Daniel J. Bergman,
The purpose of this
study is to examine the transitional nature of the student teaching
experience. What concerns and influences
do student teachers encounter as they make their way through this change
process? In particular, what do they
face when implementing research-based instruction?
Two
preservice science teachers were followed throughout their student teaching
semester. Several important
generalizations about the student teaching experience emerged. These include the sequence, amount, and
nature of field experiences in the school setting. Teacher educators must examine quality and
quantity of current practicum requirements.
Other topics of interest are factors that help student teachers survive
and succeed in the experience. Personal traits such as perspective, healthy
humor, and passion provide internal equilibrium during the student teaching
experience. Teacher educators would be
wise to consider this aspect of education.
How do they promote these attributes and acquaintances in their
pre-service students’ lives?
This
study examines a critical issue to science education – the teacher’s transition
from college student to professional educator.
It promotes dialogue about crucial influences in the success of
pre-service and beginning science teachers.
It raises questions for future research and consideration.
Introduction
It
is a common conclusion that the first year of a teacher’s career is always the
toughest. A close second-place for
difficulty is the student teaching experience.
Pre-service teachers change roles from usually passive student to an
active decision-maker. Munby and Russell
(1993) describe this uneasy shift as “a transition from being under authority
to being in authority” (p. 9).
Student
teaching is a subject of ample research investigations. Studies have examined a variety of factors
and influences on the pre-service experience.
Even before the actual student teaching semester, the sequence and
schedule of science methods courses impact the practicum experience (Crowther
& Cannon, 1998; Kelly & Dietrich, 1995). Teacher educators significantly influence the
views of their pre-service teachers concerning areas such as respecting
students, modeling effective teaching, and being active professionals (Bell,
1999). Peer supervision can also have
noteworthy impact on student teachers’ development (Caruso, 1993).
A
primary factor in the student teacher’s experience is the cooperating teacher
(Kelly & Dietrich, 1995; Talvitie, Peltokallio, & Mannisto, 2000). Cooperating teachers influence student
teacher development with respect to pedagogical knowledge (Graber, 1995),
verbal interaction patterns (McLeod, 1967), instructional activities (Sagness,
1970), beliefs related to behaviorist and constructivist learning theories
(Woolley, Woolley, & Hosey, 1999), and initial professional socialization
experiences (Su, 1992). Teacher educators
value cooperating teachers’ evaluations and input when determining final grades
for student teachers (Baker & Hedges, 1991). In turn, cooperating teachers benefit
professionally through the collaboration with student teachers (Koskela &
Ganser, 1995; Lemlech & Hertzog, 1999).
Koskela
and Ganser (1995) report that cooperating teachers often express uncertainty
about their particular role in working with student teachers. Varied expectations and deficient
communication among the university instructor and supervisor, cooperating
teacher and student teacher are common obstacles to successful student teaching
placements (Kauffman, 1992).
Communication is a determining factor for the success of a student
teaching experience (Coulon, 1994; Talvitie, Peltokallio, & Mannisto,
2000).
Potentially
harmful trials arise when student teachers attempt to incorporate
research-based, or “reform”-oriented instruction during their experiences. Particularly, this occurs when the student
teacher finds a lack of support in his or her placement. An assortment of barriers can inhibit
reform. Differing teaching philosophies
can exist between the student teacher’s placement school and the student teacher,
university methods courses and professors (Fu & Shelton, 2002; John, 2001;
Sullivan, Mousley, & Gervasioni, 2000).
Other constraints include inexperience, resistance from students, and
physical requirements such as lack of funds, storage space, and inadequate
facilities (Byrd & Doherty, 1993).
When student teachers confront barriers to reform, they face even more
challenges than simply preparing to become a teacher. This difficult change process can debilitate
beginning teachers (Abell & Roth, 1991; Thornton, 1995).
In
addition to the challenges of applying university learning toward classroom
teaching (Black, 2003), student teachers also face the challenge of becoming
active decision makers. This transition
into authority is not an easy process (Munby & Russell, 1993). Mulholland and Wallace (1999a, 1999b, 1999c)
have researched the conversion from student to teacher. Their work examines attitudes of beginning
teachers about science and their perceived ability to teach it. These studies, however, have been focused
only on elementary teachers.
Student
teachers often find themselves lost in “sea of change,” so to speak. Tides of change tug at them from every
direction. Student teachers are not
alone in this obfuscating ocean. There
are numerous objects floating and swimming by, each interacting with the
student teachers. Much as a swimmer must
deal with buoys, other swimmers, creatures of all sizes and appetites,
entangling plants, wake-trailing vessels, pollution – not to mention their own
stamina, training and skill – so too must student teachers function among an
assortment of influences. What are these
factors in the change process?
The
purpose of this study is to take a closer look at the transitional nature of
the student teaching experience. In
particular, it examines the experiences of two secondary science student
teachers. What concerns and influences
do they encounter as they make their way through this change process?
When developing a research study, Crotty (1998) notes
there are two primary questions to answer: 1) What methodologies and methods
will I use for this research? 2) How do
I justify my choices? (p. 2) This second
question refers to the epistemology – theory of knowledge – and the theoretical
perspective that frame the choice to the first question.
The
primary goal of this study is to learn about student teachers’ thoughts on the
change process from student to teacher.
Therefore, I have framed this project on an epistemology of social
constructionism. The themes that I
notice to emerge from this study are ideas formed and perceived by the
respondents, the student teachers. The
interpretivist perspective relies on examining the words and symbols used to
communicate meaning. The interpretive tradition,
as described by Smith and Heshusius (1986), posits that “social reality [is]
mind-dependent in the sense of mind-constructed” (p. 5).
My
observations and interactions with the respondents rely on interpreting the
meanings of their language and portrayal of ideas. In essence, the gathered information is a
composite of the student teachers’ own stories.
Their experiences are shaped by their individual perspectives. As researcher, I gather data through their
narratives and descriptions.
Furthermore, I take in this information through my own perspective. As I work through the process of sense
making, I reconstruct their understandings into my own words and language.
Framed
by this theoretical perspective, I have chosen to approach the study by means
of a phenomenological research methodology (Crotty, 1998). “The overall purpose is to understand
how people make sense of their lives and their experiences” (Merriam, 2002, p.
38, emphasis in original). The general
method chosen is a case study of two student teachers. This strategy affords in-depth interaction
with respondents and multiple opportunities for study. Particular practices used within the case
study are interview, observation, document analysis, and informal observation
and dialogue. I will elaborate on these
elements in the following Design and Procedures section.
Design
and Procedures
As
stated above, I employed four major components in this case study. One method was a semi-structured (or
in-depth) interview with each student teacher respondent. I composed an initial list of questions for
my interview guide (See Appendix A), but I adjusted my questions as I listened
to the respondent’s comments. These
questions were open-ended and flexible to use.
This approach was used as opposed to possibly more efficient means like
a written or emailed survey, which imposes prior construction of ideas. As Esterberg (2002) describes, “in
semi-structured interviews, the goal is to explore a topic more openly and to
allow interviewees to express their opinions and ideas in their own words” (p.
87). During these interviews, I did not
follow any predetermined script or order.
Rather, I followed the flow of the conversation and addressed questions
as they came up or related to what was said.
This less stringent approach allows the interviewee and myself to make –
or construct – meaning through our dialogue (Reinharz, 1992).
A
second method employed was observation of the student teachers working in their
classrooms. This was primarily
non-participant observation. I sat near
the rear of the classroom and to the side.
Sitting at a desk or chair, I used a laptop computer to type out
observations and comments during the class period. Since other adults such as university
supervisors of the student teachers were common visitors to the classroom, the
students seemed mostly unaware or unconcerned with my presence.
Esterberg
(2002) mentions that the research instrument in an observation setting is the
researcher. As a human instrument, I was
not able to take in every occurrence or interaction in the classroom. Since my research focus was the student
teachers’ development and experiences in change, I focused primarily on
them. During my observations, I paid
particular attention to the student teachers’ behaviors – what questions they asked,
their interactions with students, how they used students’ ideas, how they
responded to questions. I also took note
of the lesson format and approach to instruction. As I scripted the progression of the class period,
I would insert comments and questions referring to items previously discussed
in the student teachers’ science methods classes. This was helpful in framing the instruction
with respect to what the student teachers had learned through their teacher
education program.
