The Value of Professional Inquiry In Subject Departments To Enhance Beginning Teachers’ Learning: Bridging The Theory-practice Divide
Author(s):
Ann Childs (presenting / submitting) Jane McNicholl (presenting)
Conference:
ECER 2014
Format:
Paper

Session Information

10 SES 03 D, Learning to Teach: Identity, Inquiry, Agency

Paper Session

Time:
2014-09-02
17:15-18:45
Room:
B228 Sala de Aulas
Chair:
Rasa Nedzinskaitė

Contribution

This research looks at the issues and challenges in introducing an innovative approach to initial teacher education (ITE) based on the Developing English Teaching and Internship Learning (DETAIL) project (Ellis, 2008). The participants were six school mentors (all experienced science teachers), two university tutors and six student science teachers. The student teachers were placed in a single science department in one secondary school for eight months. Although placing six students in one subject department was unusual, it was the engagement by all participants in a piece of professional inquiry that was the major innovation. The main purposes for this professional inquiry were to meet the professional development needs of the department, to further enhance the ways in which the ITE partnership used research informed approaches and to support the student teachers’ professional learning. It was also envisaged that other members of the science department would be able to participate and benefit from this initiative.

We will use two theoretical ideas in analysing and understanding our findings. Firstly, our previous research (see for example McNicholl, Childs and Burn, 2013) has focused on how teachers learn collaboratively from each other in subject departments. The trialing of this innovation builds on this research by developing a programme of ITE which facilitates collaboration more systematically through a programme of professional inquiry involving the whole department. Here we will draw on theoretical perspectives from Lave (1998) whose cultural analysis of cognition in everyday interactions and practices showed that cognition is ‘distributed – stretched over, not divided among – mind, body, activity and culturally organised settings (which include other actors) (Lave, 1988, p.1). Our first research question is

  1. How is expertise distributed and shared amongst student teachers, teachers and university tutors in the Internship Development Project (IDP)? What facilitates and constrains this process?

 Secondly, the literature in teacher education internationally frequently focuses on the tensions between theory and practice in ITE (see for example Korthagen and Kessels, 1999; Nuthall, 2004) . Within the current Oxford Internship Scheme this is resolved by recognising the distinctive expertise that the school and university partners bring to ITE for example ‘the mentor is primarily required to discuss suggestions for practice in the context of their school’ whilst the university tutor’s role is ‘to introduce them [the student teachers] in a systematic, rigorous and rational way to theoretical arguments’ (Hayward, 1997, p. 20). The student teachers take the more decontextualised and theoretical ideas from the university with the contextualised ideas from school and these are tested against each other in a dialectical approach called practical theorizing; the role of the student teacher being ‘to understand, to theorise about, and most especially to evaluate the various suggestions for practice’ (McIntyre 1993, p. 49). There have been criticisms of the internship model (see for example Furlong and Maynard, 1995 and Ellis, 2010) and one criticism, particularly relevant for this research, is that practical theorising puts too greater demand on the individual inexperienced student teacher. As Furlong and Maynard say:  

With a kind of postmodernist relativist, the Oxford scheme leaves it to the student to make up his or her own mind about what are appropriate forms of practice (p.50)

We are hoping that a more shared and collaborative approach that includes the whole department may help address this particular criticism, the intention being that this model and its more systematic sharing of the expertise distributed in the school and university will enhance the student teachers’ ability to engage in practical theorizing. This leads to our second research question:

