In my graduate course, Current Issues in Teacher Education, I (Clare) gave the students lots of choice for their final assignment. Said Sidani took an incredibly interesting approach – he created a series of videos. I was so impressed I asked him if I could post them on this blog. Some are specific to Ontario but the first one, perceptions of teacher education, was applicability beyond our context.
For my culminating project, I wanted to examine a
few topics that stood out to me throughout our course. As a recent graduate from a teacher education program and a beginning teacher, I wanted to focus on themes that resonated with me and that I wanted to learn more about. Instead of writing an academic paper, I decided to use a video series to present my findings.
This video series is divided into 4 parts that focus on: 1) Perceptions of Teacher Education, 2) Occasional Teaching, 3) Hiring Regulations, & 4) Teacher Induction. Each video consists of a narrated Prezi that presents relevant literature related to the topic. I draw on course readings, research in the field, and personal experience.
My intended audience is teacher candidates, teacher educators, professors, students, and anyone interested in the teaching profession. Since there is a large number of stakeholders in education, I believe that almost any viewer will be able to take something away from watching. My goal is not to deter anyone from joining the teaching profession, but rather to inform them of some of the issues that exist and the work that needs to be done.
The position I present is that teacher education is in need of reform. Instead of deregulating teaching, we must focus our efforts on improving people’s perceptions of teacher education programs. Also, occasional teaching and hiring regulations in Ontario are part of a broken system. They discourage new people from entering the profession which in turn impacts the quality of education that students receive. Finally, teacher induction programs that promote mentorship are essential to a beginning teacher’s journey. However, when they are delivered through the use of a transmission model instead of a transformative model, they are not nearly as effective.
The videos are available on YouTube and can be accessed via these links. For the best viewing experience, the video quality should be set to 480p (this is usually automatic). Thanks for watching.
Over the holidays I (Clive) have had a chance to do some novel reading, and have read murder mysteries by J. K. Rowling (The Silkworm) and Elizabeth George (For the Sake of Elena). I enjoyed these novels, especially the first, but these authors – bless their hearts – like to put in a lot of social commentary, ideas about life, personal interest, etc. This can be very interesting and educational or quite aggravating, depending on one’s interests – so I did a lot of skimming (especially in Elena).
This made me think that in schooling and even university we don’t spend enough time teaching students to skim. We need to encourage them to “take charge” of their studies and reading life, rather than seeing complete coverage as the ideal. Smith and Wilhelm in their wonderful 2002 book Reading don’t fix no Chevys note that working class teenage boys often don’t like to read because the books we assign are too long. Skimming could help solve this problem. Similarly, doctoral students often take far too long on their literature review because they still don’t realize that one can and often must skim.
So let’s skim more – even in reading the daily news, in print or online – and encourage our students to do the same. It can make your day, and your holidays!
I (Cathy) read this lovely blog the other day and wanted to share it with you. It seemed appropriate for this time of year, when so many people seem rushed and pressured, preparing for the holiday season. I think it applies to teachers and teacher educators alike. But most of all, it’s about our students. Where some of us live, we can’t take our students outside due to the weather, but I think if you got creative, you could think of someway for them to “unwind”.
I played hooky a few weeks ago. I filled out my paperwork for half a personal day and took the afternoon off.
It’s not something that was easy for me to do. I’m usually overcome with guilt and angst whenever I take time off. I can count on one hand the times I’ve actually taken a personal day, and sick days are used only when I am so ill, I can’t muster the strength to crawl to the shower—one every few years. There’s too much work to be done to miss school—the students need me too much, right?
So, I don’t take time off.
Yet that day, I did. Where I live, the weather can be fickle and complicated. We never really know what’s going to happen on any given day. But this month, we were given a delightful weather gift. We had six uninterrupted weeks of perfect days—blue skies, exquisitely clear air, and leaves that turned color slowly. Every day dawned beautifully—and stayed that way.
But I knew our streak was almost over. Forecasts predicted plunging temperatures and heavy rain. That’s why, on a whim, I decided to take the afternoon off.
I went home and settled on our back patio. I sipped a cup of tea and read my way through a few back issues of my favorite magazines.
As the afternoon came to an end and it came time for me to go gather my children from their school, I thought about how peaceful and easy the afternoon had been. I felt full of energy. I’d put a stop to the hamster wheel and it felt terrific.
Since I felt so good after a simple and easy afternoon, I wondered how something like that would feel to our students. I worry about them. I fear they feel the effects of our “teacher anxiety.” Amid the push for high achievement, along with the immense pressure to have students reading and writing on grade level—now!—we forget that sometimes we all just need a break. It doesn’t have to be pedal-to-the-metal every moment of every day, right? Certainly not. In fact, I’d argue that kind of approach does more harm than good.
So, to all literacy teachers out there, grant yourself permission: Sometime soon, on a day that feels just right, let yourself put down the lesson plans for an afternoon. Ignore the to-do list and the upcoming assessments and the small-group conferences you have planned. Instead, gather your class and tell them to pick out a light book or magazine. Take them somewhere lovely and different, away from their routine. Join them in sinking into a comfortable spot to read—in a corner of the school library, beneath a favorite tree in the courtyard, or spread out on the bleachers near the football field. It doesn’t matter where—just so it’s away and interrupts the routine of intensity. Make sure it’s easy.
I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:
Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.
Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.