Along
with these “formal” interviews and observations, I used informal observations
and conversations with the student teachers for data collection. I interacted with both pre-service students
on campus for two semesters during their Monday night science methods class. I sat among the students during the weekly
meetings of the class. I would
participate in the class activities, discussions, and small group
interactions. In addition to providing
moments of observation and dialogue, my hours with the student teachers helped
build trust and camaraderie. After some
classes during the semester of their student teaching (and after IRB approval),
we would remain afterwards and discuss their experiences. These communications most closely resembled
the format of an unstructured interview (Esterberg, 2002). During these informal conferences, much of my
behavior was to listen. In one instance,
Sarah shared her concerns for classroom management and motivating
students. We exchanged classroom stories
and past frustrations for 20 minutes.
Ultimately, we made a mental list of helpful ideas for intervening when
one or two students continued off-task behavior.
A
fourth method component of the case study was document analysis. Resources include university information
about the secondary science teacher program, the
In
addition to these four major data sources, I maintained a research journal
throughout the entire course of the study.
I described informal interactions with the student teachers, recorded
experiences during the study, summarized my classroom visits, described visits to
the schools, and jotted down initial thoughts and reactions to current
occurrences. This informal journaling
during field work was beneficial in organizing my thoughts, reflecting on the
study, as well as incorporating noteworthy entries into data for analysis
(Fetterman, 1989).
There is one more item I must
address with regard to the design and procedures of the study. This is the number of respondents in the case
study. I chose to work with two student
teachers as opposed to a greater number such as ten or a dozen. I made this conscious decision to allow more
time to go further in depth with both individuals. This specialized focus helped me dig deeper
into the student teachers’ experiences, feelings and reactions. If an extended time span for study were
possible, I would definitely include more student teacher respondents. This is something I will consider for future
research. As it is, the time constraints
framing this study limit the respondent number.
And despite the definite need for prolonged engagement, I believe
working with these two student teachers allowed me a substantive amount of
information to examine.
Data
Collection and Analysis
After informally observing and visiting with the student
teachers in their secondary science methods class (and before beginning any formal
research), I asked them about participating in the study. The two student teachers I approached agreed
and we set up times when I could observe their classroom teaching. Semi-structured interviews occurred after the
observations – either the afternoon after school or within the next week. During this time, I also researched public
information about the placement schools and the pre-service science education
program in which the student teachers were enrolled. After the study formally began, I started to
keep records of my informal observations and discussions with the student
teachers.
Once I
had collected a bulk of data from observation notes, interview transcripts, and
document examination, I began the analysis process. I analyzed the data and developed meanings
through an technique similar to the grounded theory approach. Grounded theory, as described by Crotty
(1998), “is a process of inductive theory building based squarely on
observation of the data themselves . . . Throughout the process, it seeks to
ensure that the theory emerging arises from the data and not from some other
source” (p. 78). Esterberg (2002) notes
that there are two general steps to this approach for analyzing transcripts:
open coding and focused coding. In the
first stage of open coding, I thoroughly reviewed the interview transcripts and
my notes. I purposefully did not start
the analysis with any preconceived or conscious expectations of the data. While open coding, I marked any ideas or
comments that seemed noteworthy. Through
this initial process, I began to notice recurring themes in the data. I then returned to the data and began focused
coding. In this second stage, I
deliberately looked for the key ideas that resurfaced multiple times. I also reviewed the literature and noticed
connections among the experiences and words of the student teacher respondents
and what was found in prior research.
Merriam
(2002) reminds us that qualitative research endures an ongoing deliberation
about its validity and reliability. One
method to promote validity – internally, at the least – is to incorporate
triangulation of the data. The form of
triangulation I utilize is analyzing the multiple design components –
observation, interview, document analysis, etc. – used in the study (Denzin,
1989). Employing these various data
sources helps balance their strengths and weaknesses (Esterberg, 2002; Merriam,
2002). I would examine meaning I had
made from interview transcripts and compare that to other data sources. For example, if a respondent spoke of using
classroom management techniques to keep students on task, I would review my
scripted notes taken during my classroom observation. I would also consider our informal
conversations in the methods class and the questions and comments they shared
with their peers.
To
promote reliability – also referred to as “consistency” or “dependability”
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985) – I employed resources beyond triangulation. To check for initial accuracy of the
respondents’ meanings, I gave them each the transcript of their interview. I encouraged them to review the transcript
and inform me of any additions or modifications. In particular, I was interested if the respondents
wanted to rephrase any of their words to more accurately communicate the
intent. Once I had coded the transcripts
and identified emerging themes from the data, I composed an initial draft of
the results and my interpretations. I
gave each respondent this analyzed portion to review as a form of member
checking. This process promotes an
accurate analysis of the participants’ perspectives and what they intended to
communicate (Merriam, 2002). It helped
verify if the themes I noticed emerging were true to the meanings that the
student teachers intended to convey.
Member
checking acts as a means to promote validity.
Another such practice is peer review and examination (Merriam,
2002). As this study was part of a
graduate course in qualitative research, I shared my initial results and
interpretations with classmates for their feedback. I met with a classmate multiple times for
one-on-one peer review. Additional
activities were giving a status report and presenting a poster of my research
findings with the entire class. “Within
the qualitative paradigm, valid is a label applied to an interpretation or
description with which one agrees. The
ultimate basis for such agreement is that the interpreters share, or come to
share after an open dialogue and justification, similar vales and interests”
(Smith and Heshusius, 1986, p. 9). The
methods above were chosen to promote data interpretation and reporting close to
their intended meaning.
In
addition to the above strategies, I employed the use of thick, rich description
to promote external validity, or generalizability (Merriam, 2002). A vivid, specific narrative of the research
setting and respondents prompts readers to make comparisons to their specific
circumstances. “In case study research,
data analysis consists of making a detailed description of the case and its
context” (Hébert & Beardsley, 2002, p. 209). To this end, I chose to record and report a
thorough portrayal of the student teachers’ placements and experiences. The following paragraphs provide information
about the pre-service secondary science education program, the student
teachers, the placement schools and cooperating teachers.
The
The
The Student
Teachers
The
two student teachers involved in this study work in the same consortium of the
Sarah
is a single woman in her early 20’s. She
graduated with a degree in Agricultural Biochemistry last year. Two days after walking through commencement
exercises in May, she started classes in the
Brad
is about 30 years old and is married. At
the time of the semi-structured interview, his wife was expecting their first
child within the next month. Brad began
his college career in the pre-medicine program as a biology major. He also enjoyed art and struggled throughout
his undergraduate years “whether I was going to be an artist or a
scientist.” He switched his major to art
with plans to still attend medical school.
However, the subjective nature of art on his grades convinced him to
finish his undergraduate degree in biology.
After graduation, he moved to California and was a professional artist
for eight years. Eventually, he decided
to return to the Midwest and enter the
Placement
Schools and Cooperating Teachers
Both
Sarah and Brad are currently student teaching at their placement schools. Sarah teaches general chemistry at “Wilson” High
School. General chemistry is an elective
science course, but students planning to attend the state university system
must have this class to be accepted.
Brad teaches general biology – a required science class – at “Adams”
High School. Both schools are located in
urban settings in a metropolitan city within 40 miles of the university
campus. The following is public
information about the student teachers’ placement schools:
Wilson High School Adams High School
Enrollment (9-12) 1,210 1,186
Minority Percent 38.7% 42.6%
Average Daily Attendance 92.7% 90.3%
Students Eligible for Free/Reduced Lunch 33.0% 55.0%
Graduates Taking 3+ Years of Science 58.0% 56.6%
The graduation rate (total) for the city’s district is
82.0%. The district graduation rate for
Hispanics is 72.5% and for African Americans is 76.2%. For the state standardized science
assessment, 36.1% of the entire high school student population scored below
acceptance levels of performance. The
district presently requires two years of science credits for graduation. For the current school year, the district’s
high school science improvement goal is as follows:
Students will improve performance in science such that the percentage of
11th grade students scoring at the competent and advanced levels on
the [state standardized assessments] will increase at least one percentage
point when compared to the scores achieved by 10th grade students
the previous year.
In addition to the above
information, I have included outcroppings (Fetterman, 1989) of the locales and
people from my experiences visiting these locations. These descriptions are located in Appendix B.
I
briefly met Sarah’s cooperating teacher during my visit to Wilson High. One instance was at the beginning of class as
I was situating myself at the back of the classroom area beside his desk. He stopped at his desk for a quick moment and
was gone for the rest of the class.
Afterwards, I spoke pleasantries with him as I left the room and met him
standing out in the hallway. Later,
Sarah shared with me his reaction to my visit.
He commented he was not impressed with my own position as a five-year
veteran of teaching returning to learn how to be a teacher educator. This individual is approximately a ten-year
veteran of teaching. He has had another
student teacher from the university in a previous semester. Unfortunately, this earlier student teacher –
described by the university science methods professor as “one of the best” –
had a disappointing student teaching experience and never entered the field
upon graduating. Sarah has shared
frustration about her cooperating teacher expecting her to do what he tells
her. There is little room for her own
decision-making or incorporation of what she has learned in the
During
my entire visit to Brad’s classroom, I never met his cooperating teacher. A woman passed into the room twice to pick up
something at the teacher desk. This
could have been the cooperating teacher.
