This material may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying without the permission of the copyright holder

Alberta Teachers Association (2001) - Volume 8(2), 8-14

Forging Ahead, Forging Links: School/University Partnerships for Teacher Education

Dr Kathy Sanford and Dr Tim Hopper
University of Victoria

Introduction

What has changed in field experience at the University of Alberta? Despite rumours and pressures to the contrary, educational practices and understandings continued to develop, both in schools and in university settings – we forge ahead in an ever-increasingly complex profession. As (Zeichner, 1999) comments, knowledge of education is continually created by teachers, by teacher educators, and by student teachers as we advance the profession of teaching. However, in demanding and challenging times, it is easy to get caught up in one location and neglect the links that need to be created and maintained between institutions. A challenge we face in education now is to recognize and name the spaces in-between, where common understandings can be fostered and developed.

A new millennium serves to reinforce the awareness we have had for decades, that is, that teachers need new skills and understandings in order to successfully teach their 21^st century students. Some of the more obvious skills include use of technology and education of diverse special needs. However, teachers today also need increasingly to be sensitive to issues of social justice such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation. They need also to be knowledgeable about environmental and global issues that directly and indirectly affect their students. The complexities suggested by individual and group needs require increasingly diverse and broad sets of skills and knowledge and it is only through collaboration that the needs of student teachers will be met. Opportunities for school educators and university educators to work together have been growing, and need to continue to be encouraged. Many school coordinators have been instrumental in facilitating course delivery at their school sites, enabling more exchange of ideas and practices, growing awareness of each others’ realities, and increasing respect between school and university teachers.

The current teacher education program at the University of Alberta, now in its fifth year, has been responsive to the suggestions from practicing teachers and to the needs of a new age, including in its program mandatory courses in computer technology, classroom management, inclusion, and assessment, and the program offers a range of optional courses focusing on global and environmental issues vital to education. The roles of the participants in the student teachers’ program, i.e., course instructors, cooperating teachers, and university facilitators, have been articulated and elaborated so that students graduating from the Faculty of Education receive support in understanding the complexity of the teaching profession and in developing their own skill and confidence as teachers. Based on common sense and summaries of research in teacher education (Kagan, 1992; Wideen, Mayer-Smith, & Moon, 1998), the program has also attempted to articulate a sequential, progressive series of field experiences that address explicit developmental needs of the student teachers.

Sequential, Progressive Field Experiences

The sequence of the three field experiences provides a different focus at each level. The focus is important to note as each subsequent field experience relies on the understandings gleaned from the previous ones, and each antecedent field experience provides a foundation upon which future learning about teaching is supported. The first field experience, EDFX 200, provides a broad view of the teaching profession, including an introductory examination of both macro (e.g., socio-economics, politics, geography) and micro (e.g., organization, lesson planning, content knowledge, curriculum awareness, classroom management) aspects of education (see Figure 1). At this first level, student teachers’ experiences assist them in building relationships and recognizing the importance of relationships in teaching, in gaining self-confidence in their abilities and potential, questioning and challenging their previously held assumptions, and in making a commitment to their own development as professional educators and ongoing learners. The experiences offered in the diverse classrooms they visit help them to broaden their perspectives, valuing multiple perspectives and enabling them to look through a variety of lenses. In this way student teachers develop a sense of a teacher identity.

During the second level, the student teachers’ focus more on issues of “classroom management”. Their developing understanding of management issues from the level 1 field experience is enabled when they realize a sense of confidence and have formed positive relationships in teaching communities, i.e., peers, cooperating teachers, university instructors and facilitators. Their broadened and deepened understanding of the complexities of teaching enable them to increasingly manage and organize a diversity of students, to work collaboratively and respectfully, to build a positive atmosphere and environment, and to connect issues of management to the practicalities of planning successful learning experiences.

Positive field experiences in levels one and two, where student teachers are able to recognize and begin to articulate their learning, enable them to begin to consider the complexities of planning in specific curricular areas, to manage a body of knowledge in meaningful ways for their students, and to develop a vision for their students’ learning over the course of a unit of study and eventually over the course of a year.

The student teachers’ perceptions of the location of their most profound learning to teach is in the schools during their field experiences, and Figure 1 shows recognition of this by placing field experiences at the core of the program. The university courses surrounding each of the field experiences support and supplement the field-based learning. The challenge for university instructors is to make the theoretical understandings relevant to the practical demands of teaching, and to awaken the prospective teachers to multiple realities and depth of understanding at both micro and macro levels.

Supporting Student Teachers Learning to Teach

Student teachers have a great deal to learn in preparation for their foray into the education profession, and they realize this early on. This realization often creates in them a panic that inhibits their ability to see and hear clearly, to make connections, and to select important knowledge for themselves. The new program has attempted to address these student teacher needs by providing more and stronger support throughout their program.

