Question 3: Teacher Education, Pre-service and Inservice

Teachers possess different psychological insights, which results in different programmes of action. Should these psychological insights be made explicit and theorized as a requirement during teacher training?

 

(1) learning is a journey, where

(2) the teacher acts as facilitator (lesson designer) and guide (assisting student during lesson journey),

(3) the student and teacher work together as equal partners, and

(4) the integration of technology is liberating or domesticating

 

These insights lead to certain programmes of action which can involve the teacher "positioning" the student to be able to question, predict or hypothesize. It could also incorporate a visual, simulation or interactivity to support student construction of knowledge, use it as a resource to build concepts to build knowledge or assist students in developing a conceptual understanding of visual, simulation or interactivity.

---

Elizabeth

I am not sure about this one. Does an understanding of these insights come with experience? Perhaps it is something to be covered in a practicum setting?

 

• Elizabeth, what if the mentor teacher does not have experience or understanding of the insights that lead to these programmes of action when integrating technology into the classroom? arlene

 

Linda

I think this is a perfect opportunity for a student teacher to extend the mentor teacher's horizons.....teacher ed programs have to start somewhere in the integration of tech into classrooms. Why not start with educating pre-service teachers and having them act almost as missionaries, carrying the "techie" gospel to the uninitiated? Of course, there will always be "enlightened" mentor teachers, in which case the third insight listed above could come into play and ultimately, ideally, lead to the fourth step.

 

Simon

I often hear from mentor teachers that they learn from the student teacher just as much as the student teacher learns from them. I like the metaphor of student teachers acting as "missionaries" and trying to convert the uncoverted. It is important to start providing instruction in educational technology at the pre-service level, and to be able to see its practice in classrooms; however, integrating technology into education is not mandatory for teacher certification - maybe requirements need to change.

 

Arlene, It's good to hear that U of A requires a technology in education course. It's not required here in B.C. - unless things have changed.

 

Arlene

When I did my undergrad at U of A, a technology-in-education course was mandatory and I believe that it still is. One of the categories for self-evaluation and final mentor teacher evaluation for Education students at the U of A when completing their student teaching is integration of technology into lessons so the expectation is explicit and they are evaluated on it. I assume this is not the case everywhere.

 

Val

Having integration of technology into lessons as an expectation for student teachers is wonderful. It is a way, like this course, to get us using these tools. I like Simon's metaphor of missionaries. Student teachers can teach the mentor teacher a lot about technology and vice versa. We have two wonderful student teachers in our school and they are being mentored by two really strong, dynamic teachers. Its fun to listen to their conversations in the staffroom. It is clear they are collaborating and mentoring each other. It was in one of these classes that YouTube is being used (as I mentioned in question 2's discussion).

 

I, like Elizabeth, am unsure of this one. Discussing psychological insights with veteran teachers who may or may not use technology in their classroom is a very delicate balance. In a recent discussion with two other teachers one mentioned how much they loathe self help books such as The Four Agreements, while the other mentioned how much they love that book. The teacher disliking it said it is just common sense. I don't need to read an entire book to tell me things I already know that make sense. The other felt it offered insight and reminders of keeping focused on things that will help you be a better person. "Our principal actually quoted the Four Agreements at our first staff meeting in September." I see these two views coming up in discussing psychological insights. Some may feel they already know it and its common sense and may feel insulted in bringing it up, while others may adopt it with open arms. Similar to asking some teachers to try technology in their classrooms. For the record the teacher who doesn't like the books, is one of the strongest most common sense teachers I have ever worked with and does follow the above insights.

 

Arlene

Val, I think you're right in saying that the four insights (learning as journey; teacher as facilitator in lesson design and guide during lesson; mutual investment; and technology as liberating and/or domesticating) are quite common sense. But, like many things, I think we have a tendency to forget or have so much on our plate that we may not have the time to reflect on some things as we wish we did. Schmoker talks about this in Results Now. I think reminders or refreshers are good to bring those ideas up to the forefront. I mentioned zone of proximal development to a colleague and they looked at me like a deer in headlights. I suspect if I explained it more they would remember it from their undergrad days. Yet, they've been teaching half as long as I have and don't remember.

 

What if the student teacher is not in a student teaching situation where the mentor teacher is comfortable integrating technology and, as such, strongly discourages the student teacher from doing so? In theory, this should not be occurring, however, I'm guessing it does happen. Then what?

 

At the end of "graduating students who are not only learned but also learners," Donham (2007) mentions intentionality. Even though it applies to a slightly different context, as students developing dispositions of learners, I couldn't help but connect it to our discussion of the four insights and common sense. For some the insights are common sense; for other's they aren't. It's not enough to mention or expect it. Meaningful integration of computer technology doen't happen by accident. It happens through knowledge, understanding and design.

 

Stephanie

Arlene, I know that “deer in the headlights” feeling very well. There is so much lingo in the world of education that anytime spent out of the thick of it can make you feel quite clueless. In taking this course I have frequently felt I was not fluent enough in eduspeak to have anything to offer. At the same time I am refreshed and re-inspired by my interaction with new educational theories and new possibilities and applications in the form of new technological tools. Consider that a solid plug for making psychological insights explicit and theorized as a requirement during teacher training (and upgrading, I would add).