I asked Brad about this later. He
didn’t recall noticing her, as he was busy teaching. Brad’s cooperating teacher is a woman with
about 20 years of teaching experience.
She was ill at the beginning of Brad’s student teaching semester and has
been described as “burned out” of teaching this year. She was a past president of the state science
teachers association and a faculty district representative, among other service
positions. Much like Sarah’s relationship
with her cooperating teacher, Brad is not allowed to freely attempt his own
ideas based on methods experience.
One
reason I chose to initially investigate Sarah and Brad’s experiences was
because of this potentially restraining and strained relationship with their
cooperating teachers. The cooperating
teacher/student teacher dynamic is but one area of the student teaching
experience. I did not enter the research
with this as the center of attention.
Rather, I focused on all of the change agents and influences experienced
in student teaching. As stated earlier
in the introduction, the purpose of this study is a more general investigation
of these changes.
Before
discussing the results and interpretations of the study, I should offer my own
background. My own experience may shed
light on my perspectives. Six years ago,
I went through the same process as Sarah and Brad. While my teaching preparation was for an
undergraduate degree, I did participate in a methods program with a similarly
developed theoretical background for instruction. After attending two semesters of reform-based
science teaching methods courses, I entered my semester of student teaching.
The
extent to which my personal experiences influence this study could be
negligible or integral. Despite any
potential for detrimental bias, I would assert that my own experiences do
assist me in making meaning with the student teachers and in analyzing their
stories. Lofland and Lofland (1995)
argue that “much of the best work in sociology and other social sciences . . .
is probably grounded in the remote and/or current biographies of its creators”
(p. 13). I used my prior experiences
from half a decade ago to help me reflect on what the student teachers told me
and with what areas I saw them struggling.
Self-reflexivity benefits the development of both the research and
researcher (Reich, 2003).
Through analysis of my conversations and observations of
Sarah and Brad, I have noticed several recurring themes. For example, both were excited to dive into
their student teaching experiences. Both
student teachers struggled to fine tune the techniques – or “mechanics” – of
teaching: managing students’ late and
make-up work, addressing school activities, dealing with school building
“politics,” managing classroom behaviors, preparing for content and planning
lessons, among others. Sarah and Brad
also faced challenging changes to their personal lives, impacting family,
friends, schedules and activities. Each
of these factors impacts a student teacher’s transition process from full-time
student to full-time teacher.
Within
the framework of this study, however, I have chosen to focus on the change
experiences student teachers face with respect to their instruction. In particular, I will address three themes:
the impact of university coursework, the challenge to incorporate reform-based
teaching, and how the student teachers manage through the difficult
experience. These three themes impact
the student teachers’ progress as they navigate through their “sea of change.”
The Waves of
Classes: “I’ve had
a lot of worthless education classes actually.”
Sarah
and Brad have similar experience through their teacher education program. In addition to being in the same secondary
science methods consortium, they also have taken coursework in education
history and multicultural education. In
their current position of student teaching, they reflect on how these courses
prepared them to teach. In particular,
they examine the value of general education courses, the sequence of university
curriculum, and the impact of their specialized science methods classes.
During
interviews, both Brad and Sarah contemplated the value of their general
education courses with respect to their teaching experience. One common class was Multicultural
Education. Both student teachers are in
urban high schools with relatively high minority populations. Reflecting on his own teaching experiences at
his diverse school, Brad concludes:
The multicultural
component is vastly inadequate at [this university]. I think that the multicultural class is taught focusing so
exclusively on the African American community to the exclusion of every other
community, that you’re not prepared for certain things like the Latino
population, the Asian population, and the English-as-a-Second-Language
population. I have a lot of Latinos in
my classes who don’t speak very much English.
I have a young Cambodian kid who they don’t have a translator for
because he speaks some ancient dialect of Cambodian and unfortunately they have
decided to put him in the general population, and so he’s getting about 10% in
our biology classroom now. Knowing how
to deal with things like that – especially the English aspect – would have been
vastly more beneficial than learning about, quite honestly, the suffering of
the African American community. And I
mean I’m being honest here, but that’s all you’d learn about in multicultural.
Brad’s candid appraisal is not solitary.
During my conversation with Sarah, she brought up her multicultural
education class and shook her head. She
comments, “It was an interesting class, but really it doesn’t help me teaching
now.” These assessments are noteworthy
considering Sarah and Brad teach classrooms consistently containing up to 50%
minorities.
Another general
education course, Social Foundations of Education, receives somewhat kinder –
albeit similar – reviews from the student teachers. Both Brad and Sarah describe how learning
about different philosophers and philosophies of education helps them consider
how they teach. Yet they see few areas
for practical application.
As far as the Social Foundations of Education,
I mean, I’m kind of an egghead. I kind
of like all that theoretical stuff and learning about the history of
education. I think that’s important
too. So I get something out of that, I
guess from a theoretical standpoint. I
don’t know how much application it really has to teaching. I think it’s more just something that you
know and live with. How to apply what
you know about Dewey, for instance (Brad).
In the
student teachers’ eyes, general education courses offer little in terms of
direct translation to the classroom.
Sarah and Brad acknowledge the limits of these classes in light of their
teaching experiences. Furthermore, they
see discrepancies in what is taught and how it is taught. Instructional approaches in these general education
courses do not reflect effective classroom teaching. Sarah summarizes the bleak appraisal of her
general education experience: “I’ve had
a lot of worthless education classes actually.
It’s really surprising at how bad some of the teaching has been in the
College of Education.” Obviously, the
above judgments are given by only two student teachers. Yet the value and format of general education
courses could certainly be reconsidered.
Despite
the lack of pragmatic impact from the general education courses, both students
recognize meaningful learning from their multiple semester science methods
classes. Sarah and Brad describe how the
concepts addressed in methods courses link to their current student teaching
experiences. There is direct application
of these concepts. One drawback,
however, may be the lack of earlier experiences to connect to these
concepts.
I knew that stuff was going to be useful and I should learn it because I
knew that I would need it when student teaching. But it’s still pretty abstract. You know, in practicum, they have you do some
things. But it’s hard to really to
really picture a lot of the stuff. And
now that I’m busy student teaching, I know which of those ideas I really wish I
would have spent more time on (Sarah).
Sarah’s words indicate that her learning from
methods would have had more impact if she had further classroom experience
during these earlier semesters. Her
limited practicum encounter was not enough to explore and apply the topics
addressed in methods.
The
student teachers also assess the placement of particular concepts in their
college curriculum sequence. One example
is classroom management, which was a common issue faced by the student
teachers. Both Sarah and Brad expressed
a desire to learn more about it before they actually began their student
teaching semester. In the current class
sequence, classroom management is a topic addressed in science methods during
the semester the
Regardless of the student teachers’ views on the sequence of the
college curriculum, both Sarah and Brad cite many benefits from their science
methods program. They claim multiple
applications of their learning to their current student teaching. The methods classes provide a foundation of
support and a well-informed framework to shape their teaching decisions. Moreover, the student teaching experience has
solidified their belief in these principles.
Brad and Sarah have developed into critical thinkers who can
self-evaluate their progress and impact as teachers.
I think the best thing I learned in methods is
giving me a good basis to evaluate what’s going on. In a way, I’m more convinced of some of that
stuff now that I’m seeing students who aren’t making connections that I really
think they should be making. The stuff
from methods that I’m also really struggling with is to actually do it in the
classroom (Sarah).
Through Sarah’s words, we
can see that she is applying what she has learned from methods. Furthermore, her time in the classroom
reinforces these concepts. More than
ever, the student teachers want to employ what they have learned. The challenge lies in applying these
research-based ideas about learning and teaching.
The
concepts Brad and Sarah learn in the methods courses are indeed making an
impact. The student teachers are
attempting to incorporate much of these research-based methods in their
classrooms. This leads to discussion of
the next major theme emerging from the case study research: attempts to
incorporate research-based or “reform”-oriented teaching.
Swimming
against the Current:
“There has got to be a better way to do this.”
