Improvisation, A Tool For Building A Bridge Between Theory And Practice In Teacher Education?

Author(s):

Knut Steinar Engelsen(presenting / submitting)Marit Kulild(presenting)

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

10. Teacher Education Research

Format:

Paper

Session Information

10 SES 13 A, Professional Development and Dialogue

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-25

13:30-15:00

Room:

K5.18

Chair:

Sandra Girbés-Peco

Contribution

This presentation is examining improvisation as a phenomenon within the context of Teacher Education.

Improvisation in teaching contexts is defined as knowing how to act in immediate situations that occur in the classroom (Mason & Spence, 1999, p. 2). Improvisation is about being present in class, to dare to step out of the write-down plan for the lesson based on input from students, in order to achieve better outcomes for the collective (Wiliam, 2014, p. 7). The best way to learn this is by building a rich variety of experiences, a repertoire (Mason & Spence, 1999, p. 5).
The research literature on improvisation in higher education connected to music, dance, drama and organizational theory is rich (Alterhaug, 2004; Sawyer, 2011). Sawyer argues that improvisation should be acted upon as a natural part of the Teacher Education curriculum and practice. As a teacher, you have to balance between planned and improvised activities (Dezutter, 2011 p. 27-34). Sawyer uses the phrase “disciplined improvisation” when describing what characterizes a teaching sequence. The systematic and planned teaching sequences has naturally been (disciplined), but at the same time there should be room for spontaneity (improvisation) that always occurs in the meeting between the students and the subject (Sawyer, 2011, p. 14). Teaching sequences should be planned in such a manner that it opens up for spontaneous proposals related to a topic within a subject. Sawyer claims that the art of good teaching is about balancing structure and improvisation, and that the best teaching is based on disciplined improvisation because this always happens within spacious structures and frameworks. Class management involves both structure, the development of sustainable relations with students and facilitating a high learning pressure through student participation.
Alterhaug (2004) and Jarning (2006) draw parallels between improvisation skills in teaching and in jazz music. In the musical meetings improvisations happens on themes that are known and proven. They both points out that great jazz improvisations always is aware of a common repertoire that has been the subject of practice over time. Transferred to our context it will be a current goal to recognize that improvisation activity also is important and inevitable within a variety of contexts that requires training and practice (Alterhaug, 2004, p. 98). A trained and familiar repertoire for a teacher or a student teacher requires practice and can then serve as a basis for dynamic interactions in the classroom (Dezutter, 2011).
Shulman (1986, p. 14) defines the repertoire as the teacher's total arsenal of resources. It consists of various forms of representations arising both from research and from cleverness learned and developed through practice. An experienced teacher is through education and experience gained various types of repertoire. In lesson planning the experienced teacher disposes a comprehensive didactic repertoire. In the relational encounter with the learners, she also has a rich repertoire to take off. In addition, the experienced teacher has gained an educational and academic content understanding through education and work with subjects, and she knows how the teaching meets the pupil where it is and can plan so that there is room for student input (Shulman, 1986). A spacious structure of teaching gives the teacher the opportunity to develop a classroom environment that encourages taking risks (Dezutter, 2011).

During a period of four semesters, a group of students has studied, rehearsed and reflected upon various aspects of improvisation related to the subject “pedagogy and pupil knowledge”. In order to investigate the impact on the student teachers a qualitative inquiry has been conducted.

The research question is: How is improvisation used as a concept in
teacher students reflections on own practical experiences?

