83583869 edwards-2004

Homework Help
https://www.homeworkping.com/
Research Paper help
Online Tutoring
click here for freelancing tutoring sites
Study Title: Teaching by proxy: Understanding how mentors are positioned in relationships
Study Author: Edwards, A. & Protheroe, L.
Publication Details: Oxford Review of Education, vol. 30, no. 2, 2004, pp. 183-198.
Summary:
What did the research aim to do?
This study investigated interactions between experienced teacher mentors and student teachers
within the context of initial (primary school) teacher training (ITT) conducted within a partnership
model involving schools and higher education institutions in England. It aimed to analyse what
mentors discuss with student teachers in relation to an ideal of learning to teach as a process of
'learning to be, see and respond in increasingly informed ways while working in classrooms'. This
ideal is informed by a view of expert teaching as involving the capacity to connect learner and
curriculum (Tochon 2000). From this perspective a pedagogic act calls for 'an informed
interpretation of a classroom event' followed by selecting a response that will in turn 'assist pupils
to… participate meaningfully in the opportunities for learning available to them'. Hence, the issue
was the extent to which teacher mentors interacted with student teachers in ways that helped
promote the interpretative capacities and dispositions required. To address this issue the
researchers framed three research questions:
1. What do mentors believe they offer student teachers as they learn to teach in primary
school classrooms?
2. What do they in fact offer [the student teachers]?
3. What does the way they support student teachers tell us about how mentors are positioned
in the activity systems of their own schools and ITT programs?
How was the study designed?
The paper reports the case study component of a larger study of two cohorts (N=125) of students
doing 1-year postgraduate primary teaching programs at two institutions. Twelve case study
participants, six from each program, were selected (one subsequently dropped out) and studied as
they learned to teach English (literacy) and mathematics (numeracy); 24 teacher mentors (one per
student for each of English and mathematics) participated. Three data subsets were collected:
• The researchers conducted post-observation interviews with the student teachers to discuss
their interpretation of classroom events that occurred during their teaching session (as noted by
the researchers whilst observing the student teachers). There were four interviews per
participant: one each for English and mathematics in each of their first and second teaching
practices (45 interviews).

• 47 interviews were conducted with the teacher mentors (1 each per mentor per teaching
practice) about what they intended to focus on in their post-observation feedback
conversations with the student teachers.
• 47 post-observation feedback conversations (teacher mentors with student teachers).
Data were audiorecorded and transcribed, and subsequently subjected to content analysis
informed by two main theory sources: research questions 1 and 2 were informed by sociocultural
theories of learning underpinning the ideal of teaching adopted in the research; the third research
question was informed by Activity Theory developed by Yrjo Engstrom (1996, 2001) in order to
understand the feedback provided by teacher mentors in relation to how they are positioned within
schools and training partnerships. Data analysis also involved use of an important distinction
between observations that noted pupils' actions and observations where the focus was on student
teachers.
What were the limitations?
Case studies have strictly limited generalisability; however, this study provided an exemplary
model that could be adapted for further research within settings that employ or are considering
employing the kinds of partnerships involved in the two programs investigated.
What were the findings?
With respect to Questions 1 and 2:
• Post observation interviews with student teachers indicated that the student teachers saw more
clearly what specific pupils could do (37 of 45 interviews); they felt more confident about
classroom management (28 interviews); and that they saw more clearly how to move pupils
through the curriculum (18 interviews).
• Interviews with teacher mentors conducted prior to the feedback conversations about what they
would talk to student teachers about emphasised how to take pupils through the curriculum (41
of 47 interviews); providing knowledge of the pupils (26 interviews); and providing advice on
discipline and control.
• There was a high degree of consistency between what the mentors said they would cover in
the feedback conversations, what they did in fact cover, and what the student teachers derived
from the feedback conversations.
The overall findings for Questions 1 and 2 are summarised in the following tables:
Table 1: Ranks and percentages of meaning units of talk taken from conversations between
mentors and students following a classroom observation session in the first and second teaching
practice (TP1 and TP2)