Sarah
shares the following anecdote about how she first got attracted to
teaching: “In high school, I started
thinking about teaching. One of the
reasons that I decided I was interested in becoming a teacher was sitting in
science class thinking, ‘There has got to be a better way to do this.’ I want
to teach.” Similarly, Brad describes a
desire to impact his students’ lives by becoming a dynamic, effective
teacher. Making a beneficial difference
for students is perhaps the most quoted reason teachers provide for their
commitment to education. In order to
make lasting positive change, teachers must first learn how to change their
instructional approaches. Educators need
to bypass working off of “style” and “gut feelings” and inform their practice
through research. Such reform-oriented
education bases itself on thoroughly researched practices and understandings of
teaching and learning (Clough, 2003; Clough & Kauffman, 1999).
This
research-based rationale for teaching is the fundamental framework of Brad and
Sarah’s science methods program. They
have learned about the complexities of effective teaching – identifying and
promoting student goals; recognizing actions that exhibit those goals;
developing and choosing effective teacher behaviors, strategies, activities,
materials, and content; and basing instruction on research of how people learn
– ability to handle abstractions, connecting to prior knowledge, among other
principles (Clough, 2003; Colburn & Clough, 1997; Rowe, 1983; 1986).
Brad
and Sarah face a significant challenge in incorporating research-based
instruction in their classrooms. The
challenge is not only working to fine tune research-based practices, but also
struggling against a school culture that resists change.
I probably even more really want those goals
for my students than I did before. But
I’m probably doing less about it than I thought I did. I
worry that I’m getting stuck. It’s easy
to teach the way I’ve always been taught, that I’m still being taught, even
though that’s not always the way I want to teach. So I’m starting to berate myself by standards
that aren’t really mine. And I’m trying
to keep on top of what my goals are (Sarah).
There is a tension between how the student teachers
want to teach and what they face in the current school system. Several components arise that affect the
student teachers’ success in applying the reform methods they have learned.
Echoing
past research of student teaching experiences, one of the most influential
factors is the cooperating teacher.
Sarah and Brad’s cooperating teachers are not in full support of the
instructional changes promoted by the university science methods program. The cooperating teachers do provide much aid
and mentoring for the student teachers.
With their help, the student teachers develop many operational
“mechanics” of teaching – writing lesson plans, monitoring classes and passing
periods, managing student grades and documentation, and other daily tasks. Sarah
and Brad describe how they worked with their cooperating teachers to develop
and practice lesson planning. Brad
followed his cooperating teacher’s format to start writing his first lesson
plans for student teaching. Relating to
our first topic of university coursework, Brad mentions that this is a
technique he wishes he had more practice doing during his classes and practicum
before student teaching. Sarah explains
her working relationship with her cooperating teacher when planning
lessons:
It started out with at first I would just pick
up the [cooperating teacher’s] lessons at the end of the day and use the same
thing, which was really kind of hard because I didn’t really know which
direction I was going to take if [the students] started asking questions. And then we kind of started planning
together, kind of split up. One of us
would make the worksheet and then one of us would make the lesson plans. And I would have to check out how I was doing
things. For the last two weeks, I’ve
pretty much been teaching. Last week, I
was kind of stressed out the whole week and then I finished out with plans this
week. I did more of the planning. And next week I’m kind of doing my own
thing. And then the week after that it’s
going to be a big lab where it’s pretty much, ‘Here’s the lab we’re going to do
and now you need to do it.’
Writing lesson plans is
an example of a beneficial interaction with cooperating teachers. As mentors, they help student teachers
develop the technical “mechanics” of daily teacher duties.
The cooperating teacher also acts
as a sounding board for many of the student teacher’s questions, ideas, and
issues that arise during the experience.
Unfortunately in Brad and Sarah’s situations, the sounding board does
not always resonate with their ideas.
Particularly, the cooperating teachers resist the student teachers’
attempts to change instruction. The
changes the student teachers wish to promote all come from a research-based
study of learning and teaching. Yet when
the student teachers try to use these reform methods, they run into a brick
wall.
I haven’t really been allowed to do very many creative things. Basically, I was told, ‘You’re going to do
what we did,’ and, ‘Here’s all the activities I did, here’s all my lesson
plans. Just kind of copy them and do
them.’ So unfortunately, I haven’t had
the chance to do a lot, to implement a lot of the things we’ve learned in the
Unfortunately, Brad entered his student teaching
experience in what he describes as a “weird situation.” His cooperating teacher was sick and
frequently absent at the start of the semester.
Brad found himself creating lessons on his own without any
guidance. Once his cooperating teacher
returned, she took control leading the class and had him shift to the role of
observer for a while. Eventually, Brad
was able to lead the instruction again, though his cooperating teacher held
tight control of his decisions.
Sarah’s
situation also struggles from a cooperating teacher unwilling to promote
research-based instruction. She has
learned techniques through her experience of co-writing lesson plans and
assignments with her cooperating teacher.
However, preparing worksheet assignments appears to be the bulk of
Sarah’s instructional training through her cooperating teacher. In a discussion of experiences during the
meeting of the science methods course, Sarah described her student teaching
situation to her peers. She commented
that she was jaded from writing, passing out, and grading a hundred different
sets of worksheets during her student teaching.
No, her estimation of the number of assignments was not an excessive
exaggeration. She explained that every
day in her classes, her cooperating teacher would usually have one, two, or
three worksheets for the students to complete.
During my observation, Sarah did pass out one homework worksheet to the
class. Worksheet assignments are not
necessarily unproductive for learning.
However, an overload on busywork could be detrimental.
Perhaps
the cooperating teacher’s greatest influence on reform is not in restraining
the student teacher’s progress. Rather,
it may very well be the culture of passiveness they establish in their
classrooms. Before the student teachers
even set foot in the classroom, they are already at a disadvantage based on
what the cooperating teachers have created.
Sarah conveys her struggles to fight against the tide of traditional
teacher-centered setting:
It’s a pretty big adjustment just trying to
fit in what I want to do with how the class is set up to go. Sometimes I think that things just wouldn’t
work out based on what these guys have already learned. There are some things that I’d really like to
make [the students] do and enforce, but I just can’t make too many rules.
In Sarah’s case, we can
also see how the toil to change instructional methods is closely related to
classroom management issues. Brad
reports a grim picture painted – at least in part – by his cooperating
teacher:
She’s kind of burned out of the first half [of
the school year], so now the kids [in class] don’t like science at all. They hate biology and so I’m kind of getting
the repercussions of that. So really,
it’s been a challenge to try to get them interested in anything.
An
example of the cooperating teacher’s influence of classroom culture is what
students do at the end of class. In my
observations of Sarah and Brad’s classes, their students put away their
materials, packed their bags, stood up, and in some cases lined up or crowded
around the door. This occurred with
about five minutes remaining in the class period. Both Sarah and Brad expressed frustration
with this time off task and the wasteful routine that the students had
developed. This was a behavior both
student teachers vehemently wanted to change.
Since this cultural momentum had ingrained the habit into the students’
minds, it was a never-ending struggle to reverse. The students learned these procedures through
what their teachers allowed. Clearly,
the cooperating teachers have significant power in determining the climate of
the classroom.
In the
best scenario, the cooperating teacher promotes student goals and develops
effective instruction founded on research.
The students are mentally engaged and active in their learning. They work as a community to investigate
concepts and construct accurate understandings linked to prior knowledge. Conversely, the classroom may be a setting of
inert instruction, following directions, memorization of trivial facts, and
plenty of management issues. In Brad and
Sarah’s cases, the classroom environment is not ideal. In part due to the cooperating teacher, such
polluted waters are indeed a burden for student teachers just learning how to
swim on their own. Yet they are not the
only ones that struggle in perilous waters.
The students in the classes also slog away among the mixed currents.
During my classroom observations, I noticed a mix of
reactions to the student teachers’ attempts at reform-based teaching. Students are not used to the teacher
responding to their question with another question. Most expect the teacher to simply tell them
the answer when they ask for it. Or if
the students are incorrect, they want to know immediately without any
explanation of the correct concept. They
have been trained to be passive listeners in the classroom. Most students do not question or examine the
information. They simply take it in (if
at all) at face value as another trivial bit to be memorized for the next
test. Typically, the students go through
the motions and play the game of stale education. When a student teacher breaks these outdated
rules, however, the students must reorient themselves. A few students have recognized the frivolity
of the unengaged classroom. They want to
try this new approach to education. Many
students, however, struggle to adjust to this dramatic difference. Interestingly, their trials parallel those
that the student teachers face. The
students, though, are more likely to resist the change. Sarah reflects on her students’ reactions to
her attempts at what she knows is effective instructional practice:
Some students are really enjoying some of the
things I do. And some want to get the
worksheet. Some days [the students] get
real frustrated when I’m not answering their questions. I’m kind of trying to make it so that they’re
not miserable while they’re trying a new thing.
So it’s not really long enough for them to figure it out, to make sense
of some of the things I want to do.
