon, 1974)
• Factors connected with cognitive & affective
engagement with teaching (Borko and Mayfield,
1995, Beck and Kosnik, 2001)
Reflected in two dimensions: a task dimension
and a relational dimension
17.
Features of a high quality
opportunity to learn to teach:
Task dimension:
Criterion 1: Opportunities to teach & to
observe cooperating teacher [CT] teaching
and reflecting on own practice.
Criterion 2: Shared planning of outcomes,
resources & aligned pedagogy.
Criterion 3: Provision of quality feedback
which is evidence based, critically
constructive and sufficiently regular.
18.
Features of a ‘high quality’ opportunity to
learn to teach, continued:
Relational dimension:
Criterion 1: High mutual empathy
Criterion 2: Openness of CT & PST to
learning from one another.
Criterion 3: The CT and PST engage in
disclosure and checking of assumptions,
expectations and reactions.
19.
Mentoring practices in relation to
this framework/model
• When framework applied to mentoring
PSTs experienced, it was evident that
practicum was a very variable experience.
• Fewer than 25% of PSTs in the sample
enjoyed a ‘high quality’ opportunity to learn
to teach.
20.
Espoused practices of CTs:
1. Planned with the PST in preparation for
teaching
2. Modeled teaching for the PST and
articulated their own practice.
3. Observed the PST teach and provided
feedback after
4. Stated their expectations and familiarized
their PST with their programme
21.
Actual practices as reported by PSTs
• Minority [9/32] CTs stated expectations, few
made PST fully familiar with programme & very
few gave any idea of where proposed lessons
fitted.
• Accessibility meant different things to CT and
PST. 15/32 met regularly, only 3 of 15 gave a
set period each week
• 28/32 observed most teaching, half gave some
written feedback- “unevenly distributed”- and
absence of focus on learning
• Very little time given to chatting about teaching –
“they’re so busy”
22.
Other findings:
• Cooperating teachers [CTs] motivated to work
with PSTs from sense of goodwill to profession
“Someone once did this for me”.
• CTs espoused practices, which if implemented
would assist PSTs learn to teach, however,
• The reality – a combination of factors, including
an absence of time or preparation for the role,
undermines good intentions.
23.
The framework/model applied to
two mentoring relationships
• PST Kate
• A tale involving the worst of times,
fortunately followed by the best of times….
• Cooperating teacher: practicum 1 Rose
• Cooperating teacher: practicum 2 Sam
24.
Cooperating teacher Rose
• Year 3 teacher [ teaching 2 years 4 months
when Kate arrived]
“as crazy as it sounds, I’m a senior teacher here”.
• Motivated by belief own training so recent she
could help a PST
• Recalled own training as inadequate “not
enough practical stuff at TCOL”
• Took on two PSTs simultaneously
• Kate allocated to her for 4 hours per week.
25.
Practicum 1: a story of mounting
tension
• Non-compliant PST [Kate],
• CT under stress, absence of support in a
department under stress
• proximity of own training of little use,
• absence of “wisdom” to fall back on?
“my partner and I have a young family and
are renovating a house and are working
full-time” Rose, year 3 teacher
26.
Wisdom….
A way of knowing that involves expert
knowledge at a “personal-professional,
theoretical and practical” level (Goodfellow
and Sumison, 2000, p 248)
• An alternative view? - possibly not well
enough mentored herself to learn good
practice while a PST]
27.
PST Kate’s perspective
Issues to do with:
• resourcing,
• mismatched beliefs about discipline
• Lack of credibility in feedback
• perceptions of low expectations of CT
• Absence of any sense of welcome either
in CT’s classroom or department
28.
The model applied
Task Dimension:
Criterion 1: Opportunities to teach & to observe
supervising teacher teaching and reflecting on
own practice.
Kate did observe Rose, Rose observed Kate but
provided no modelling or reflection on practice
for Kate
Criterion 2: Shared planning of outcomes,
resources & aligned pedagogy.
No real time given for this after 2 sessions.
29.
Model applied…
Task Dimension
Criterion 3: Provision of quality feedback which is
evidence based, critically constructive and
sufficiently regular.
Very little feedback, perceived by Kate to be “all
negative”
Relational dimension: Criterion 1: High mutual
empathy- Kate felt unwelcome, CT frustrated,
little time spent together and high level of
tension developed between CT and PST
30.
Model applied…..
Relational dimension continued:
Criterion 2: Openness of CT & PST to learning
from one another – Kate identified those
practices of Rose’s she felt she could work with.
Criterion 3: The CT and PST engage in disclosure
and checking of assumptions, expectations and
reactions – no checking of expectations or
assumptions and no discussion of points of
difference.
31.
With hindsight
Context worked against Rose:
• i.e department under stress- understaffed,
morale low, moving into new national
assessment and qualification with
unwilling Head of Department.
• Coordinator [liaison between university &
school] ill- no one to turn to for advice
• Own resources & experience insufficient
32.
Practicum 2: A story of development
with a positive outcome
Kate now a little older and wiser & context
changes.
33.
