This article was downloaded by: [Oklahoma State University]On: 20 December 2014, At: 17:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Action in TeacherEducationPublication details, including instructionsfor authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20

Becoming a Teacher:The Development ofPreservice TeacherPerspectivesE. Wayne Ross aa Department of Teacher Education ,University at Albany, State University of NewYorkPublished online: 19 Jul 2012.

To cite this article: E. Wayne Ross (1988) Becoming a Teacher: TheDevelopment of Preservice Teacher Perspectives, Action in Teacher Education,10:2, 101-109, DOI: 10.1080/01626620.1988.10519395

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1988.10519395

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy ofall the information (the “Content”) contained in the publicationson our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to theaccuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content.Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly

or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the useof the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

The perspecti ves oj social studies student teachers were studie d and analyzed .The investigator concludes that teachers' perspectives are a produ ct oj a dialectica lprocess oj profe ssional socialization .

Becoming a Teacher: The Development ofPreservice Teacher Perspectives

INTRODUCTION

A review of teacher education research reveals four basic fram ework s for ex ­amining the process of becom ing a teacher. These framewor ks have been labeledby Veenman (1984) as: (a) perceived problem s of beginning teachers (e .g. , Cruick­shank , Kenned y , & Myers, 1974 ), (b) developm ent al stage co ncerns (e .g ., Fuller& Bown , 1975), (c) cog nitive developm ent al (e .g ., Sprinthall & Thies-Sprinthall ,1983), and (d) teacher socializa tion (e .g . , Lacey, 1977 ).

Researchers using the perceived problem s of beginning teachers framework haveproduced ge neral agreement on the most often perceived problem s of beginnin gteachers , however this approac h has little to say about how context, teacher char­acteristics , and individual differences influence teachers ' percepti ons and perfor­mance . Veenm an (1984) notes that the three remaining frameworks are all co ncernedwith changes in preserv ice teachers , but their sources of ideas and concepts aredifferent. The development al stage co ncerns and cog nitive developm ent al frame­work s provide a way of catego rizing teachers according to how they think and whatcapaci ties they do or do not have at various career stages . These frameworks con­sider changes in the individu al as self- directed and employ psychological conceptsin the inves tigation of these changes .

Of the four co nceptua l framewo rks identified above , the teacher socializationframework provides the most inclusive structure for the study of the process of changethat occ urs as an individual moves from lay to professional status . This frameworkallows for the use of psychological co ncepts, but also gives attention to the contextwithin which changes occ ur. Research based upon an interact ive framework, suchas teacher soc ialization, is able to provide inform ation about the complex nature ofthe process of becoming a teacher.

There are two co ntras ting orientations that may be taken when study ing the re­lationship between the individual and social institutions . The first orientation is in­terested in how society transforms the indiv idual. This approach is known as thefunct ionalist model of teacher socializa tion (Lacey, 1977 ). In this case , soc ializationis describ ed as the process whereb y individuals are "fitted" to soc iety: individualsare viewe d as passive vesse ls that give way to the forces of socialization, accept ing

E. Wayne Ross is Ass istant Professor in the Departm ent of TeacherEduca tion at the Universi ty at Albany, State University of New Yor k.He teaches co urses in socia l studies ed ucat ion and educational researchand his cu rrent research interests includ e the professional soci al izat ionof teac hers and preservice teacher educat ion.

101

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

without resistance the attitudes . va lues, and beh aviors deemed appropriate by so­cie ty .

The de terministic charac ter of the functio nalist model is a consequence of its "e m­phas is on structural form and the unchangin g nature of soc ial institut ion s" (Lacey,1977 , p. 19 ). Th e history of research on teacher educa tion retl ect s the intluence ofth is model on conceptions of how ind ividua ls acquire the beliefs , know ledge, atti­tudes, and values that are represent ati ve of a teaching culture (Zeichner, 1980 ).Whil e the functional perspective has co ntributed much to the understandin g of theprocesses of teac her socialization, it has failed to account for the variations in in­d ividual teacher perspecti ves .