Sarah’s last comment in the statement above indicates one
more factor that affects the student teachers’ challenge for reform-based
instruction. There is only so much
time. The student teaching semester
consists of 12 weeks of classroom experience.
Not all of this time consists of the student teacher leading the
class. Usually, the student teacher
spends the first few weeks observing and easing into instruction, leading
reviews and guided practice, for instance.
Toward the end of the 12 weeks, the student teachers begin sharing
teaching responsibilities as the cooperating teachers gradually resume their
roles. This time goes by rather quickly
when considering all of the learning experiences awaiting the student
teachers. Attempting reform-based
instruction is just one component, along with familiarizing themselves to the
school (including students and staff), adjusting to the new schedule, and
practicing the “techniques” like management and grading.
“I can’t really be the teacher I want to be
just being here five weeks [so far]. I
can do one unit on something but I don’t have time to carry anything through”
(Sarah). This comment summarizes the
strain on time both Sarah and Brad cite as something that limits their
opportunities. They only have so many
days to try the things they have learned in their methods classes. Nevertheless, they both express positive
experiences when they finally do get relatively complete control over a
unit. They may not be able to build off
of this unit into future lessons or connect prior units to this one. But they make do. As the student teachers teach their own
units, they can maintain a degree of flexibility. They can base instruction on the rate and
degree of the students’ learning. If
needed, the student teachers can add an extra day to attend to a particularly
challenging concept. When students
struggle, the student teachers can modify lesson plans. The focus is on learning and understanding,
not simply covering material.
Time
constraint on modifying instruction according to research-based reform is one
challenge for the student teachers.
Another strain on their hours and days is the time allotted to outside
class activities. Student teachers can
learn from experiences with other teachers and professionals in their school
building. Their placement school is a
dense population of valuable resources.
Student teachers have the opportunity to “pick the brains” of an
assortment of educators with diverse experiences and expertise. Regrettably, it appears that this source of
knowledge remains untapped.
I thought that I’d have more time to do
things. Like go talk to other teachers
about how they’re teaching, observe other teachers. But unfortunately, my coop [teacher] has kept
such a tight lock on my time. I haven’t
had time to go. I wanted to go talk to
my principal and the vice-principal, and have them come and watch me. I haven’t even really talked to them at all,
unfortunately. And there’s a teacher
upstairs who does a lot of very modern things with letting the kids choose
their curriculum and choose the projects they want to work on. You know, it’s very student centered. And I wanted to get up there and see how she
did that, and I still haven’t had the chance (Brad).
In
light of the challenges Sarah and Brad face in using research-based
instruction, I did notice positive changes during my observations of their
classroom teaching. The largest
indicator of this was in their interactions with students. Both student teachers used effective
questioning, listening and responding behaviors. These interactions engage the students in
thinking about their ideas.
Additionally, these behaviors help the student teachers assess their
students’ current levels of understanding.
Questions were often thought-provoking and required extended answers and
thinking from the students. The
following are some example questions and responses used by the student
teachers:
Student Teacher: What would be the logic of having one type of
molecule to charge all your body reactions?
Student Teacher: Why is heating [the solution] going to matter?
Student: It speeds up the process.
Student Teacher: How does it speed it up?
Student: Energy is contained in ATP like a spring.
Student Teacher: Explain what you mean by that.
Student: Something triggers that and makes it be released.
When students answered
with a science term, the student teacher would ask them to define the
word. This sort of response checks to
see what the student understands beyond using vocabulary. It also helps clarify the discussion for
other students in the class. Frequently,
Brad and Sarah responded to students’ questions or comments by asking “What do
you mean by that?” or “How do you know?”
They would relate discussions of scientific concepts to real world
applications, connecting new ideas to students’ prior knowledge. Another purposeful behavior was using the
students’ questions and ideas. For
example, when one student asked if an acid-base indicator would change color
upon shaking the solution, Brad responded, “What do you think?” Later after the students wrote down
predictions, Brad prepared a test for the question and they investigated
through a demonstration.
Brad
and Sarah had some success in applying research-based instruction in their
classrooms. However, both classrooms I
observed were mostly teacher-dominated.
While this alone is not detrimental to meaningful instruction, both
student teachers express their desire to increase the contributions of the
students in leading the learning. The
student teachers’ classrooms contain a complex mix of reform success and varied
opposition. Brad and Sarah continue
their attempts to promote critical thinking and engage students in discussion
of ideas. There were still many students
trying to slip by in a passive state.
Among the waves of resistance, the reform process is difficult. The student teachers undergo tension between
doing what they believe is best and settling for what is easier.
Often,
Sarah and Brad find themselves easily slipping into traditional methods they
labor to overturn. When so many
variables flow against them, the student teachers revert back to instruction
they know they don’t want to do.
Yesterday we went through things and [the
students] were kind of getting irritated with me and the whole rest of the
class, so I just went back to more of what they’re used to. Because if I do it this way [traditional
lecture], I know they’ll take the notes (Sarah).
Swimming upstream saps
the student teachers’ energy. Sometimes,
they have to go with the flow to survive.
But that doesn’t mean they have to like it. They know that playing the traditional
education game yields deficient results.
Sarah continues her self-evaluation with the following insight:
I found out one day that when I set up the
overhead and the students just take notes, the classroom management problems
are way low. They just sit and
write. And the next day, when we’re
supposed to be using this stuff, they have no idea what they wrote. [The first day was] really easy and then the
next day I pay for it.
Sarah’s
two previous comments were said with laughter.
In a way, she is amused by the absurd nature of her experience. As a novice, she finds herself striving to
change the system she is entering. So
much of the established school culture surges against the student teachers’
efforts. This change is a difficult
challenge indeed. The task is even more
ominous when student teachers lack support in their placement location. The constant effort of “swimming against the
current” takes its toll.
Of all the new things I’ve learned from [the science methods professors],
this was supposed to be the spot where I was supposed to try that out – in a
place where I could fail and still not get fired. Unfortunately, it looks like that’s going to
be my first year of teaching (Brad).
Student teachers in
situations such as Brad and Sarah face trials that truly thwart their
development and morale. But they
continue to press on. Perhaps this extra
effort makes them stronger in the end.
Keeping Their Heads above Water: “‘It will take you five years
before you’re really where you want to be.’
And I think, ‘Yes it will.’”
Despite
the swirls and eddies of change, both student teachers manage to keep their
heads above water, so to speak. Even as
Brad and Sarah work through the transforming experience, they also maintain perspective. Sarah describes how she purposefully prepared
for the trials she would face:
I knew there would be days when I go home thinking, ‘I’m not sure I want to
teach anymore.’ And I’ve had some of
those days. But, I knew that I was going to have that, and I would try to be
prepared for it so I wouldn’t be, ‘Go apply at [a local business].’ (laughs)
Both student teachers are positive and optimistic
about the future. Student teaching may
be an incredibly challenging endeavor, but Brad and Sarah continue to press
forward. Even in Brad’s particularly
difficult circumstances, he finds value and benefits: “You know, I’m getting something out of this. I mean, obviously, I’m getting a lot of
little things out of this like classroom management and lesson planning and
stuff like that.”
In
fact, Brad’s unique situation may have other benefits beyond building
persistence. His challenging student
teaching placement helps him more closely examine his ideas about teaching and
education. During our conversation, Brad
shared many thoughts and ideas about improving the teacher preparation
program. These areas vary from
practicum, to the schedule of the
We run a block schedule at [this high school], which I don’t really
believe in for [this school]. I think
it’s a very bad idea. I think the kids,
for 90 minutes, they’re bored, they’re tired, they don’t like what they’re
learning. Then they leave the classroom
and for two days they don’t hear anything at all about biology until they come
back again. And then I spend 30 minutes
bringing them back up to speed again. So
really, the block is not helping, it’s hurting because I’m only getting half
the time for instruction that I should.
The above words indicate analysis and examination
beyond Brad’s individual situation.
While he may not have any solid answers at the moment, he does reveal an
ability to consider issues of a broader dynamic. His student teaching experience – in
conjunction with personal reflection – has helped him develop a vision outside
his own classroom.
In
addition to developing a wider education perspective, the student teachers
clearly show improvement in their teaching itself. As described earlier from observational data,
both Sarah and Brad are making progress in their development. They are honing their “technical” skills like
classroom management and dealing with random disruptions in the school
day. Furthermore, they are establishing
a learning environment shaped by research-based instruction.
Sarah
and Brad also enhance their perspective on how to improve. They
see the effects of their efforts. They
see the influence of their own teaching – how they interact with students and
design lessons. Moreover, the student
teachers analyze how to improve instruction.
This aspect of development may be closely related to their prior
self-evaluation assignments in the methods courses. As the student teaching semester progresses,
Brad and Sarah become more comfortable in examining their teaching and seeking
improvement.