  1. How does the IDP enhance and/or constrain student teachers’ ability to engage in practical theorising?

Method

This was an explorative study into the introduction of a new model of ITE and therefore we adopted a qualitative methodology which consisted of a number of ways of collecting data: 1. Field notes were kept by the university tutor who led the project. These notes consisted of recording: i. any issues and challenges arising from meetings with the student teachers. In the period from September to December the group met regularly at the university and in school to discuss any issues and challenges they were facing; ii. any issues and challenges faced by the school mentors in setting up and maintaining the project. 2. Assessment of the student teachers: i. the students teachers’ assignments reporting the findings from their involvement in the professional inquiry project; ii. university tutors’ reports of the discussions between mentor, student teacher and university tutors summarising student teachers’ progress in December, February and March. 3. Interviews at the end of the project with the student teachers, mentors and university tutors to explore their experiences of the IDP including what issues and challenges they faced in setting up and sustaining the project, the benefits of the project and how the different partners worked together and shared their expertise. Analysis is ongoing but began with descriptive coding of the interviews by the two university tutors focusing on answering the research questions. After this coding is complete then the themes that emerge will be used to analyse and interrogate the other data listed above. For example, in the meetings in September some of the student teachers expressed their concerns that their involvement in the IDP meant that they would be doing relatively more team teaching and less independent whole class teaching, consequently hindering their ability to learn to be excellent teachers. However, our analysis of the interview data collected in the following May/June showed that this concern had been reduced considerably; therefore our intention is to return to the data and interrogate it in order to look at the reasons why these concerns had lessened during the course of the IDP. We will use this approach with other themes that emerge from the interviews in relation to our key research questions.

Expected Outcomes

Initial analysis of the interview data (first research question) shows that the professional inquiry project was perceived to be a very effective means of drawing on the distinctive expertise offered by each group of participants. For example, the head of department and lead mentor clearly identified that the area of development for the science department and the university tutors were able to use their expertise in research to design and train the student teachers to carry out the professional inquiry. In addition, the findings from the project allowed the science department to design specific interventions with Year10 to address the issues and challenges identified in the professional inquiry. The analysis of the data shows that a key issue that facilitated this process was that in placing six student teachers in one department meant that the university tutors spent much more time in school working with mentors and student teachers supporting the professional inquiry project and in liaising and supporting the student teachers’ professional learning. However, a key constraint was a delay in the department responding to the findings meaning that the student teachers were unable to participate in the intervention phase of the professional inquiry project because they had moved schools. For the second research question initial analysis of the interview data shows that despite being unable to see the professional inquiry through, the student teachers perceived that they had benefitted significantly from it. Such benefits included the chance to work together with university tutors to develop research skills, knowledge of the literature in the field of motivation and knowledge of young peoples’ perspectives on learning. Later analysis of the assignments will show how effectively all of this was brought together in the process of practical theorizing.

References

Ellis, V. (2008) Exploring the Contradictions in learning to Teach: The Potential of Developmental Work Research. Changing English, 15(1) pp. 53-63 Ellis V. (2010) Impoverishing experience: the problem of teacher education in England, Journal of Education for Teaching, 36(1) pp 105-120 Furlong J. and Maynard, T. (1995) Mentoring Student Teachers: the growth of professional knowledge. London: Routledge. Hayward, G. (1997) Principles for school focused initial teacher education: some lessons from the Oxford Internship Scheme. In T. Allsop and A. Benson (eds.) Mentoring for science teachers. Buckingham: Oxford University Press. Korthagen, F. and Kressels, J.(1999) Linking Theory and Practice: Changing the Pedagogy of Teacher Education. Educational Researcher, 28 (4) pp. 4-17 Lave, J.(1998) Cognition in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press McIntyre, D. (1993) Theory, theorizing and reflection in initial teacher education. In J. Calderhead and P. Gates (eds) Conceptualizing Reflection in Teacher Development. London: Falmer Press McNicholl, J., Childs, A. Burn, K. (2013) School subject departments as sites for science teachers learning pedagogical content knowledge. Teacher Development, 17, 2, pp. 155–175 Nuthall, G. (2004) Relating Classroom Teaching to Student Learning: A Critical Analysis of Why Research has Failed to Bridge the Theory-Practice Gap. Harvard educational Review, 74(3) pp. 273-306

Author Information

Ann Childs (presenting / submitting)
University of Oxford
Education
Oxford
Jane McNicholl (presenting)
University of Oxford
Oxford

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.