When deciding where to apply for my teacher education program I only knew two things; I wanted to fix what I thought was wrong with schools and I wanted a concurrent program. I had awful and awesome experiences in both elementary and secondary school and could not fully explain why, but I wanted to. I also knew that my timid nature would benefit from the extra practicum hours and practice present in a concurrent program. This narrowed my view to XXX University, YYY University, and ZZZ University. Amazingly, I had my pick so I turned to my teacher friends to help me make my decision. It honestly came down to a conversation I had with a friend in which she said, “If you want to learn the theories that drive education go to YYY and if you want to learn how to be a teacher, go to ZZZ.” On this conversation alone I decided on YYY because my interest was in educational reform and my mind was far from thinking about the necessity of knowing how to be a teacher.
The program was a one year teacher’s ed program taken part time concurrently with my undergrad program for 3 years. My first year of undergrad and one other year of my choice was to be entirely devoted to undergraduate studies. There were two mandatory courses for all teacher candidates in the first year of the program, Inquiries into Schooling and Inquiries into Learning. There was also a panel specific course. Being in the secondary panel I was required to take The Adolescent and The Teacher, a psychology course about child development from birth to adolescence. Each year of the teaching program there was a year long practicum. The first year is a community education placement that focuses on an education initiative in a community. As an example, in my first year, I collected children from three different elementary schools in the queen west area of Toronto, took them to a bookstore and ran an afterschool literacy program that included reading buddy time between the younger and older students. This year is ended by a one week observation block in a school. The following two years are in school placements that are one day a week for the university’s academic calendar and followed by one month practical block after exams are finished. With the practicums there is a non-credit, once a month class that is aimed at unpacking the experiences in the practicums and gives strategies to help student teachers be successful. They were either held on campus, at the practicum schools, or at a school nearby (I had one of each of these arrangements).
The strengths of the program rest on the amount of time you spend in schools. I found I was very comfortable with school routines and the students by the time I was asked to take over the class in May. It would have been helpful to start the year off with an observation block so student teachers get to know the students and routines very quickly rather than the month or longer that it takes only going once a week. Once you get to know those routines and the students though, the practicum becomes part of your regular week and that is very helpful. It is still one of the better practicum programs in my opinion. There was one professor I had as well who was truly inspiring and a real mentor to me. She truly embodied a constructivist approach as well as knowing her students as a pedagogical tool. She saw how even in my first year of teacher’s college I was highly critical of our education system and showed me how to connect my personal experiences to theories of reform that already existed in education. Her strengths in this area, however, exposed that this was a weakness in the program overall.
Though I had one amazing professor who profoundly affected me as a learner and educator, I cannot say the same for any of my other professors. This leads me into one of the three biggest weaknesses of YYY’s Education program. Through my time in the concurrent system I was the student of 12 different teacher educators. Many of these professors fell into two types. There were many professors who were so well versed in the research and theories of education that they could not make the material accessible to us. Either from a lack of practical or phronetic experience in the classroom, or from the material being too advanced too early, the professors did not have an impact on us. The difficult theoretical readings paired with what seemed to be easy and meaningless reflective papers meant that the courses did not seem appropriate or purposeful. The other problematic teaching style was that of the teacher model. This is where the professor assumes the role of elementary or secondary teacher and treats the student teachers as children and rarely as professionals. The purpose is explicit – to model classroom strategies- but the tone is condescending. These courses also had challenging theoretical readings but they were rarely discussed in class and so the learning from them was left to the individual learning and their ability to access that learning on their own.
Struggling with these professors and the material further highlights another weakness in the program: a lack of a unifying goal. I went into teachers college already knowing that there was a distinct difficulty in education of a defined goal of public education. Before entering university I understood that there was problem with our education system that promoted or at least maintained class distinctions. I could see that the end goal of school varied depending on which economic class the child belonged to (not in theory of course, but in practice). As a new student teacher it only took one or two get-to-know you activities in my classes to understand that we all had different ideas on what the end goal of school should be. Is it to maintain social order, prepare students for jobs, create independent and creative thinkers? It was plain to see that we all had different ideas about what we were really learning to do. What wasn’t plain to see was what the university thought the end goal of public education should be. There was no conversations around it, there were no chances for us to explore our own ideas and have them challenged. There were just professors, with their own ideas, teaching conflicting ideas to young student teachers that didn’t have enough concrete experience with which to ground the multiple theories in. The result was disjointed classes that all used the same philosophers and experts in education to argue different pedagogical approaches to subjects and students. The two different types of professors further show that they didn’t even agree on the end goal of our university experience; one type embodying the academic theory based pedagogical approach, and the other, a concrete and practitioner based approach. Though I think a combination of some sort could be the most beneficial for student teachers, it needs to be far more intentional and clear so that student teachers have a better sense of what they are supposed to be learning. The distinction between the two types of professors was so obvious and opposing that on several occasions I heard other classes and unnamed professors spoken ill of. Only upon later reflection have I realized how this problem I witnessed in my elementary and secondary education was also present in my teacher’s education program.
The final weakness of the YYY program that I will explore, and have already hinted at, is the idea that we had very little control over our own learning. The very thing that drove me to become an educator, what I am the most passionate to learn about, has rarely been addressed. The mandatory courses we were forced to take were problematic in that they were too general, the material was complex, and we didn’t have enough experience to understand the theories. The elective courses were much more specific but often did not take into account the realities of public education (Ie. a technology in education class that will be out of date by the time the school I’m teaching in sees half the technology we were using). Furthermore, there wasn’t an elective course that had anything to do with what I wanted to learn about. There was only one opportunity, my first year of the teacher’s program and my second year in my undergrad where I got to explore a topic that was a key factor in my decision to become a teacher. In that year, our observation and community placement year, we were assigned a community mapping project in which we also had to research and devise a thesis on how education in that community was affected by a particular factor outside the actual school. I mapped my rural hometown and wrote about how the class divide in the community leads to a class divide in the school that is not addressed and causes many of the problems I witnessed when growing up there. I was passionate about the topic, the professor helped my find academic papers that addressed the issues I was writing on, and we talked about our projects in class as we developed them. I learned more in that project than I did in the entirety of my other classes put together because I was in control, I knew the purpose, I was connected to the content with experience and interest, and I was supported in that. In most of my other courses I felt like my voice and opinions were dismissed or there was no space for my thinking. The reflections we did were not enough for me as I am sure they were not enough for many of my peers. I had already done so much reflecting which is what led me to choose teaching as my profession, I wanted more meaningful learning experiences that addressed my individuality as a student teacher.