My first couple weeks, the whole drive home I
had all these thoughts running through my head about what went wrong. And now I’m better at saying, ‘Yes, I
should’ve done that better. Here’s what
I should have done.’ And then I stop
thinking about it. I’m a lot better at
evaluating it right away as soon as it happens, thinking, ‘You know, I
shouldn’t have done that. Okay. Next time’ (Sarah).
Through Sarah’s words, we
can see that the overbearing burden to perform is decreasing. Instead of expecting perfection, the student
teachers acknowledge the growth process.
They more readily acknowledge problem areas and quickly develop ideas
for improvement.
There is another vital component that keeps the student
teachers afloat. This factor is much
different than experience or education.
Quite simply, this important ingredient is passion. Both student teachers cite personal
conviction to enter education for reasons beyond teaching science
concepts. After our recorded interview,
Brad discussed more personal reasons for teaching. He expressed his concern to help develop
other human beings, not just teach them science. I noticed this passion for people during my
observation of Brad’s classroom. I saw
the commitment in his behavior to care for each student and help them
learn. Whether it was working with the
entire class or with a student one-on-one, Brad displayed genuine kindness with
each individual. The classroom was a
caring atmosphere and the students knew they were accepted. Brad’s interactions communicated an interest
and hope for each students’ success – not just in science, but in all of their
future endeavors. His vision truly
reaches beyond the science classroom and into his students’ lives.
Sarah
also expresses her interest in helping students develop outside of science
learning. She explained to me how her
mother is involved in public health and works with teenage mothers. Sarah talks with her mother frequently and
they discuss their similar experiences.
Sarah has a passion to help students develop in their circumstances and
decision-making. Clearly, a passion for
helping people is a strong buoyant force for the student teachers. Passion leads to perseverance. When student teachers have a purpose for
their efforts, they are more likely to develop and improve through the
challenging experience.
One more beneficial buoyant force is a sense of
humor. This is part of maintaining a
healthy perspective during a challenging, changing experience. During my interviews and observations of the
student teachers, they often used humor to express their thoughts. As they taught class and worked with
students, they were quick to smile and make humorous observations. Interestingly, the amusing comments –
including examples above – quite often make a direct point about the situation. Humor is a clear reflection of the truth
sometimes. Jokes reveal innermost
thoughts in the student teachers’ minds.
Consider the following comments Sarah makes with a smile and laugh:
[Our methods professor] says, ‘It will take you five years before you’re
really where you want to be.’ And I
think, ‘Yes it will.’ Keeping in mind
that this is student teaching, and I
kind of joke that it’s a good thing I’m student teaching now and I get to leave
so whatever I mess up I just get to run away from!
Even as the student teachers find
themselves awash in an ocean of change, they manage to keep their heads above
the water. The above factors – humor,
passion, perspective – help them remain afloat and ride out the waves. In light of all these buoyant forces, the
student teachers persist to develop and learn from their experiences. Student teaching is definitely a demanding
endeavor. Yet Brad and Sarah are
confident in their ability to succeed.
They also have hope that they will indeed make a beneficial impact. Sarah summarizes her feelings about the
student teaching experience with the following words:
Overall it is challenging, and sometimes very frustrating. But still, I still kind of have a vision for
what I do want to end up being. And I
still see how, yes, eventually I will be able to really have positive effects
in the lives of the students.
There is confidence,
optimism, and realism found in these words.
The student teachers are not simply treading water in the ocean of
change. They are making headway.
Implications
for Future Studies
As I
stated earlier, this project is a pilot study.
A limit in time has reduced the depth and breadth of research. In order to mitigate this restriction, future
research will need prolonged engagement in the field. This would include more frequent observations
and interviews. How do student teachers’
experiences and feelings change over the semester? We would want to investigate the experiences
and perspectives of more respondents in the student teaching semester. Furthermore, it would be insightful to
examine the experiences of student teachers in other programs and
disciplines. How do undergraduates’
experiences compare to those of graduate students in programs like the
We can
develop several avenues of research from the findings and interpretations. I would recommend investigating further into
each of these themes of change faced and influenced in student teaching. For example, one could explore the topic of
how student teachers deal with the pressures and stresses. This could be a deep and rich subject. The characteristic of having a passion to teach
is particularly interesting. This was a
trait common to both Sarah and Brad. The
buoyant force of passion trumps an overwhelming number of challenges that weigh
a teacher down. How common is this trait
in other student teachers (and teachers) who persevere? How can it be measured? How is it developed? Another recurring sub-theme that runs along a
handful of change factors is the use and strains of time. This topic could be an entire research study
by itself. Other areas for investigation
are examining the lasting value of university coursework, evaluating the
barriers and supporters of reform, and developing communication networks among
the university, cooperating teacher, and student teacher to resolve conflicting
expectations.
No
research situation is perfectly ideal.
Yet we can use what is gained from the study as a springboard to
forthcoming research. As Luttrell (2000)
describes her research with respect to ambiguity and decision-making, we can
deem a study “good enough” to be useful both in planning future work and in
applying to practice.
Implications
for Practice
Even
though this initial study is limited by time and number of respondents, it does
shed light on several important factors influencing the student teaching
experience. The findings are clearly
tentative, but we can still make some generalizations to guide future
practice.
The Sequence of
Teacher Preparation
A
general suggestion for enhancing the experience is to get pre-service teachers
out in the schools early and often.
There should be a field experience component during each semester of the
education program. Furthermore, these
practicum experiences should involve participation – not just observation – on
the part of the college students. This
extended school exposure familiarizes them to the teaching profession and
diminishes the shock of plunging into full-time student teaching.
Related
to this is the idea of learning teaching techniques. These “mechanical” tasks are a major source
of multiple concerns for the student teachers.
However, they are also issues that mostly dissipate through experience. Again, teacher preparation programs must get
students out in the classrooms frequently so they can get this initial
apprehension out of the way. The newness
wears off and soon the student teachers can handle such duties naturally and
simultaneously. Moreover, they can focus
on individual student learning and improving pedagogical practice.
College
classes must become more relevant to the classroom. This applies to both general education and
methods courses. We must consider
reworking both the curriculum and the sequence of these courses. What is beneficial? When college students work directly and early
in classroom teaching, they gain concrete experiences and knowledge. Then, they can add new educational
instruction from college courses onto this foundation of familiarity. If there is no prior experience, information
in college courses will remain abstract and unlearned.
The Setting of
Student Teaching
Field
experiences must not only be plentiful.
Pre-service teachers must have meaningful school experiences. Practicum and student teaching settings must
be environments that cultivate what is learned at the university. When student teachers enter the classroom, they
are diving into an ocean with established tides, markers, and currents. Sadly, some of these preexisting traits may
not be conducive to effective instruction.
Tragedy occurs when the student teacher is powerless to change the flow
and right the ship.
Echoing
previous research, Sarah and Brad both evaluate their student teaching
experience strongly based on their interactions with their cooperating
teachers. Cooperating teachers can be
life preservers for student teachers. As
mentors, they can orient student teachers to the school, staff, and
students. Cooperating teachers also
model and train the technical duties of teaching – lesson planning, management,
paperwork, and other mechanics. However,
cooperating teachers can act as dead weights.
They can drag student teachers to the depths through apathy, ineffective
teaching, resistance to change, and suppression.
When
selecting cooperating teachers, university coordinators must choose those that
will help student teachers succeed. The
cooperating teacher clearly has a profound influence on the student teaching
experience. Universities cannot settle
for any classroom that will accept a student teacher. They must evaluate each placement and
determine its merit before sending student teachers out to sea. If there are not enough beneficial placements
from which to choose, then we must make more.
Universities must clarify the expectations of the program and
placement. This should be done
regardless of the quality or quantity of placements. All cooperating teachers must be informed of
how they can assist their student teachers’ development. If necessary, individual discipline
departments – not just the general field experiences office – must hold
orientations and in-services to educate cooperating teachers on the program and
their role.
Staying Afloat
Student
teachers are indeed swimming among a sea of change. In addition to the transition from passive
student to active teacher, they also face changes in their routines, schedules,
decision-making power, and application of knowledge. As they go through their own encounters of
change, they find themselves striving to be change agents of a larger
arena. Even though they are the
newcomers to the field, they are often the ones willing and responsible to
advance the profession. As student
teachers negotiate through this complicated channel, they find sources to keep
them above the waves. A network of
family, friends, and peers helps them along.
Furthermore, personal traits such as perspective, healthy humor, and
passion provide internal equilibrium during the student teaching
experience.