Method

The article is based on a semi structured (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015, p. 49) focus group interview with a sample of five students, conducted in their second year as students. In addition, observations from practice and the student's own reflection notes are used to underpin the credibility of the data that appears in the interview. Before the interview the respondents got an information sheet on the topic and the purpose of the call. The aim of the conversation was to gather the students’ descriptions and interpretations of the phenomenon studied (Kvale, 2009). The informants showed commitment and willingly shared their experiences and reflections. This way we got insight into how improvisation was used and reflected upon. The five informants were selected by the following criteria: 1) The informant should represent the various practice schools. Sharing experience and reflection from informants across practice schools secured a breadth of experience of the phenomenon. 2) The informants volunteered to the interview. The interview was audio recorded and later transcribed and used as data for analysis. In the analysis of the interview we have sought to distance ourselves from the material by systematic categorization and condensation of meaning, but in both coding and analysis the interpretations will be colored by our understanding of the phenomenon studied. The transcribed interview was analyzed by the use of Hyper Research. In the first phase of the analysis, we used the tool "word counter" in order to get an overview of the concepts that had the highest frequency in the interview. The next phase of the analysis was an open coding of the data where we broke down and examined and categorized the data. The goal was to develop categories that caught the experiences described by interviewees in the best possible way (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2015, p. 226 ff). These categories became in the final phase the basis for a more focused coding (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2015; Postholm, 2010) of the material in order to identify some core categories, giving the starting point and basis for interpretations of the students statements. The four categories were elaborated during discovery and discussion. We have chosen to treat the findings and discussion as a whole. This choice has been made in order to achieve a closeness and coherence between student voices in the focus group interview on one side and the discussion and the findings on the other.

Expected Outcomes

Knowledge on improvisation seems to make sense for the students. They talk about improvisation in close connection their work in practice. They use repertoire as the basis for their concretization of the phenomenon, and that it has a practical side where try outs both in the University College and in the classrooms, enable them to manage and develop improvisational skills. An interesting aspect is that the informants in most cases explain improvisation by using examples from theory or own experiences from their practicum, "here and now situation" which is essential for the disciplined improvisation. They claim that being present and in dialogue with the pupils enable them to take the pupils perspective in the school situation. Further, our analysis shows that repertoire seems to be a meaningful concept when it comes to developing students' understanding of what improvisation in teaching is all about, and what assumptions underlie productive improvisation in practice. Awareness and training on repertoire seems meaningful to student teachers when it is embedded into an authentic teaching discourse. They claim that exercises were they gain an awareness of repertoire enable them to plan for improvisational meetings with the pupils, and that they have learned to listen actively to the pupils. Several places in the interview they emphasize that they adjust their teaching based on input from pupils. Working with improvisation in Teacher Education is not a magic formula for the students becoming experienced teachers. However, the interview reveals a large degree of consciousness about what characterize the profession, and it seems to contribute in making them safe in the teacher role. Our conclusion is that working consciously with improvisation in teacher education can function as a positive contribution to the students' development of professional understanding and the development of action competence and confidence in meeting with students.

References

Alterhaug, B. (2004). Improvisation on a triple theme: Creativity, jazz improvisation and communication. Studia Musicologica Norvegica, 30(3), 97-117. Dezutter, S. (2011). Professional improvisation and teacher education: Opening the conversation. Structure and Improvisation in Creative Teaching, 27-50. Holdhus, K., Høisæter, S., Mæland, K., Vangsnes, V., Engelsen, K. S., Espeland, M., & Espeland, Å. (2016). Improvisation in teaching and education—roots and applications. Cogent Education, 3(1). doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1204142 Jarning, H. (2006). Dewey square: Lærerarbeid, didaktikk og improvisation. I: K. Steinsholt & H. Sommerro (red.). Improvisasjon. Kunsten Å Sette Seg Selv På Spill. Oslo: N.W. DAMM & SØN AS. Kvale, S. (2015). I S. Brinkmann, T. M. Anderssen & J. Rygge (red.), Det kvalitative forskningsintervju (3. utg., 2. oppl. ed.). Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk. Mason, J., & Spence, M. (1999). Beyond mere knowledge of mathematics: The importance of knowing-to act in the moment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38(1-3), 135-161. Postholm, M. B. (2010). Kvalitativ metode: en innføring med fokus på fenomenologi, etnografi og kasusstudier (2. utg. ed.). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Sawyer, R. K. (2011). Structure and improvisation in creative teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Sorensen, N. T. (2014). Improvisation and Teacher Expertise: A Comparative Case Study. Van Manen, M. (1993). I K. M. Thorbjørnsen (red.), Pedagogisk takt: Betydningen av pedagogisk omtenksomhet. Nordås: Caspar forl. og kursvirksomhet. Wiliam, D. (2014). Formative assessment and contingency in the regulation of learning processes. Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia, PA.

Author Information

Knut Steinar Engelsen (presenting / submitting)

Western Norway University of Applied Sciences

ALK

Bergen

Marit Kulild (presenting)

Høgskulen på Vestlandet

Stord

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 you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.