Though my experience was largely negative, the one professor I had, and the one project that was meaningful had a huge impact on my career as a teacher. It validated my personal perspective on education and when I presented my project (early because I was so interested I finished it months in advance) my professor told me that I should do my masters one day and further explore that topic. I had never considered myself a candidate for anything beyond university (being the first in my family to attend a university) but I ended up pursuing that path based on her acknowledgement of my academic skill and the hope that I could further study the topics that I was interested in.
Ultimately, I feel teacher’s education programs have the reputation that they deserve but that it embodies something that is a much larger problem. In my personal opinion, education is so desperately in need of radical reform to deal with the systematic and institutional problems that studying and reforming on aspects of it, and that includes teacher education programs will only go so far. Until we really take a look at the system as a whole and create a cohesive goal only minor gains will be made.
I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:
Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.
Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.
My teacher education program was at University XXX, where I was part of the primary/junior cohort (K-grade 6) cohort in the year of 2013-2014. The cohort had a First Nations focus. There were about sixty students from various places, with vast variety of experiences, knowledge, interests and skills. My teacher education program consisted of many strengths and areas of improvement. Due to the areas of improvement, I feel that my teacher education program could have prepared me better.
During my teacher education program at University XXX, I had witnessed many strengths and weaknesses of the program. I will start off by addressing the strengths and then the weaknesses. To begin with, coming to class at XXX everyday was the highlight of my day, as the program culture was very supportive, caring and one that respected diversity. I found all my professors to be extremely genuine and caring, as they treated every single student teacher as a whole (emotionally, physically and mentally). The student teachers in my class were a pleasure to learn with, as we provided one another with assistance with course assignments, we had lunches together in big groups, and we also made time to socialize after class by going to a near by pub. A quote from the article titled Teacher Education at the University of Virginia: A Study of English and Mathematics, that resonated with my experience at XXX, “There, she says, professors worked to create a strong, caring community that respected diversity…. being a part of a strong, supportive community was a key experience” (Merseth & Koppich, p.75). This quotation resonated with my experience at XXX, as I felt part of a community of educators who learned together by supporting one another. However, half way through the program, many students started getting in arguments with one another and complaining how they were not getting a lot out of their teacher education program. My cohort coordinators dealt with the situation in a very positive manner. My coordinators split the class in half, and we had a community circle where a talking stick was used, and everyone had the opportunity to say what was on their mind. Soon enough, the conflict was resolved and strategies were put in place for improvements. In addition to this, another strength of my teacher education program was during my practicum experience at YYY Public School in a grade 4 classroom. One and a half weeks in to my practicum, my associate teacher had been going through a great deal of back pain, to a point where she had to take a couple weeks off and had back surgery. I was in her classroom with a Long Term Occasion (LTO) teacher (supply/substitute teacher), whom I did not get along with as she did not let me teach a single lesson. I gave the LTO teacher a couple of days to settle in, in the hopes of her providing me with a chance to teach my lessons that I had prepared. I felt like a volunteer in her class, and the way she dealt with the students did not fit my teaching philosophy. I remember coming home and crying and making a connection of my experience with the LTO teacher to the song ‘Wrecking Ball’ by Miley Cyrus. Although I did have three other student teachers from my class at the same practicum school, I felt like I needed more support. I contacted my practicum coordinator and expressed my concerns with the LTO teacher. My practicum coordinator was very helpful and quick in dealing with the situation, as she had arrived at my practicum school the very next day, and had my placement changed with another associate teacher in the school. I was very impressed with the quick change.
Although my teacher education program had many strengths, through a critical lens, I found there to be a couple of weaknesses/areas of improvement in the program. To begin with, there were sixty student teachers in the class; I feel that class sizes should be smaller; about thirty to forty students maximum. Small class sizes allow for a lot more individual attention, and more critical questioning. Although my cohort had a First Nations focus, I felt that there was not enough infusion. Although we used a talking stick and were exposed to and provided with a certain level of knowledge, we were not provided with First Nation resources such as books, videos or lesson plans to use in class. I would have liked to receive a ‘First Nations Resource Tool Kit’ that had a package of important rituals, resources and activities to do with the students as a starting guide to educating students about First Nations. In addition to this, I did not gain much knowledge from one of my foundations courses. My professor was not an effective educator on this particular subject. I am not even sure up to this date, what I was suppose to learn from that class. My professor was of First Nation descent, which I really valued because I gained an immense amount of knowledge regarding First Nations, however I did not gain an efficient amount of knowledge dealing with the subject I was suppose to be taught. A quote that resonates with this experience is from the article titled How Teachers Learn and Develop, “Teachers are even more important than the material they use because the ways in which they present material highly influence how they are viewed by students” (Hammerness, Darling-Hammond, Bransford, et al. p. 384). Another weakness I found in the program was not enough class time; especially in math seeing as how numeracy is really big within school boards and it is the number one subject students struggle with. I found my math class to be very engaging as we had our ‘math tool kit’ that included a variety of manipulatives, however the learning was rush and clustered together due to time constraints.