Teacher
educators would be wise to promote these attributes and acquaintances in their
pre-service students’ lives. At every
level, effective teaching expands beyond the classroom walls. Teacher education is no different. University programs must provide services for
students to maintain camaraderie and collaboration among each other. Furthermore, we must help pre-service
teachers develop positive personal traits.
Programs can help them develop beneficial perspectives as they prepare
to student teach. Lastly, we must
thoroughly examine our teaching candidates for passion. Do they have a desire to give the necessary
effort to effectively teach? If there is
passion, we must cultivate it.
Universities must not drive it out through incompetent education. If the passion is lacking, we must help
pre-service teachers create it. If
passion for teaching and children does not arise, we cannot afford to let these
individuals continue. A lack of
dedication will harm not only the student teacher, but their students as
well. Education involves an examination
of the self. Helping students recognize
what career fits their passion is perhaps the most valuable lesson learned in
college. The commitment to our education
students requires dedication on our part as well. We must have passion to guide each individual
toward the best career and life pathway.
Sink or Swim?
Teaching
is not a science or an art, as some often debate. Instead, a more accurate analogy is the
medical field. Much like doctors with
patients, teachers must assess and diagnose the needs and progress of our
students. The same is true whether the
setting is a kindergarten classroom or a teacher preparation program. Instructors must focus on students’ actions,
work, comments and questions to monitor learning. This is necessary to help learners
develop.
At the
same time, instructors must listen to students to find out what these
“patients” need. Doctors do not
prescribe treatment based only their own observations and education. They cannot ignore what the patient is
telling them. This first-person
information is necessary in order to consider appropriate treatment. Similarly, teacher educators must not resort
only to our established practice and theory when developing students. We must also listen to these
individuals. They are the ones actually
living through the pre-service and student teaching experiences. Student teachers like Sarah and Brad have
insight from daily direct encounters.
They have important information to provide. We must learn to use this vital
experience-based knowledge.
The
student teachers are speaking. Are we
listening?
Let’s
not let them drown.
References
Abell, S., & Roth, M.
(1991). Coping with constraints of teaching elementary science: A case
study of a science enthusiast
student teacher. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Lake Geneva, WI:
April
7-10.
Baker, M., & Hedges, L.
(1991). The identification of components
underlying the summative
evaluation of student teachers and
component influence upon students’ final grade. Summary of research (Report
No. OSU-SR-60). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Department of Agricultural
Education.
Bell, V. (1999). The influence of teacher educators’
perspectives on the role of teachers in the
student teaching experience
(Report No. ED 433 338). U.S. Department of Education.
Black, K. (2003). Science in the trenches: An exploration of
four pre-service teaches’ first
attempts at teaching science in the
classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the
Association for the Education of Teachers of Science. St. Louis, MO. January
30-February 2.
Byrd, S., & Doherty, C.
(1993). Constraints to teacher change.
Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the National Association for Research in
Science Teaching. Atlanta, GA: April.
Caruso, J. (1993). Keeping professional company: Individual,
group and collaborative
supervision in a student teaching
practicum. A preliminary study. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Atlanta, GA.
April
12-16.
Clough, M. (2003). The value of a research-based framework.
Proceedings of the International
Meeting
of the Association for the Education of Teachers of Science. January 29-February 2.
Colburn,
A., & Clough, M. (1997). Implementing the learning cycle: A gradual
transition to a
new teaching approach. The Science Teacher, 64
(5), 30-33.
Clough, M., & Kauffman, K. (1999). Improving engineering education: A
research-based
framework for teaching. Journal of Engineering Education, 88 (4), 527-534.
Coulon, S. (1994). The effect of post teaching conferences on
the instructional behaviors of
student teachers.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. New Orleans, LA. April 4-8.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning
and perspective in the research
process.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crowther, D., & Cannon,
J. (1998). How much is enough? Preparing
elementary science
teachers through science
practicums. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Association
for the Education of Teachers of Science. Minneapolis, MN: January 9.
Denzin, N. (1989). The research act, 3rd ed.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Esterberg,
K. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Fetterman,
D. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Fu,
D., & Shelton, N. (2002). Teaching collaboration between a university
professor and a
classroom teacher. Teaching Education, 13
(1), 91-102.
Graber,
K. (1995). The influence of teacher education programs on the beliefs of
student
teachers: General pedagogical knowledge,
pedagogical content knowledge, and teacher education course work. Journal of
Teaching in Physical Education, 14 (2), 157-178.
Hébert, T.P., &
Beardsley, T.M. (2002). Jermaine: A critical case study of a gifted black child
living
in rural poverty. Chapter 10 in S.B. Merriam (Ed.), Qualitative research in
practice: Examples for discussion
and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
John,
P. (2001). Winning and losing: A case study of university tutor-student teacher
interaction
during a school-based practicum. Mentoring and
Tutoring, 9 (2), 153-168.
Kauffman,
D. (1992). Supervision of student teachers. ERIC Clearinghouse on
Teacher
Education,
Kelly,
S., & Dietrich, A. (1995). The influence of program structure and
learner characteristics
on
teacher training outcomes. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South
Educational Research Association. Biloxi, MS.
November 8-10.
Koskela,
R., & Ganser, T. (1995). Exploring the role of cooperating teacher in
relationship to
personal
career development. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators.
Detroit, MI. February 18-22.
Lemlech,
J., & Hertzog, H. (1999). Reciprocal teaching and learning: What do
master teachers
and
student teachers learn from each other?
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. Montreal, Quebec: April 19-23.
Lincoln,
Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Lofland,
J., & Lofland, L. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to
qualitative observation
and
analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Press.
Luttrell,
W. (2000). “Good enough” methods for ethnographic research. Harvard
Educational
Review, 70 (4), 499-523.
McLeod,
R. (1967). Changes in the verbal interaction patterns of secondary science
student
teachers
who have had training interaction analysis and the relationship of these
changes to the verbal interaction of their cooperating teachers. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Merriam,
S. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and
analysis.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mulholland,
J., & Wallace, J. (1999a). Beginning elementary science teaching:
Entryways to
different
worlds. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching.
Boston, MA: March 28-31.
Mulholland,
J., & Wallace, J. (1999b). Learning and teaching elementary science in
the
transition
from preservice to inservice teaching.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting
of the American Educational Research Association.
Montreal, Quebec: April 12-23.
Mulholland,
J., & Wallace, J. (1999c). Teacher induction and elementary science
teaching:
From
dreams to reality. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the National
Association of Research in Science Teaching.
Boston, MA: March 28-31.
Munby,
H., & Russell, T. (1993). The authority of experience in learning to
teach: Messages
from
a physics methods class. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. Atlanta, GA: April 12-16.
Reich,
J. (2003). Pregnant with possibility: Reflections on embodiment, access, and
inclusion in
field research. Qualitative Sociology, 26
(3), 351-367.
Reinharz,
S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Rowe,
M. (1983). Science education: A framework for decision makers. Daedalus,
1 (2),
123-142.
Rowe,
M. (1986). Wait-time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up. Journal of
Teacher
Education, 37 (1), 43-50.
Sagness,
R. (1970). A study of selected outcomes of a science pre-service teacher
education
project
emphasizing early involvement in schools of contrasting environmental settings.
Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.
Schensul,
S., Schensul, J., & LeCompte, M. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods:
Observations,
interviews, and questionnaires. Walnut
Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Smith,
J., & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the
quantitative-
qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational
Researcher, 15, 4-12.
Su,
J. (1992). Sources of influence in preservice teacher socialization. Journal
of Education for
Teaching, 18 (3), 239-258.
Sullivan,
P., Mousley, J., & Gervasoni, A. (2000).
Caution: Classroom under observation. Asia-
Pacific
Journal of Teacher Education, 28
(3), 247-261.
Talvitie,
U., Peltokallio, L., & Mannisto, P. (2000). Student teachers’ views about
their
relationships with university supervisors,
cooperating teachers and peer student teachers. Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, 44 (1), 79-88.
Thornton,
S. (1995). The enacted curriculum: A Deweyan perspective. Paper
presented at the
Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. San Francisco, CA.
April 18-22.
Woolley,
S., Woolley, A., & Hosey, M. (1999). Impact of student teaching on
student teachers’
beliefs
related to behaviorist and constructivist theories of learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Association of Teacher Educators. Chicago, IL. February 12-16.
Appendix A: Sample Interview Questions
Describe your path you took to get where you are now (from high school).
What is your background in education?
Science?
For what reasons did you chose to become a teacher?
What were your feelings going into the student teaching experience?
What are some concerns you had going into student teaching? How have these concerns changed? Stayed the same? Which ones did not become an issue?
How did you prepare personally before the experience?
