There is agreement in the research literature that the Practicum is a major component in education of teachers (Smith & Lev-Ari, 2005; Leshem & Bar Hama, 2008).). Tillema (2007) calls it the core of the teacher education program, and Graham (2006) claims that it is an important rite of passage in a teacher’s career. However, as important as the practicum is, there are still several problems related to assessing candidates’ performance during the Practicum. Smith (2007) discusses the many challenges assessors meet and she suggests a process for empowering all actors in the practice triad, student teachers, mentors and university supervisors, in assessment, in order to improve the quality of assessment during the Practicum. Leshem& Bar Hama (2008) reveal the internal paradoxes which assessment of quality teaching entails. Tillema & Smith (2009) found that all parties involved in the process agree that assessment for learning plays a major role during students’ teaching practice. This role is mainly to enhance students’ continuous learning, development and professional growth. Several researchers (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Shute, 2008; Sadler, 2009) argue that in relation to formative assessment, the quality of feedback the learner receives is a core factor in promoting learning. During the Practicum, it is mainly the mentor the candidates are looking to for feedback, the type of feedback which can take them forward, feed forward (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Moreover, Timperley (2001) claims that school-based mentors have unique opportunities to promote professional learning in their interactions with the students during the Practicum. Although there seems to be wide agreement on the role of assessment in mentoring it is an open issue still how perceptions of mentors and mentee differ across contexts An international comparative research project between a Norwegian, Israeli and Dutch teacher education program examined how student teachers and school-based mentors perceive good mentoring in regard to assessment of practice teaching. The study looks into the interplay between two processes: How student teachers and mentors perceive 'good assessement’ and the extent of agreement between student teachers and their mentors in the assessment process. The primary research question asked is the extent of agreement in assessment of the Practicum (teaching performance and quality of mentoring) between mentors and candidates in the three different contexts. In the current paper the main focus is on the perception of mentoring.

Graham, B. (2006). Condition for successful field experiences: perceptions of cooperating teachers Teaching and Teacher Education 22 ,1118-1129. Hattie, J. & Timperley H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), 81-112. Leshem, S. Bar-Hama R. 2008. Evaluating teaching practice. ELT, 62,3 257-265. Sadler, D. R. (2009). Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34: 159-179. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78: 153-188. Smith, K. & Lev-Ari, L. (2005). The Place of Practicum in pre-service teacher education. Asian Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(3), 289-302. Smith, K. (2007. Empowering School- and University- Based Teacher Educators as Assessors: A School-University Cooperation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13 (3), 279-293. Tillema, H. & Smith, K. (2009). Assessment Orientation to Formative Assessment of Learning to Teach Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice Vol. 15, No. 3, July 2009, 389–402. Tillema, H.H. (2007). Authenticity in Knowledge Productive Learning of Teams. In Munthe, E. & Zellermayer, M. (Eds.) Teachers Learning in Communities, international perspectives (pp.27-45). Sense Publishers: Rotterdam Timperley, H. (2001). Mentoring conversations designed to promote student teacher learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 29 (2), 11-123.