School practicum is an essential component of teacher training and is important for developing preservice teacher’s professional teacher identity (Alves et al., 2019; Fuentes-Abeledo et al., 2020; Standal & Moen, 2017). Internationally school practicum has been a subject for research in a number of countries over several decades. Overall, research has documented that practicum is not beneficial in and of itself – the pedagogical value of school practicum is not only depended on the content, structure and how it is carried out in relation to the overall program, but also depending on how the preservice teachers have been prepared for learning (Fuentes-Abeledo et al., 2020). Furthermore, research has documented that they experience a ‘gap’ between the University-based portion of their teacher education and school practicum (e.g., Ottesen, 2007), and that preservice teachers often have unrealistic expectations about school practicum (Alves et al., 2019). While González-Calvo et al. (2020) highlights that preservice teachers are in a vulnerable position given that they are uncertain of their professional subjectivities and future careers.

In Norway there is little research on the school practicum part of physical education teacher education (PETE). However, Moen and Standal (2014); and Standal and Moen (2017) draw their attention to preservice teachers practicum in PETE in Norway. Their focus has been on the preservice teachers learning in and through practicum, and similar to previous studies, they highlight that the preservice teachers’ experiences that the PETE educators occupied a relatively distant role during their school practicum (Moen & Standal, 2014; Mordal-Moen & Green, 2012; Standal & Moen, 2017).

The importance of professional identity for teachers has been widely acknowledged, and Alves et al. (2019) highlight that challenging emotions during school practicum have a deep impact on the preservice teachers construction of a professional teacher identity. Developing a professional PE teacher identity is complex, consisting of what others think or say, as well as how we see ourselves and our capacity to reflect upon our experiences (Luguettia & Oliver, 2018). Oliver and Oesterreich (2013) highlights the importance of providing preservice teachers space to debrief. Debriefing involves the preservice teachers reflect and discuss their lived experiences with teaching with respect to the curriculum and pedagogy. Furthermore, it involves reflection upon what facilitates/hinders their interests, motivation and learning during school practicum. This is in line with student-centered approaches to teaching in PE and PETE, which is our main focus throughout this project.

In this project we have followed the preservice teachers closely during their three-week school practicum. This has not only given us valuable knowledge about how they perceive this mandatory part of their education, but also facilitated a deeper understanding of how we – as PETE educators, facilitates for the preservice teacher’s motivation, learning and interest as they enter school practicum. Drawing on the preservice teachers experiences from school practicum; the purpose of this study has been to examine how they use school practicum as an opportunity to develop their professional teacher identity. Our goal has been to prompt further debate and discussion about how the PETE program support the preservice teachers experiences of school practicum and by drawing on Oliver and Oesterreich (2013) how a student-centered approach in PETE can contribute to developing the preservice teachers professional identity.

This paper presents findings from a larger study that investigates preservice teachers’ teachings during school practicum at a university in Norway. In this article we draw on the preservice teachers’ perceptions and experiences. The preservice teachers school practicum is organized into three-weeks periods with the preservice teachers being full time at the university studying pedagogic, didactics, and other subjects before they go into schools to practice their teaching full time. During school practicum, preservice teachers are supervised by a mentor teacher, who also oversee their lesson plans. The practicum we planned to study took place early in the fall semester. The preservice teachers were in their fifth semester of a five-year general teacher education program for the secondary level (age group 10-15). Hence, they had already finished four school practicum periods (5 days observation practicum and 30 days teaching practicum). Ten preservice teachers – 6 male and 4 female – volunteered to participate in the study. These students chose PE as one of three specialization subjects, which was a part of their practicum teaching both in spring and autumn that year. The preservice teachers were organized in groups of three to four and had their school practicum at three different secondary schools. We assigned one to two researchers to observe the preservice teachers teaching at each school. Data material consists of researchers’ observational notes, preservice teachers’ written self-assessment tasks, and their daily lesson plans. A thematic analysis was used in a process of constant comparison. The first step was for the researchers to independently read and re-read all the material while jotting down what caught their attention. The next step was to meet and discuss the analysis. In this process, some categories were omitted, and others became more refined. Our discussions facilitated a deeper understanding of preservice teachers experiences in school practicum as well as our own pedagogy and educational program. Voluntary participation is complicated in studies where the researchers intervene in education. The school practicum was a compulsory part of the education program, but the preservice teachers could choose not to be a part of the research study without any consequences.

Following preservice teachers during their school practicum gave us valuable insight into how they engage with this mandatory part of their education. The study indicates that preservice teachers were not sufficiently prepared for their school practicum. Furthermore, in line with earlier research, the PETE program leaves the responsibility of what the preservice teachers experience during practicum to the mentor teachers. This makes preservice teachers mainly dependent on the mentor teacher to reflect upon their experiences and maintains the gap between the university-based portion of their teacher education and school practicum. In many ways we see the school practicum as an untapped potential to develop the preservice teachers’ professional identities as PE teachers and challenging the status quo of PE and PETE. Even though the preservice teachers in this project had limited pedagogical experiences with PE, we agree with earlier research (Moen & Standal, 2014; Standal & Moen, 2017) that more can be done to assist the preservice teachers on their course to becoming PE teachers. Analyzing the data has contributed to discussions and reflections regarding our own PETE program and teachings, making us realize that a more student-centered approach to PETE would facilitates for bringing together the university-based teaching with school practicum. We argue for the value of involving the preservice teachers in planning the goals for their school practicum by identifying what facilitates their interests, motivation and learning in order to construct their professional identity. Essential would be to work together with the preservice teachers as they prepare themselves to school practicum, followed up by debriefing sessions with PETE tutors, as well as written reflections about their own development as future teachers. We believe that there is a need to adopt a student-centered approach to PETE and school practicum to support the preservice teacher’s construction of a professional identity.

Alves, M., Macphail, A., Queirós, P., & Batista, P. (2019). Becoming a physical education teacher during formalised school placement: A rollercoaster of emotions. European Physical Education Review, 25(3), 893-909. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x18785333 Fuentes-Abeledo, E.-J., González-Sanmamed, M., Muñoz-Carril, P.-C., & Veiga-Rio, E.-J. (2020). Teacher training and learning to teach: an analysis of tasks in the practicum. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 333-351. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1748595 González-Calvo, G., Varea, V., & Martínez-Álvarez, L. (2020). ‘I feel, therefore I am’: unpacking preservice physical education teachers’ emotions. Sport, Education and Society, 25(5), 543-555. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2019.1620202 Luguettia, C., & Oliver, K. L. (2018). 'Getting more comfortable in an uncomfortable space’: Learning to become an activist researcher in a socially vulnerable sport context. Sport, Education and Society, 23(9), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2017.1290598 Moen, K. M., & Standal, Ø. F. (2014). Student teachers’ perceptions of the practicum in physical education teacher education in Norway. Nordic Studies in Education, 34(2), 111-126. https://doi.org/doi:10.18261/ISSN1891-5949-2014-02-04 Mordal-Moen, K., & Green, K. (2012). Physical education teacher education in Norway: the perceptions of student teachers. Sport, Education and Society, 19(6), 806-823. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2012.719867 Oliver, K. L., & Oesterreich, H. A. (2013). Student-centred inquiry as curriculum as a model for field-based teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(3), 394-417. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.719550 Standal, Ø. F., & Moen, K. M. (2017). Praksisopplæring i kroppsøvingslærar- og idrettsutdanningar: 3 utfordringar for framtidig fagutvikling. Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education, 1(0). https://doi.org/10.23865/jased.v1.562