While the supportive role of the cooperating teacher has always been recognized, serious attempts to offer other levels of support (of university facilitators, course instructors, student teachers’ peer groups) have been made. These various roles, while linked, differ in significant ways; this difference needs to be clearly identified in order that responsibilities are not overlapped in unproductive ways. The knowledge that cooperating teachers share with student teachers (specific to curriculum, school culture, student information) is clearly different than the knowledge provided by university facilitators or course instructors (generalized knowledge about students, curriculum, culture), and the differences need to be recognized and acknowledged as beneficial to the student teacher rather than detrimental (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; Sanford & Hopper, 2000).

Roles of participants in the process of learning to teach

Course Instructors

Course instructors are the first participants in the teacher education program that student teachers meet, and play a significant role in developing confidence, relationships, and attitudes. Through their course offerings, the instructors are conscious of the need for relevance perceived by the student teachers’ to their development as practicing teachers, and this relevance is often developed by making connections to student teachers’ field experiences and existing teaching knowledge and practices.

Student Teachers

The student teachers need to be led to a position of increased responsibility for their own learning, and increased respect for a multiplicity of perspectives and effective practices. The student/teacher binary becomes an increasing frustration for student teachers struggling to develop a confident sense of themselves as teachers, and they often get lost in the slash between the two. They often caught in what (Britzman, 1991) refers to as the myths of learning to teach such as you are born a teacher, teachers are self-made, and learning is synonymous with control. Student teachers often find themselves caught in the contradictions of being a students friend or foe, as seek a sense of their own effective teacher identity. The sequential progressive field experiences attempt to address the changes in the student teachers from the inception of their program to the conclusion, and course offerings and assignments need to also be reflective of the growth of these fledgling teachers.

Cooperating Teachers

The role of cooperating teacher is a demanding and crucial one, not only for the individual student teachers with whom they work, but for the forging of the profession as a whole. Cooperating teachers need opportunities to understand the complexities of their mentoring role, to talk with colleagues, to share their understandings and experiences with university instructors and program developers, and to spend time with their student teachers. Learning to mentor requires not only an in-depth understanding of specific classrooms, students, and curriculum, but also a broad vision of future directions of education. Opportunities for reflection on the issues of education, both specific and general, can offer linked in-service opportunities (professional development) as well as pre-service education.

University Facilitators

The role of university facilitator is relatively new, having been developed with the new program beginning in 1996. University facilitators are most often familiar with school life as well as university life, and provide critical links between expectations and understandings at the university and at the school site. They are familiar with field experience handbooks, course content, and the overall teacher education program (University of Alberta Field Experience Handbook 2000-2001). Theirs is a vital role in supporting student teachers in the field, where their confidence and skill levels are often taxed. They also offer support to the cooperating teacher, offering an alternative perspective and an interested ear. Existing in the junction between the two institutions, university facilitators must be skilled at articulating the knowledge of both institutions, and assist in making theoretical and practical learning connected and visible for the student teachers.

Forging Links between Schools and University

For several years we have been working with schools in the Edmonton area, initially to provide effective and successful field experiences, and then to offer courses at the school sites. One high school coordinator encouraged one of us to conduct a university class at his school, and further supported our collaborative venture by presenting to the class and inviting other staff members to become involved with the student teachers. Two other high schools have also become involved in similar ways, suggesting issues and strategies for enabling student teachers to learn about teaching. We have had equally successful experiences with elementary and junior high schools, where the staff and ourselves as course instructor/university facilitators have collaboratively provided stimulating learning environments for the student teachers. In addition to these experiences being seen in positive ways by the student teachers themselves, the teacher participants at each school have had opportunities to impact the course content in significant ways and to enable the integration of “theory” with “practice”. They have also enhanced their own understandings of learning to teach, forming communities in which they can work together and work with university faculties to present ideas at conferences and conventions. The closer connections that are forged between schools and university courses enable student teachers to be mentored by experienced caring professionals who are committed to teacher education. Such relationships enable student teachers to ask questions and puzzle through the complexities in supported learning communities.

Embracing complexity

Sites of learning are obviously highly complex organisms that demand a wide range of skills, knowledge, and expertise. This complexity can often create fear on the part of the student teachers who are aware of their lack of experience and worry about lack of background knowledge. As suggested previously and well documented in learning how to teach literature (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; Zeichner, 1999), student teachers need to be provided with support and a sense of security in order to feel comfortable enough to develop the confidence to manage a class of students, to take risks and to admit their insecurities. Supportive environments enable student teachers to embrace the complexities of their profession and of their school culture rather than attempting to reduce it to its simplest terms. A frame of mind and attitude that shows willingness to respond flexibly to new situations and challenges will enable successful communities of learners to develop and flourish, working in tandem to prepare student teachers for positive educational experiences and meaningful lives.

REFERENCES

Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. Albany: State University of New York press.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationship of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 249-305). Washington: American Educational Research Association.

Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129-169.

Sanford, K., & Hopper, T. (2000). Mentoring not monitoring: "Mediating" a "whole school" model in supervising pre-service teachers. AJER, XLVI (2) (pp. 149-166). Alberta Journal of Educational Research, XLVI(2), 149-166.

University of Alberta Field Experience Handbook (2000-2001). Edmonton, Alberta, Faculty of Education, University of Alberta.

Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68(2).

Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(9), 4-15.

Figure 1: A diagram of the University of Alberta teacher education program