How has your daily routine changed since beginning student teaching? Weekly routine?
What activities take more time than you initially thought? Less time?
What have been the biggest adjustments beginning student teaching?
How has this experience compared with what you thought it would be?
Describe your working relationship with your cooperating teacher.
What “big things” have you learned from your cooperating teacher?
What is your biggest challenge? What was the most difficult to get used
to?
What have been easier successes?
How has your student teaching experience affected your “home” life –
family, friends, recreation?
What is the most important thing you’ve learned? About the profession? About yourself?
What advice would you give new freshmen?
Methods students? Methods
instructors?
How has the experience affected your outlook on teaching?
How has the student teaching experience compared with what you learned in
your science methods courses?
What prior experiences seem most valuable to you now in your student
teaching semester?
Appendix B: Experiences and Descriptions of Student Teachers’
Placement Schools
Wilson High
School – Sarah
Wilson
High School is a two-story red brick building.
It is a large complex with a central section housing most of the classes
and student lockers in its halls. The
building exudes school spirit, from the bright green lockers to the green trash
cans positioned around the grounds to the green Husky paw-print trail on the
sidewalk leading up to the school’s front entrance. The front marquee on the school lawn displays
the following: “Diversity Week Feb.
21-25; Good luck BB teams; Let’s go back to state.” Nearby is a flagpole exhibiting the U.S. and
state flags. Large cotton wood trees –
their leaf buds weeks from bursting forth – line the brown grassy lawn.
The
school sits atop a hill about a half mile from a main commercial street filled
with fast food restaurants, shops, a strip mall, department stores, and car
lots. The school’s immediate
neighborhood is residential, surrounded by ranch-style houses. The neighboring homes are one or two-story, some
duplexes, and most with flat open yards to the street running along the
school. To the west of the school is a
gravel student parking lot, beyond which are both a football and baseball
field.
Upon
entering the school’s front foyer entrance, I am greeted by various groups of
students hanging out as the lunch period finishes up. There is the usual loud chatter of an
energetic student body, along with music from building speakers. After getting instructions to the student
teacher’s room, I walk up a flight of stairs to a much quieter setting – the
classroom halls. These are lined with
the aforementioned green lockers and various bulletin boards outside the
classrooms and guidance counselor office.
The classroom where Sarah teaches is the typical high
school science classroom. It is spacious
with the back half of the room housing the lab area – black counter-topped
tables, sinks, light tan cabinets and shelves.
Its attributes reveal the dual purpose of housing chemistry and biology
classes. Aquariums sit alongside the
back of the room – housing turtles, fish, and other aquatic creatures. Page-sized cardboard squares of the periodic
elements hang in rows from the ceiling, displaying each element’s name, symbol,
atomic number, mass.
The
front of the room – the classroom portion – is full of student tables, three
columns of five desks each. They seat
two students per table, and all face forward to the instructor’s table and
chalkboard. The chalkboard at the front
echoes of traditional college lecture halls.
It consists of two green board panels that slide up and down over each
other as the teacher needs clean space to write. Despite being an interior room with no outdoor
windows, the room is bright due to fluorescent bulbs in the hanging ceiling.
The students in the class I observed represented the
school population as a whole. There is a
variety of minorities – African American, Asian American – among the slight
majority of Caucasian students.
Interestingly, the vivacity and enthusiasm shared among students in
their downtime after lunch evaporates as they enter the classroom. Most slump in their chairs and if they do
show enthusiasm, it is mostly chatting with a neighbor or asking if the class
can dismiss for an optional school assembly.
The students wear every variety of clothing from every shop in the
mall: styles of urban street and ghetto,
traditional jock and prep, punk and gothic.
As
I left the school after the last period, I noticed many students wore bulky
team jackets, hooded sweatshirts, baggy clothes. After the students exited the school
building, many were already actively using cell phones, instant messaging, or
listening to head-phoned music players as they chatted with friends. Slang was the common language among friends. Bass music blasted in automobile speakers as
students drove out of the parking lot.
Sarah herself wore jeans and a long-sleeve T-shirt with
the school logo. Jeans and school shirts
were the common outfit for the instructors and staff. Sarah mentioned that Friday was green school
colors day. She stated that on a normal
day, she dressed up with a sweater or button shirt and nice slacks.
Adams High
School – Brad
Adams
High School’s setting is slightly more urban and “inner city” than that of
Wilson High School. The building is
similar and size and scope to that of Wilson – two stories with several wings
branching about containing classrooms and locker-lined halls. Adams High’s brick building seems a decade or
two older than Wilson, but that may just be due to the state of the
building. The most glaring example of
disrepair is falling and chipped paint on the metal façade above the front of
the building. Though there are some
pennants and posters on classroom doors, there is not much to be seen for “school
spirit” outside the building. The flag
pole stands bare with no flag and dead plants wither in large outdoor pots –
apparently lasting there from the previous fall. The marquee displays the following: “March –
Across
the street from Adams High’s front entrance are a park with picnic tables and a
community swimming pool with slide – closed for the winter. The rest of the blocks bordering the building
are industrial. Two main streets run
north-south along the east and west sides of the building. Brick warehouses for rent and an industrial
park fill up the blocks bordering along these directions. I heard multiple sirens during my entering
and exiting of the building.
The
residential areas a few blocks from the school are all aged. Most are one-story with large porches that
would have been impressive thirty years ago.
Empty lots are full of trash, disregarded furniture and appliances. A five-minute drive north toward the
interstate brings one to a commercial area resembling a mix of eras. One block holds a plaza and parking lot,
including a large video rental store.
Blocks along the other direction resemble a small town “main street”
look – three-story brick buildings with store fronts and upstairs storage or
apartments. Both eras have seen better
days.
Adams High School’s hallways are similar to any other
high school. The halls are lined with
ivory lockers inset in ivory brick and tiled walls. The classroom of Brad’s student teaching
experience is a wide room that has been modified for biology laboratory
work. There are three rows across of
student tables (two students per table); each row contains four or five
tables. The middle row is interrupted on
both ends by two black laboratory sinks with multiple faucets. These appear to have been installed after the
room’s initial construction. Waist-high
shelves spread along the two side and rear walls. Above the rear wall’s book shelves are large
glass windows looking out into a small outdoor grassy courtyard. Potted plants sit along the rear shelves in
front of the windows. A couple of fish
aquariums sit on the top of these short book shelves. Posters of various kinds adorn the
walls. The posters all feature a biology
concept – systems, cells, etc. Some are
colorful student-created collages about the various kingdoms of living
things.
The
front of the room features the standard science lecture/demonstration table,
chalkboard, and screen for overhead projector, which sits in the middle of the
front student table row. Posted at the
front bulletin board by the door are the following “Classroom Expectations”:
1. Be in your seat and
ready to begin class when the bell rings
2. Have all binders, planners, and materials
ready to use at the start of class
3. Follow directions the first time they are
given
4. No food, drink or personal grooming in
class
5. Be respectful of yourself and others
The students in the class were representative of the
school student body. There are several
groups of minorities – African American, Latino American – among the slim
majority of Caucasian students. Dress
was of all sorts, but mostly urban, loose T-shirts and hooded sweatshirts, and
some school and professional sports designs.
Interestingly, the first student of Brad’s that I met was
a young man waiting in the hall outside the classroom. He was from the class period before my
observation. Brad stepped outside, asked
the neighboring teacher in the hall to watch his class, and walked with this
young man down the hall toward the office.
When Brad returned between class periods, he informed me that he had an
“interesting first” experience.
Apparently, the young man had thrown a chair in his anger at some aspect
– but not related directly to Brad’s instruction or class. Brad walked the student down to the office
and talked with him about not being angry with the behavior, but just wanting
the student to be able to cool down.
As I left school after the period I observed (a block
period), I made my way through the hallways and lobby full of students. Most were chatting and finding friends during
this passing period. It was extremely
crowded. In the front lobby, I met a
gentleman on staff who was a hall supervisor.
He wore a shirt and tie and had a plastic earpiece in his ear like those
worn by Secret Service agents. He
glanced at my university badge and gave me a nod of approval.
Exiting
the building at the front entrance, I passed by one male student yelling at
another, including comments such as “you’re talking sh*t about me!” The other student – who was with friends of
both genders – didn’t seem to understand what the first student was angry
about. Neither seemed willing to escalate
the confrontation any further. The
teacher in me felt I should mention something, but the unpaid, unstaffed
individual in me chose to ignore it, assuming cooler heads would soon prevail
and/or a paid staffed individual would soon step in.
I
left the building for the parking lot among a small group of a dozen students
or so. Some made their way across the
street to the park to have a smoke.
Others walked to the parking lot with me and disappeared after
that.