Draw ing upon inves tigations of professional soc ialization in other field s , parti c­ularl y medici ne (c.g ., Becker, Gccr. Hughes , & Strauss , 1961 ), a model of teachersoc ializatio n has begun to deve lop that cha llenges the determ inistic characte r of thefunction al ist view of teacher soc ialization by em phas izing the interplay between in­dividu als and institutions . Thi s dialecti cal model provides a co mprehens ive theoryof socializatio n by aek now ledg ing the co nstra ints of social struc tures , while notove rlook ing the acti ve ro le ind ividu als play in the co nstruc tion of the ir ow n profes­sio nal ide ntities . Indi vidu als' ac tions and beliefs that contrad ict the dom inant normsand values pervadin g a part icul ar soc ial sell ing se rve as ev idence that the ind ividu alis a crea to r as we ll as a recipi ent of va lues .

Invest igations utili zing a d ialec tica l ap proach attempt to include both the con tex tof learning to teach and the teacher ' s percepti ons of that task . The element s of theco ntex t include; peers , teacher educa tors, coo perating teachers , pupil s , charac ter­istics of preservice teachers, and institut ional settings . As a result of their ex peri­ences as pupil s , prospecti ve teac hers are famili ar with the values , attitudes . andmili eu assoc iated with teach ing . To become a teacher, then, does not requi re theacquisi tio n of previously unknown values as much as it requires a change in theindividual' s ow n relat ion to the c lassroom situation (Lacey, 1977 ). Thi s process ofcha nge is illustrated by the development of teacher perspecti ves , which arc themeanings and interpretation s that teachers give to their work and their work situa­tion .

Adler ( 1984) has described the notion of teacher perspect ives as a co nstruc t thatca ptures the ideas , behav iors , and co ntex ts of parti cul ar teaching acts. Teacher per­spectives differ fro m se lf-re ported statements of ideology or attitudes because theyarc anchored in the wo rld of actua l si tuations and have re ference to parti cul ar be­haviors . Therefo re, a teacher perspecti ve is a theory of action that has developed asa result of the individual' s expe riences and is applied in particular situations. Teacherperspect ives take into account a broad range of fac to rs, including the teacher ' s back ­gro und, beli efs , and ass umptions ; the contex ts of the classroom and the sc hoo l; howthese clements arc interpreted ; and the interpretation' s intl uence on the teacher ' sactions .

Recent field -based stud ies have inquired into the nature of preservice teachers 'perspect ives toward teaching in general and the soc ial stud ies curriculum in parti c­ular. The purpose of this study was to exa mine the spec ific processes throu gh whichteac her perspecti ves arc created .

METHODOLOGY

SUBJECTSStude nts majorin g in soc ial stud ies educa tion at a large mid western publ ic uni­

vers ity du ring 1984 - 85 we re the subjects of the study . Twenty-one stude nts rep -

102

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

resent ing eac h of the four major phases o f the tea cher educa tion pro gram at theuniversity voluntee red to part icipate in the study . The sample included students from :(a) the fres hma n early fie ld ex pe rience pro gram. (b) the sopho mo re leve l ge neralped agogy and educa tiona l psychology co urse seque nce. (e) the se nior leve l second­ary soci al studies meth od s co urses . and (d) stude nt teaching .

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALVSISInd ividu al interviews we re the pr imary means of dat a co llec tio n. An interview

protoco l was crea ted after a review of previous ethnog raphic studies of the profes­siona l socializat ion process (c.g .. Becker et al., 196 1; Lorti e . 1975 ) and a pilotstudy. Interview sess ions range d fro m one to two hours in len gth . Throughout theinterv iewi ng process , the rese arche r attempted to co nstruct a sto ry of the develop ­ment of eac h ind ividu al as a teach er. Th e inter view er ge ne rally foll ow ed the inter ­view prot ocol , but allo wed respondent s the free do m to d iscu ss issues and eve ntsthey perceiv ed as imp ort ant in their professional dev elopment. T he interviews fo­cuse d on the devel opment of the ind ividuals ' teaching per specti ves over time. par­tic ularly during the un iversit y teach er educa tio n program . All interview s were taperecord ed and transcribed. T he transcri bed data were ana lyze d usin g a mod ified ver­sio n of the co nsta nt co mparative meth od s of da ta ana lys is (G laser & Strauss , 1967;Miles & Hub erm an . 1984 ).

