 |
|
|
| Student Teaching
Experiences and What Student Teachers are Learning about Teaching
Learning #2 Learning #3 Learning #4 Learning #5 Learning #6 Learning #7 Learning #8 Learning #9 Learning #10 Learning #11 Learning #12
|
TEACHING
Several years later, Carter (1990) summarized the expansive body of "learning to teach" literature, suggesting that learning to teach is based on a knowledge conception of teaching that is directly related to classroom performance. This "professional" knowledge is not the formal subject-matter knowledge or procedural rules that guide what teachers do, matters typically the focus of undergraduate teacher education programs. Instead, novice teachers gradually acquire professional knowledge as they struggle at teaching, that is, as they hone their pedagogical skills by reflecting upon and continuously aiming to refine their classroom practice. Then, as novices become neophytes, these women and men learn to process an increasing number of bits and more complex pieces of information imported from the classroom environment. Attending to these cues, neophytes then formulate plans, make decisions, and evaluate alternative courses of action. This refined ability—evidenced in the expanding body of professional knowledge that neophytes possess and novices have yet to acquire—demarcates more expert teachers from their less expert colleagues who, as of yet, have not learned to teach. How, then, do expert teachers overcome the deficiencies associated with the novice and neophyte colleagues? Kagan (1992) believes the "learning to teach" literature provides evidence that, during the course of the first five years of professional practice, novice teachers who develop into neophyte teachers achieve this status by critically examining their interactions with students and not allowing their personal beliefs and images about teaching and learning to prejudice their reflections (Figure 1). In addition, novices learn to acknowledge where their beliefs and images are incorrect or invalid and adjust accordingly. It also seems that the teacher knowledge (i.e., the mental images they carry of themselves and their students) as well as their beliefs and problem-solving skills interact powerfully to promote student learning, but only if novice teachers engage in sustained reflection upon what is actually transpiring within their classrooms. Along the way, another individual must substitute authority by introducing cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) into the novice and neophyte teacher’s mind, upsetting the comfortable status quo of this teacher’s well-ordered world to reveal where the neophyte’s preconceptions do not gibe with classroom reality (Figure 2). For example, a department chair, grade level coordinator, or mentor teacher substitutes one’s expertise for a less mature colleague’s, all in order that professional maturity will flourish. Likewise, principals—in the role of instructional leader—substitute their more mature intellects, power of will, and breadth of experience for a novice or neophyte teacher’s less mature intellect, power of will, and breadth of experience. And, given patience, persistence, practice, and openness to the critical feedback provided by their more expert colleagues, novice and neophyte teachers will grow toward greater professional maturity and become more capable of exercising authority and self-governance. The learning to teach literature, then, identifies what appears to be a five-year pattern in the development of expert teachers. Novice teachers come to the profession with a keen desire to teach, but it is in classroom practice not pre-service training where novices actually learn to teach. During the first two years, novices first learn how to exercise control over the classroom environment, especially by attending to student behavior. Then, as novices feel comfortable in leading a classroom full of students, novice teachers gradually shift their focus to the content of instruction, by working to develop lesson plans they believe will interest students, and to assessment, by developing schemes to measure student learning. Interestingly, in these two early stages, the novice’s attention is directed upon oneself and one’s activities not upon the students and what they are learning. The novice’s achievement—which is no small achievement, indeed—presents a crucial moment when one’s "learning to teach" begins to transform classroom practice. That is, because novices exercise control over the classroom and are able to communicate instructional content effectively, they now can turn their attention away from excessive concern with self and toward their students. And so it is that novices have become neophyte teachers, for they are now able to note differences between students, whether that be their interest (or lack thereof), ability, or other idiosyncratic characteristics. At this point, the pressing question for neophyte teachers seems not to be "What do I need to do?" but "What’s going on with the students?" Thus, by inquiring into student motivation, neophytes are able to demonstrate a personal interest in their students and, not surprisingly, their students begin to feel and to appreciate their teacher’s interest which may (or may not) translate into increased motivation to learn. With a solid pedagogical foundation established, the feedback students provide neophyte teachers provides a framework for them to develop new and more interesting, if not more creative and exciting pedagogical methods that offer the promise of engaging their students more fully in learning activities. This indicates a tremendous advance in expertise, professionally speaking, as neophytes have moved away from worrying about classroom discipline and communicating/assessing instructional content to worrying about the quality of their students’ learning. Gradually, their professional knowledge is approximating that associated with an expert than a novice. Neophytes, then, construct their practice upon three competencies: good classroom discipline, substantive instruction and assessment, and warm human relations. Their classrooms are characterized by students engaged in learning. Furthermore, the students experience their teachers’ care, both as individual and as groups. And yet, there is another substantive learning that must transpire if neophytes are to become experts, namely, they need to learn how to derive satisfaction from teaching. This intangible element is what sustains expert teachers and provides the intrinsic challenge needed if they are to strive toward greater professional maturity by engaging in regular and ongoing professional development. Thus, expertise in teaching does not necessarily
correlate with an individual's length of service in the profession. That is, one can
remain a novice or neophyte teacher for years and decades, that is, if the individual does
not engage in systematic reflection upon actual classroom practice and endeavor
continuously to refine it. Without sustained reflection on practice, the learning to
teach literature suggests that the chances decrease that novices will develop into
neophyte and expert teachers. And, unless someone substitutes authority for that of the
novice and neophyte, the odds increase that classrooms will devolve into unimaginative
meeting places characterized more by rote educational decision making and impersonal
"teacher-proofed" curricula than by more deliberative interventions and
authentic educational decision making (Burlingame & Sergiovanni, 1993).
Berliner, D. C. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15(7), 5-13. Burlingame, M., & Sergiovanni, T. (1993). Some questions about school leadership and communication theory. Journal of Management Systems, 5(2), 51-61. Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291-310). New York: Macmillan. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129-169.c |