My teacher education program could have prepared me to fulfill my duties as a teacher more effectively. My teacher education program did not introduce us to the report card system, how to provide students with final grades or about the types of comments one should include in report cards. In addition it would have been beneficial for student teachers to know about specific buzzwords and interview questions that could be asked during school interviews. I would have felt better prepared if my teacher education program provided us assistance and guidance with job search. However, due to the competitive teaching market, my teacher education could have provided us with suggestions of what else we can do with our degree, other than just teaching in a classroom. I also believe that the program could have prepared me better by making the teacher education program for 2-3 years, instead of 1 year. A longer teacher education program would be able to provide students with more practicum experiences, critical thinking, learner- centered teaching, community based activities among diverse groups, and an increased and effective amount of content knowledge that covers all core subject areas. An example of an effective teacher education program is the Curry School of Education, which is a 5 year BA/MT program in Virginia. As stated in the article, by the end of this program “Somebody who comes out of the Curry School is going to be able to walk into a classroom prepared for almost anything. They’ll be knowledgeable in the subject area, knowledgeable in a variety of strategies of teaching methods, of classroom procedures and discipline” ( Merseth & Koppich, p. 64). This is the type of framework and actions that University XXX needs to implement for a more effective and improved teacher education program.
This reflection paper has really provided me with some in-depth insight about my teacher education program. From an overall stance, I had only considered the strengths for the program. Through this paper, I was able to critically assess my teacher education program and what could be done to improve the program for future student teachers.
Some questions that still arise about teacher education programs are: When choosing placements for students, I am aware that the University has relationships among specific schools and teachers that have acted as associate teachers in prior years. Is the health and well being of those associate teachers checked each year? Or are student teachers just paired up with those teachers, because that particular teacher was used in the past? Another question I still have is, when preparing and improving teacher education programs, who has the say and input of what should be improved? How is this determined? Do student teachers have a voice in this? Are their opinions and advice considered for improvements of the teacher education program?
Works Cited
Darling-Hammond.L. (Ed). (2000). Studies of excellence in Teacher Education: Preparation in a five year program. New York: AACTE Publishers. ISBN NO: 0-9654535-5-3
Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (Eds.) (2005). Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and Be Able to Do. Jossey Bass.
I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:
Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.
Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.
Concurrent Education: Eat Sleep Teach Repeat
Repeat, repeat, repeat!
“Teaching is not a lost art but the regard for it is a lost tradition.
Hence tomorrow’s problem will not be to get teachers,
but to recognize the good ones and not discourage them
before they have done their stint.”
—Jacques Barzun
In the epigraph above, Jacques Barzun refers to the lack of well-trained teachers and society’s failure to support the good ones. A simple observation of our educational system today highlights the shortcomings of teacher education programs and people’s lost faith in the teaching profession. This paper presents my teacher education program, its strengths and weaknesses, and whether it prepared me to become a teacher. Do not be surprised, but I am discouraged.
As a child, I wanted to be either an entomologist or a teacher. As a teenager, I developed a fear of insects and a love for history. When I was 18 years old, I had officially been admitted to the Concurrent Teacher Education Program (CTEP) at the XXX. The CTEP program allows students to pursue two degrees (HBA/HBSc and BEd) simultaneously over the course of 5 years. Students are required to take education courses that provide them with a foundation for teaching before taking any BEd courses. They include topics such as conflict resolution, equity and diversity, and child and adolescent development.
The program prides itself in providing various opportunities for experiential learning, which include a 100-150 hour anchor subject internship, classroom visits and observations. The internship, considered part of the undergraduate degree and completed before any practicums, is intended to help teacher candidates develop teaching experience in their main area of study. Students participate in organizing extra-curricular activities, providing support, and working with a variety of teachers to deepen their knowledge of the teaching profession. Finally, candidates maintain an e-portfolio to help them track their learning as they progress through the program by encouraging reflection and promoting professional development.
Whenever I mention my program of study, I am told, “You do not have to worry about getting into teacher’s college in 4 years. It’s getting competitive and many people apply because they have nothing else to do.” This highlights one of the strengths of the program. There was a huge sense of relief and security in knowing that excelling in my courses and maintaining my professionalism meant that my dream of becoming a teacher was within reach and in my control. Candidates often saw themselves as part of the ‘lucky few’, but it definitely came at a cost. For example, the intermediate-senior program was only open to students majoring in chemistry, mathematics, or French (based on the needs of schools in Ontario). As a result, I ended up majoring in French Teaching and Learning when I may have enjoyed fields such as management.
Concurrent education was a commitment, which can be seen as both a strength and a weakness. The stipulation for entry also dictated what I studied for five years, which sometimes made my courses feel like a means to an end. It also meant sacrificing many of my undergraduate electives for education courses. The biggest assumption people made was, “It’s okay. You want to be a teacher. What’s the big deal?” The problem was that 18-year-old concurrent students were perceived as 100% set on becoming teachers, thereby ignoring the fact that, like most other first years, we were curious, had various interests, but were somewhat limiting ourselves because of the light at the end of the tunnel.
On the other hand, the socialization into the profession began almost immediately after the first few weeks of our classes. The many hours I poured into classroom observations, reflection papers, and inquiry before even stepping foot into YYY University was a test of my commitment. Exposure to various aspects of the teaching profession over a longer period of time allowed me to make more informed judgments. Some of my colleagues fell in love while others wanted to break up. There was no better way to realize my like or dislike for teaching without immersing myself in it. CTEP was all about immersion.