Table 2: Ranks and percentages of meaning units of talk taken from conversations between
mentors and students following classroom observations in literacy and numeracy (p. 190)
As can be seen, the three most highly ranked forms of mentor talk -- analysed according to coded
categories of meaning -- in the recorded post-observation conversations with the students during
the first teaching practice round were also the top three in the second teaching practice round. The
emphases merely exchanged places within the top three ranks. The figures show that mentors
were mainly concerned with the pace at which student teachers covered the curriculum content
and with how effectively the student teachers managed the children in class whilst covering the

curriculum. This conformed closely to what the mentors said they intended to cover in the post
observation conversations. Not surprisingly, the same patterns were repeated in those components
of the study that focused more specifically on the literacy and numeracy aspects of learning to
teach (Table 2). In relation to these tables the researchers draw attention to the relatively low
ranking assigned to mentors' advice on the use of activities and resources through which the
children might learn: that is, on helping the students to see the pedagogic potential in conventional
classroom resources and how these could be mobilised to help promote learning.
In short, this data suggests that mentors' concerns were focused on how student teachers could
get pupils to attend to the tasks they were set and to work through the curriculum.
With respect to Question 3:
• The Activity Theory-based analysis of the interactions suggested that the communities of
practice being investigated valued 'operating as classrooms in schools more than as part of
training partnerships'. In other words, the interactions affirmed a community concerned with the
goals of curriculum coverage and pupil performance rather than one concerned with
'developing' the student teacher as a pedagogic expert.
• The school-higher education institution partnership operated from a model that reinforced the
expectation that student teachers would operate as proxy teachers.
• The mentoring given to the student teachers 'did not encourage them to engage in responsive
pedagogic acts' of the kind assumed in the teaching ideal underlying the research.
What conclusions were drawn from the research?
The major conclusion was that, relative to the ideal of teaching expertise underpinning the study,
the kinds of mentoring interactions occurring in the programs investigated were not conducive to
developing student teachers as future expert teachers. Furthermore, this should not be understood
as shortcomings of the teacher mentors but, rather, as a more or less inevitable consequence of
the activity systems in which they (and the student teachers) participate, and how teacher mentors
are positioned within these systems.
What are the implications of the study?
The study implies that if student teachers are to be trained to undertake 'responsive deliberative
action' within classrooms, there is a strong case for partnerships focusing on how they can support
schools as sites where teachers and trainee teachers 'do more than [just] ensure that the
curriculum is delivered'. The kinds of studies and analyses that can be made using Engstöm's
approach to Activity Theory may be useful bases from which to begin a concrete transformation of
current teaching and teacher training practices.
Generalisability and significance for Queensland
The potential significance of this study for Queensland, with its 'Smart State' and 'Productive
Pedagogies' orientations is considerable. If Queensland decides to move further toward the kinds
of partnerships in place in England, it will be important to consider the case for supporting schools
as sites concerned with more than curriculum delivery alone.

Where can interested readers find out more?
Engström, Y. 1996, ‘Overcoming the encapsulation of school learning’, in Introduction to Vygotsky,
ed. H. Daniels, Routledge, London.
Engström, Y. (ed.) 2001, Activity Theory and Social Capital: Research Reports 5, Center for
Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Available at
http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/
Tochon, P. 2000, ‘When authentic experiences are 'enminded' into disciplinary genres: Crossing
biographic and situated knowledge’, Learning and Instruction, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 331-359.
Keywords: teacher education, mentoring, pedagogy
Homework Help
Math homework help
Research Paper help
Algebra Help
Calculus Help
Accounting help
Paper Help
Writing Help
Online Tutor
Online Tutoring

83583869 edwards-2004

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais de homeworkping3

Mais de homeworkping3 (20)

Último

Último (20)

83583869 edwards-2004