After a lesson in which the kids weren’t that interested
and were mucking around, Sam asked me “why do you
think they weren’t engaged with this, What do you think
you could have changed to make this more interesting
for them? Is there a different approach you could have
made with the same material?”, that kind of stuff, which
was really good because it made me think, “well,
maybe it’s not the lesson that’s totally crap, but the
way I approached it” or “maybe the lesson was bad
and the approach was OK”. I had to kind of think, “well,
which is it?” (Interview with pre-service teacher Kate)
34.
Cooperating teacher Sam
• In 10th year of teaching
• Management units as assistant HoD
• Kate with him TWO classes per week [8
hours] + form class [15 minutes daily]
• Allocated one period a week to meet with
Kate for planning, feedback etc
• Co-leader of a small and welcoming
department – worked closely together.
35.
Differences in beliefs & practices of
cooperating teachers Rose & Sam
Differences in key aspects:
• in belief about place of ‘theory”
• in provision of opportunities for shared planning
• in provision of quality feedback
• in level of welcome
• in openness to learning
• in extent to which inquiry and reflection were
promoted
(And of course, in the context – their departments
provided very different models of working)
36.
Characteristics of departments
providing ‘high quality’ opportunities
for PSTs to learn to teach
• Extended a warm welcome to PSTs
• Placed great emphasis on collegiality and
demonstrated it in practice
• Engaged in extensive professional
development including regular meetings
• Smaller to medium sized
• Two providing consistently positive experience
for PSTs had commitment to mixed-ability
teaching
37.
Possible reasons for the gap between
espoused and actual practices
1. Expectations not explicitly conveyed by
the university [especially in relation to
mentoring]
2. Mentoring PSTs is of necessity a low
priority in schools
3. CTs hold variable beliefs about teaching
and learning
4. Absence of preparation and time
allowance for the role
38.
The importance of good
cooperating teachers or mentors….
“Given that our student teachers are going
to be our future colleagues in the teaching
profession, every attempt should be made
to ensure that practicum advisors are not
only the very best people available for that
task but well prepared to undertake that
task” (Clarke, 1997, p. 168).
39.
Some helpful views of mentoring
• Mentor as “teacher educator” (Feiman-
Nemser, 1998)
• Providing “educative mentoring” (Feiman-
Nemser, 2001)
• Mentor as “coach and co-inquirer”
(Maynard and Furlong, 1993)
40.
Mentoring: a definition.
• A nurturing process in which a more skilled or a
more experienced person, serving as a role
model, teaches, sponsors, encourages,
counsels and befriends a less skilled or
experienced person for the purpose of promoting
the latter’s professional and/or personal
development. Mentoring functions are carried
out within the context of an ongoing, caring
relationship between the mentor and protégé
(Anderson and Shannon, 1988, p.40).
41.
“The tools of mentoring – observation, co-
planning, co-teaching, joint inquiry, critical
conversation and reflection – are also the
tools of continuous improvement in
teaching” (Feiman-Nemser, 1998, p. 73).
42.
Some thoughts at the conclusion of
the study………………
• Voluntarism may have served well in the past
but current conceptions of mentoring exceed
what might be asked or expected of a volunteer
• Grace & favour, hands up, any warm body and
baptism by fire have all had their day – but
change will not happen without enhanced central
resourcing
• Professional goodwill is neither an infinite
resource nor an appropriate one on which to
base a role as significant as that of supervising
teacher/mentor.
43.
References
Anderson, E., & Shannon, A. (1988). Towards a Conceptualization of
Mentoring. Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 38-42.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in Practice (1st ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2000). Associate teachers in pre-service
education: Clarifying and enhancing their role. Journal of Education
for Teaching, 26(3), 207-224.
Berliner, D. C. (1987). Simple views of effective teaching and a simple
theory of classroom instruction. In D. C. Berliner & B. Rosenshine
(Eds.), Talks to teachers (pp. 93-110). New York: Random House.
44.
Berliner, D. C. (1990). What's All the Fuss About Instructional Time? In
The Nature of Time in Schools: Theoretical Concepts, Practitioner
Perceptions. New York and London: Teachers College Press,
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Borko, H., & Mayfield, V. (1995). The roles of cooperating teacher and
university supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 501-518
Britzman, D. P. (1986). Cultural Myths in the Making of a Teacher.
Harvard Educational Review, 56(4), 442-456.
Clarke, A. (1997). Advisor as Coach. In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.),
Teaching About Teaching. London: Falmer.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1998). Teachers as Teacher Educators. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 21(1), 63-74.
45.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001a). From Preparation to Practice: Designing a
Continuum to Strengthen and Sustain Teaching. Teachers College
Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
Goodfellow, J., & Sumsion, J. (2000). Transformative Pathways: Field-
based teacher educators' perceptions. Journal of Education for
Teaching, 26(3), 245-257.
Maynard, T., & Furlong, J. (1993). Learning to Teach and Models of
Mentoring. In D. McIntyre, H. Hagger & M. Wilkin (Eds.), Mentoring:
Perspectives on School-Based Teacher Education (pp. 69-85).
London: Kogan Page.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of
the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological
perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 130-
178.
+1 214-227-7369
+91 73473-34050 