In addition to the analysis of commitment above, examining course structure and the social impact of the program shed light on its effectiveness. I am thankful that my courses allowed me to experience different grade levels before deciding on the Secondary School stream. By the end of my 3rd year, I had spent time with every age group and knew that Secondary was the right fit for me before beginning any official teacher training courses. These courses have contributed immensely to my teaching philosophy and my development as a practitioner. However, when comparing my undergraduate education to the BEd courses, I realized that the material had become repetitive. With the exception of my Curriculum Instruction courses, many of us saw little value in the teacher training courses because we had covered the same topics over the past 3 years. CTEP saw us as the most knowledgeable and immersed practitioners, when in reality, we were experiencing fatigue, feeling disengaged, and ruing the missed opportunities. Furthermore, the lengthy anchor subject practicum took place in my 4th year, thus leaving a significant gap between its completion and my graduation date. Thankfully, this has since been remedied and students now complete both practicums in their 5th year.
Finally, it is important to consider the impact CTEP has had on my interpersonal relations. I have developed many friendships with my colleagues over the period of 5 years. We became a close-knit community that struggled and celebrated together while sharing countless experiences and horror stories, all of which made CTEP very enjoyable. However, I did feel isolated from my university community because we were required to attend courses at the downtown campus for an entire semester in 4th year. After months away from my home campus, it was back to ‘normal’. The main difference was that I now felt like a teacher, having completed 80% of my teacher training, but was once again a student taking an undergraduate course. Not surprisingly, this has now been remedied since it hindered professional development and students now attend XXX University full time in their 5th year. I was a guinea pig, and after all of it, I am discouraged.
The program prepared me to be a teacher the same way military education prepares a soldier for the battlefield. It is a simulated experience, rich in theory and strategies, but devoid of the reality. Before we can consider admitting that teacher education programs are preparing us to assume the duties of a teacher, we are in need of great reform and rebuilding, from the ground up. On the topic of commitment, I am pleased that CTEP admission has stopped. Instead, XXX University has introduced a minor in education, which enables students interested in the field of education to complete foundational courses that help them develop their leadership skills while completing placements and participating in reflective inquiry. It is a step in the right direction.
In terms of coursework, teacher education needs a wake up call. I do not recall discussing topics such as classroom management, navigating the first year of teaching, realities of the teaching market (beyond “no jobs unless you’re in French”), the politicization of education, the history of education in Ontario, and the lack of support for new teachers. The topic of assessment in teaching should receive its own course; however, it was limited to a few hours in our Curriculum Instruction courses and many of us entered the classroom in September feeling overwhelmed, disjointed, and unprepared. We have all heard the saying, “Teacher’s college is a joke. If you can use a projector, you’ll pass.” My most inspiring teachers have told me that when I become a teacher, I will have to teach myself everything. While I am committed to learning as a lifelong process, I am disappointed that in theory, I have received specialized training deemed sufficient to assume the duties of a teacher; yet, I still feel incapable.
I am angered when people say, “If it’s your first year teaching, good luck. It’s going to be hell.” I am willing to challenge myself as I aspire to become a more experienced practitioner; however, I am more reluctant than ever to sign my French permanent teaching contract. Where are the mentorship programs for recent graduates? What happened to pride in our profession? For example, occasional teachers who have not completed an long term occasional contract longer than 97 days are not eligible for the New Teacher Induction Program. I vividly remember my principal telling me, “I cannot assign you a mentor because you have been here for a week, but report cards are coming up; you should reach out to a colleague.” The individualistic nature of the teachers at the school meant that no one was willing to help me. If I cannot help myself, how am I supposed to help the students? Teacher education programs and professional associations should play a more effective role in the induction of teachers into the profession.
Last but certainly not least, I never fully understood why my program only admitted students majoring in French, mathematics, and chemistry. Ironically, when I applied to the school district with teachables in French and history, I was hired as a social sciences occasional teacher and not for my French proficiency. My point is that teacher education programs have become more concerned with ‘filling holes’ in the Ontario system as opposed to developing teachers that can take their practice anywhere in the world.
In reforming teacher education programs, we need to examine why people want to be teachers and what they need in order to succeed in the classroom. It is as simple as asking for input from teacher candidates instead of delivering a predetermined curriculum that satisfies objectives in a document. Teachers are often told to include their students as partners in learning, but I do not recall being asked for any input until I had completed my program. What if teacher education programs were improved through collaboration with school boards and other stakeholders to gain a deeper, richer understanding of what students need in the classroom? An example is teaching 21st century skills, which require a thorough examination of the curriculum, teacher quality, and assessment. Initially, CTEP sparked a fire inside me, but my teacher education program and the school board have slowly extinguished it. Although I am grateful for everything I have learned, I am discouraged.
A book that helped me (Cathy) process my observations more astutely is Ethnographic Eyes : A Teachers Guide to Classroom Observation, by Carolyn Frank. This book describes how a teacher educator trains her student teachers to see the classrooms they visit through an ethnographic perspective. To accomplish this, the teacher educator used the tool described below:
I used an activity called Notetaking/Notemaing to help student teachers understand the differences between their own personal perspectives and an insider, classroom perspective. Notetaking/notemaking was presented to the student teachers as an ethnographic tool to help them observe in classrooms. The student teachers were asked to keep an observation notebook and to divide their observations into two sections: Notetaking (or descriptive fieldnotes) on one side and notemaking (interpretations of what is being observed) on the other side. We then showed them either a photograph or a video of a classroom. In this way, it was hoped that the student teachers would begin to reflect on how their own personal biases interfered with an objective account or differed from the classroom members’ perspective. (p. 9)
This tool was used by this teacher educator throughout the year. She also showed her student teachers how to use it as a means of data collection towards effective assessment. At the close of the year, one of the student teachers stated, “[e]thnography has prepared me to think in a new way: a way that makes me think critically about everything that happens in my classroom.”