 

The other piece I have to offer comes from work I did as the Director of Religious Education for the Unitarian church----my work there was with parents and kids creating a culture of inquiry. We wanted kids to ask the big questions, to learn about the world and themselves by doing things and talking about their experiences. Not that different from what I wanted my own children to experience in their regular school curriculums. One of our main ’claims to fame’ as Unitarians was the fact that we saw ourselves as lifelong learners, that

(1)learning is a journey, where(2) the teacher(parents and community) act as facilitator (lesson designer) and guide (assisting student during lesson journey),

(3) the student and teacher work together as equal partners (youth is respected and encouraged to take on leadership roles), and the integration of technology is liberating and domesticating( the older youth were early users of technology to plan district wide events, to communicate with others across town and across the continent, to explore the big ideas in discussion using Facebook, blogs, wikis and whatever is coming next)

 

My point here is not to prosyletize,(and my deep apology if this is inappropriate), but my experience has been outside of the regular system. One thing I do feel well prepared to offer, is support for these four insights. I do think they should be part of pre-service training and continuing professional development. To me, these are a philosophical foundation for our sense of purpose as educators. The technology is new, but as lifelong learners ourselves, we see the educational possibilities that come with the world of Web 2.0, and it is our duty and privilege to engage! Okay, I know that sounds over the top, and I recognize the reality of teacher-overload, but gradually, over whatever time it takes, we need to move toward meaningful technological integration. How that will be done is another issue....

 

Val

I agree Arlene that we have to keep focusing on the 'insights' and likely most of us won't remember them specificially. In our school we are using Reading Power and All on the same Page (from the New Westminster school district), as well as Schmoker's Results Now for reference. Schmoker talks about classes being individual pods and each student goes to a 'new school each year' as they learn the methods, terminology etc of the new teacher. While I think this point is overexaggerated for most schools the point is to have a common language. If I asked a colleague about the zone of proximal development I too would get, and up until a month ago, would give a 'deer in the head lights look'. What we are doing at our school is getting everyone on the same page. Last Thursday we had divisional meetings regarding our implementation of Reading Power. Our goal as a staff is to realize, most, if not all, are doing some part of the strategy in their classes. We just need to get everyone speaking the same terminology. Four of us were able to de-stress one teacher about implementing Reading Power, when we talked about all the things she was doing in her classroom that were part of reading power. We talked about eg. of tweaking lessons to include terminology etc. She was so relieved she didn't have to 'start over' with another new way of teaching. I think this fear is also common in teachers trying to introduce technology. When shown what they are actually doing already, what they know and how easy small steps can be, its much easier to embrace.

 

I love Katie's comment of the best teaching happens when she's learning. Great stuff! I like your example of the SS reference/research.

 

Cindy

I feel that it is very important that the four psychological insights be studied and infused into teacher training. How we approach technology and how students utilize and learn with technology has changed dramatically over the years. We need to ensure that the new generation of educators have an informed understanding and effectively support technology development in classrooms. The young student teachers of today are most likely our ‘digital natives’. Through successful collaboration with their mentoring teachers, they can develop a better understanding of students and the learning process. At the same time, the ‘digital natives’ can be instrumental in guiding and teaching the ‘digital immigrants’ the successful process and value of integrating Web 2.0 tools into their teaching. It is a win-win-win situation, involving student teachers, seasoned classroom teachers and students.

 

John

I am noticing a dynamic something like this when hanging around with our student teachers and their cooperating teachers. The student teachers are (generally) comfortable with technology and incorporate it with some ease (The biggest technical struggle for one super young education student is keeping the plants alive in a Grade 1 unit on living things). The cooperating teachers are focusing on classroom management and realistic plans. What these student teachers are gaining from their mentoring teachers is a bit of the art of teaching. So, I guess that will help them to aim for the very most effective "liberating" uses of technology.

 

I would say that many young teachers are very fixated on pleasing their cooperating teacher (stressful) and some might need time to really understand their student group. Whatever model that would help them to plan the integration of technology would need to be straight forward and easy to plug into a particular situation. The four insights mentioned could fit the bill if some concrete applications could be given.

 

Val  Following on John's comment that student teachers are fixated on pleasing their sponsor teacher, I would say it is this 'self-pressure' that would make insight #3 - working as equal partners, difficult.  As much as the sponsor teacher puts the student teacher at ease and accepts them as equals in the classroom, I'm sure we all remember back to our Student teaching days, when we were nervous and had the 'need to please' disease.  Perhaps with student teachers being more comfortable with technology and web 2.0 tools for the classroom, they would feel more like an equal partner than a 'student' if able to incorporate technology into their lessons.   

I feel the sponsor teacher and student teacher could incorporate the 4 insights into their learning/teaching experience if shown these insights in practice (mentoring).  For example, inquiry based learning and critical thinking lead to the teacher being the facilitator but the student being the driver. An excellent site for primary questioning is Essential Questions by Bellingham School District.  This site offers inquirey based questions for K-5 that force students to solve a problem or make a decision.   Another great site for all ages is Jamie MacKenzie's questioning.org A favourite to check out is his The NoTime Slam Dunk Digital Lesson.  With concrete lessons to allow student teachers and teachers to reach the insights, I believe the goal of implementing them is doable.