Try watching part of a classroom literacy event or a video of a class just to observe, then watch using notetaking/ notemaking. You may be surprised by what comes up.
I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:
Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.
Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.
Reflections on Teacher Education Bashing and What Teacher Education Taught Me
David Berliner’s (2000) list of a dozen criticisms levelled against teacher education struck a real nerve in me. I was not at all surprised by the volume of grievances or by the nature of their complaints: they are all “quite familiar” as Berliner himself points out. But I realized as I scanned these critiques about “Mickey Mouse” coursework and the futility of preparing people for a job that “any reasonably smart person can do” (Berliner, 2000, p. 358) that I hadn’t absorbed these assumptions from a suspicious general public. Quite the opposite, in fact, most of the people I know who aren’t teachers tell me regularly that they could never imagine being one. “I don’t know how you do it,” they often say. Instead, these critiques sounded like the grievances of my colleagues. I heard many of them before I’d even started my initial teacher training at OISE, and most often from graduates of it or a similar program. I heard them aired by a number of my fellow teachers in training, especially those who couldn’t wait to get into the “real world” of practice. I hear them even more often now in the hallways and in the staff and work rooms of the schools where I’ve taught since I graduated six years ago. Why are many of us so quick, I wonder, to throw our pre-service education under the bus?
I am just as guilty, at times, of bashing my own teacher education. Despite promoting itself as an integrated program, my Bachelor of Education at OISE at times felt like anything but. My cohort was bound more or less by common interests—I belonged to the “Global Education” cohort in the intermediate-senior panel—but my coursework, at times, felt disjointed in both content and pedagogy. While I was practicing inquiry-based learning in my social sciences methods course, for example, I was being drilled by weekly multiple-choice tests about stages of adolescent development in my psychology course. The program had something of a collective vision, to borrow Kennedy’s (2006) terms, but there appeared to be disagreement among my professors about the way to enact that vision. My practica felt even more disconnected, as though my placements had been last resorts (they were) instead of intentionally selected to meet my needs as a teacher candidate and the program’s own aims. By the end of the first week of my first practice teaching placement, my associate teacher, who was often mapping out football plays in the back of the room while “observing” my lessons, had taken to leaving shortly after the bell for a coffee run. The massive windows of that first classroom overlooked the parking lot below, and I would watch as his car pulled out of the lot and drove silently away while his twenty or so Grade 10 English students, most of them half-asleep, waited for me to do whatever it is that a teacher is meant to do.
These grievances, to be sure, weigh heavily as I reflect on my time in that program, just as the criticisms Berliner identifies carry substantial weight in conversations about what it is that teachers ought to learn and how they should learn it. However, what I find troubling about mine and others’ tendency to bash our own pre-service education is that it often rests on a flawed understanding of learning, and one that ultimately underestimates teachers’ own capacity as knowers and narrowly defines “practice” as the thing that happens between teachers and students in the classroom. If teaching does involve upwards of six distinguishable and simultaneously enacted areas of concern, as Kennedy (2006) has it, then perhaps we are asking too much of our pre-service programs. Or perhaps, since one of our profession’s hallmarks is the “abruptness with which full responsibility is assumed” (Lortie, 1975, p. 59), we are expecting too much too soon. I want to work against my own knee-jerk tendency to bash my pre-service education and do something I haven’t done as often: reflect on what it did offer me rather than what it didn’t.
First a slight detour. One of the most important lessons I learned during my undergraduate degree is that writing well involves taking risks and making mistakes. The professor who taught my fourth-year seminar in social movements explained this by way of analogy: approach writing, she told us, as though you are a potter. A potter puts a slab of clay on the potting wheel, and uses her hands to mould and remould the clay until she’s created something that satisfies her. At any time, the potter can remove the clay, roll it in her hands, and start again. A jeweller, on the other hand, who is cutting a diamond for a ring or a necklace, has only one chance to make the perfect incision or else he renders the stone worthless. Writers, she insisted, are under no such obligation: they can do as the potter does, working and reworking what they’ve written until they’re satisfied. I understood exactly what my professor was explaining—so much so that I now share this analogy regularly with my own students—but it’s only recently that I think I may have “learned” this lesson for myself. Or rather, more accurately, it’s only recently that I’ve begun learning this lesson in practice.
I share this analogy, and my “learning” of it, for two reasons. On one hand, it reminds me that learning is not a simple transaction: that we never simply or immediately “apply” what is “learned”—that learning is not about making deposits which we later cash in. I am still very much learning what I portended to have “learned” as a teacher candidate, just as I am still learning to be a potter rather than a diamond cutter. I “learned”, for example, about inquiry-based learning, about student-centred curriculum, about the importance of community and citizenship education to nurture the whole student—all the trademarks of the teacher education collective vision, really (Kennedy, 2006). But learning, for me, is not teleological—there is no fixed or obvious endpoint at which something is definitively “learned”. Standard curricula assume the opposite and posit that a clear destination is not only in sight, but that it can be reached within a bounded timeframe given the right sort of interventions. I don’t think of learning that way, and so why should I hold my pre-service training against these criteria?
The potter analogy is also instructive to me because I like to think I approach teaching in much the same way—as a process of working and reworking—and I do this because that is what I learned about teaching, in obvious and subtle ways, at OISE. My instructors here—particularly in the so-called “Mickey Mouse” methods courses—actually did what Loughran (2006) proposes: they invited us to “see into teaching” by giving us “access to the thoughts and actions that shape[d] their practice” as teacher educators (p. 5). When my social science methods instructor had us developing units of study, for example, she used an inquiry-based model that began with us musing on the purposes of social science education in the first place, and then reading the formal curriculum vis-à-vis our own images of what social science teaching and learning ought to entail. We threaded our own ways of knowing with curricular ways of knowing to develop lesson plans that resonated with and expanded our own values and experiences. Meanwhile she explained the pedagogical choices on her part—the sequencing, the purposeful arrangement of small groups, and so forth—and invited us to reflect on their efficacy for our own learning.
I wasn’t cognizant at the time of the many layers enacted in this seemingly simple task of unit planning. Or rather, although I knew my instructor had intentionally designed the experience with several layers in mind (she told us as much), it’s really only now, with a few years of being in the classroom behind me, that I’ve begun to understand how it and similar experiences prepared me for teaching in ways that I underestimated. It’s not just that my instructor “modelled” inquiry-based learning, or constructivist approaches, or whatever arm of the teacher education collective vision (Kennedy, 2006) such an exercise evokes, it’s that she positioned us, teachers-in-the-waiting, as knowers and doers. None of us had stepped into a classroom yet—we were not “practicing” in the traditional sense—but I believe, in retrospect, that we were in fact already “learning-by-doing” (Lortie, 1975). By weighing in on her decisions, by pottering with her, I feel that we were already “practicing” what teaching entails.
Kennedy (2006) is suspicious of any teacher education program that “lacks a repertoire of habits and rules of thumb” (p. 209). I could easily concur that my program left me woefully underprepared because I left with few practical ways of “doing” teaching. Sure, much of what I did “learn” was front-loaded, and perhaps necessarily so, but as Loughran (2006) suggests, it requires a different sort of energy “for students of teaching to shake themselves out of their well-established comfort zone of (perhaps passive) learning and to begin to question the taken for granted in their learning about teaching” (p. 4). I am resisting these critiques of “front-loading” and dumbed-down curricula because they posit, in the first place, that teacher education is merely preparation for practice and not a kind of practice in itself. Perhaps the greatest single strength of my pre-service education—and the rule of thumb that has sustained me in my career so far—is that it resisted this notion: it forced me to be a potter. Moulding, remoulding and shaping is what I continue to do.
References
Berliner, D.C. (2000). A personal response to those who bash teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 358-371.
Kennedy, M.M. (2006). Knowledge and vision in teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 205-211.
Lortie, D. (1975). The limits of socialization. In Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Loughran, J. (2006). Introduction: Developing a pedagogy of teacher education—What does that really mean? In Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education (1-10). New York: Routledge.
I (Clare) am currently teaching a graduate course Current Issues in Teacher Education. The first assignment asks students to:
Write a reflection paper on your experiences in a professional program (teacher education, Teaching English as a Second Language ….). Provide a very brief description of the program. Some questions to consider are: What were the strengths/weaknesses of the program? How well did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher? What were the limitations of the program? Have your views of the program changed since graduation? How could the program have been improved? Did the program prepare you to assume the duties of a teacher (or other position)? Do NOT respond to all of these questions. Select one or two and respond to them. In the fourth class of the course, you will work in small groups and share your paper with your fellow students.
Since all of the students in the course are teachers they have a good perspective on their program. Their assignments were so stellar I felt these would be of great value to share with other teacher educators. Over the next few weeks I will be sharing these papers. I learned much and I suspect you will too. I have changed the name of the university so that no school of education is identified.
Teacher Education: A Glimpse from the Lebanese Perspective
After reading about several teacher education programs in North America I have decided to shed some light on one of Lebanon’s leading teacher education programs that of the University XXX, my Alma Matter. After graduating, I experienced first-hand that the theories we were learning at university could come alive in the classroom. I was able to rise above what Linda Darling-Hammond describes as the “apprenticeship of observation” (2006,p.35) and that the shift from the teacher-centered approach, which I was taught in at school, to the student-centered approach, that I learned about in university, was actually doable and not just a bunch of fancy theories in thick American text-books. I expended my energy building connections in the classroom as well as in the students’ brain synapses, instead of wasting that energy lecturing to a bunch of bored twelve-year-olds. The practicum was where it all came together for me. Even if it was not the major part of the program, it was the most meaningful and vital in making me the teacher that I started out as. My focus, however, will not be on my experience per se, but rather on University XXX’s teacher education program and how it is today rather than 25 years ago. This would open a window for you to look into a developing country’s perspective on the teacher education program at University XXX and show you how it aims to raise Lebanon from the ashes of its civil strife.
On the university’s website, the Department of Education describes its future graduates as those who “aspire to become agents of change in their community” and ones who “develop into reflective teachers who believe in children as critical thinkers and independent learners” . They also promise to make of them “reflective practitioners, literate in information and communication technology, and critical thinkers committed to the human and moral values of lifelong learning, integrity, innovation, civic responsibility, and leadership.” From these statements we notice that this university program focuses on the school student as well as the student-teacher and the community as a whole. Classes at the university have a lot of hands-on-experiences. Professors make sure that their students are active participants in the class instead of passive listeners to lectures. This is mainly done by having reflection groups, thinking aloud about issues encountered in the literature or in the field. Case studies are also used to dissect certain issues and find viable solutions that are practical in the classroom. However, knowing the teachable subject well is not enough if not coupled with a strong basis in pedagogical knowledge of how to teach a certain subject matter and manage a classroom and practical hands-on field experiences in actual classrooms. At university XXX a student needs around 30 courses (each is one semester, 5 months long) to graduate with a BA in Education. 7 of those are university breadth courses. 8 courses are dedicated to subject matter like Math or English or History, for example. 7 courses are core education courses such as “Educational laws, Learning and Human Development, School and the Social Order” to name a few. 1 is a seminar. Finally, 5 courses are method courses that are the bulk of the field experience. So, if we look closely, subject matter and core pedagogical courses are almost equally balanced, but field experience only makes up a quarter of the total education course load and is usually concentrated in the last year of the program. However, I think this comes late in the program and is not enough to give the prospective teachers enough hands on experience or ample confidence to manage their own class when the time comes for it.
The placement in schools is usually done with partner schools after coordination meetings between the teacher-mentor and the professor. There are also meetings with representatives of the schools to follow up on how student-teachers are performing and giving student-teachers the opportunity to correct and design exams, give mini lessons and then eventually full lessons. Student teachers must also get acquainted with all classroom practices in the hosting school. The Professor then assesses the student-teacher ‘s teaching capabilities in the school classroom only once. The teacher-mentors are paid, sign for student-teachers’ attendance at school, and send official sealed reports about the student-teachers’ performances. However, student-teachers have the right to report to the head of the practice teaching committee in case the mentor or school does not cooperate or support them. This gives both parties a sense of accountability. So, the advantages of such a program are adding professionalism to teaching, familiarizing student-teachers with teaching experience ahead of time and putting them in direct contact with students, which gives the student-teachers a chance to see in practice what they learned and to practice teaching in existing schools. However, the quality of pre-service programs depends on the quality of mentors and the follow up on student-teachers in schools. As a teacher who has mentored for that university’s students before, I don’t remember anyone from the university interviewing me to see whether I would be a good role model for the student-teacher assigned to me. Furthermore, in my opinion, for the professor to just go to the school once and grade the student-teacher is not ample for there are several variables at play in a classroom. What if the class students were tired after a long day and not responsive to the activities, or what if the student-teacher was having a bad day?
The Education department at the university is a close-knit community, especially since the department is not very large. I asked a professor there to describe the relationship between fellow colleagues in the department, and between the university and schools in the community. She said that direct colleagues meet to compare, evaluate and exchange ideas about how to ensure that students apply and use knowledge across the courses they teach. But, she says that there is a disconnection between the university and the schools. In my opinion that is due to the fact that the university is thinking about the utopian school or maybe the Eurocentric ideal school that is trying to exist in Post-colonial Lebanon. But that is not the demographic of all schools in Lebanon. For example, the University is in West Beirut and is a very expensive private university, so it caters to the elite of the community with its student-teachers graduating to teach in the most prestigious private schools. Rarely do its graduates go and teach in the public sector, so the program is not geared towards that demographic. Furthermore, Lebanon is known for being Francophone, with half of its schools teaching in French the language, the Sciences and the Math programs, with the other half of the schools teaching them in English. Only Arabic language, Social Studies (not always), and Civics are taught in Arabic. But the university does not offer French pedagogy courses for literacy, Sciences, or Math, even though its main partner school has 50% of its program in French! I wonder how effective AUB graduate teachers are when they go on to teach Math or Science in French. Wouldn’t their colleagues who did their degree in courses designed for French do a more effective job?
There are many challenges and obstacles to maintaining a high level teacher education program. It is ideal to follow up on student-teachers after they graduate to make sure that the program caters for the teachers and the community of schools; however, many politics come in the face of that. At the university they do not follow up on where their student-teachers go after graduation. They might only hear from them if they come back for recommendations. Furthermore, they can’t follow up on them without an official invitation from the schools they teach at. There must also be more rigorous conditions for students to be admitted to the university program. If they raise the standards of the student-teachers they are recruiting, then they have to worry less about maintaining quality teaching and teachers as mentioned by the Curry School study. In that regard, the university does have high standards in recruiting students. For it is still not an easy feat to get accepted into the program. A prospective student needs at least a B average to get accepted there. Furthermore, establishing a network for exchanging experiences and expertise between universities in the country is important, as well as giving more incentives for research oriented efforts in the universities to see what that demographic needs instead of getting pre-bottled programs from North America or Europe that might not always cater to the Lebanese future-teacher or schools. Furthermore, I personally think that a teacher educator who has actually taught in a school will have more to give to student-teachers for then he/she would not be preaching from an ivory tower but rather would be a fellow comrade of sorts for the student-teachers. I have a problem with the view that the “ex-school teacher” cannot un-pack the teacher educator’s role and do a good job as Dinkleman’s study, that was written about in Loughran’s book, “Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education,” states. Why can’t the ex-school teacher have “an understanding of teaching that goes beyond being a good teacher” (p.14), but the teacher educator who has never taught can? The “ex-school teacher” who is a teacher educator and the teacher educator who has never taught, both have to do their unpacking and self-study and learn how “to be able to articulate the what, how, and why of teaching and to do so through the very experiences of teaching and learning about teaching” (italics in original) (Loughran, 2006, p. 14)
In a developing country like Lebanon, its young generation is its biggest asset. Making sure they grow up learning how to become critical thinkers is the stepping stone that will make them rise from the quagmire of ignorance that is pulling them down and keeping them entrenched in a world of brainwash and civil unrest. In order to do that, qualified and enthusiastic teachers are needed. If this particular university program can fulfill its aspirations to graduate teachers who can make critical thinkers and independent learners of their students, while at the same time producing teachers who aim to change their society for the better, then it is hopeful that Lebanon will be in better hands in the future.
Works Cited
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful Teaching Education:Lessons from Exemplary Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching and Learning about Teaching. London: Routledge.
Over the holidays I (Clive) have had a chance to do some novel reading, and have read murder mysteries by J. K. Rowling (The Silkworm) and Elizabeth George (For the Sake of Elena). I enjoyed these novels, especially the first, but these authors – bless their hearts – like to put in a lot of social commentary, ideas about life, personal interest, etc. This can be very interesting and educational or quite aggravating, depending on one’s interests – so I did a lot of skimming (especially in Elena).
Literacy Teaching and Teacher Education 