Respondent s participated in follow -up interviews in which the rese arc her sharedspec if ic find ings and pattern s that eme rge d from the study . T he respond ent s we regive n the opportu nity to co nf irm. modi fy . or cha llenge these preliminary find ingsprior to the form ulation of co ncl us ions .

FINDINGS

The main objec tives of the study we re to co nstruct profil es o f the parti cipants 'teach er perspect ives and to examine the processes throu gh whi ch the per specti veswere created. T his article foc uses on the second of these objectives .

T he findings of thi s study suppo rt a dialecti cal mode l of teacher soc ializa tio n.Teacher perspecti ves were the res ult of interactions amo ng three factor s . First. soc ialstruc tura l variables (i.e . . tea cher educa tion co urse work and field ex periences as we llas ind ividual s ' apprenticeship of obse rva tio n as a pup il) pro specti ve teachers e n­co unter in sc hoo ls and un iversities . provide the co ntex t with in whi ch teach er per ­spectives deve lop. Eac h indi vidual' s per son al back ground or biograph y- values .reli gion . life ex pe riences . co nte nt spec ializa tion. etc .-was also imp ort ant in ac­co unting for the d ifferences in teacher per spect ives amo ng ind ividu als . Biograph icalfactors o perate as filters throu gh which the situatio ns are viewed and interp reted .

Fina lly . while the uni versity and the sc hoo ls determine the orga nization and ge n­era l nature of preservice ex periences . indi vidu als were able to sha pe these ex pe ri­ences throu gh four mech ani sm s: (a) ro le-play ing. (b) se lec tive ro le-mo de ling. (c)impression managem ent . and (d) se lf-leg itima tion. Utilization of these stra teg iespro vides evidence of the active ro le of the indi vidual in the development of his orher teach er perspecti ve and implies an acti ve role in the ir own soc ializa tion into theprofession.

Role-playin g . The opportunity for role-play ing in ea rly field ex periences. as we llas stude nt teaching . was found to be the most imp ort ant process in the developmentof a teacher perspec tive . In this study . role-play ing included duties preservice teac her

103

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

assumed in classrooms that were co nsidere d to be "teacher act ivities . " These role­playing experiences allowed preservice teachers to part icipate in and master activ­ities that , up to thi s point , preservice teachers had only obse rved inservi ce teachersdoing . Role-playing duri ng field experiences allowe d preservice teachers a degreeof autonomy and respon sib ility , placed them in situations where they were treatedas profe ssio na ls by other s , and allowe d them to demonstrate and eva luate thei r teach­ing abi lities . Thro ugh role-playing in fie ld experiences, preservice teachers wereable to "prov e " to them selves and others that they had mastered , or were on the irway to mastering, the skills and know ledge necessary for success ful teach ing .

Respond ent s ' descriptions of how an indiv idual learn s to teach were dominatedby references to role-playing during fie ld experiences . Th e significance of role-play­ing opportunities is ev ident in this student teac her 's comme nts:

Field ex periences are the most impo rtant because you are do ing it. You learn di rectlyfrom your mistakes. You see your mistakes much faster. At the university, I felt a lotof the issues were based upon opinion. Your answers were based on your opinion andit is easy to do that in a co llege class . . . . You can write the greatest essay in theworld and it may not mean anything, but, in the schoo ls , it 's a different story . Thereis nowh ere to hide . . . I th ink I learn ed fas ter and I reali zed my mistakes much quickerin the fie ld . I really made a lot of mistakes in the c lassroom. based on op inio ns thatweren' t well-gro unded .

In relation to field experiences, the respondents perceived teacher education coursewo rk as artificia l and separated from the realit y of the schoo l cla ssroom . Preparatoryactivities such as lesson plann ing , objective writ ing , test co nstruction, and discus­sions of various schoo ls of thought regardin g motivation of students and cla ssroommanagement were viewed as " teacher prep arat ion activities," not professional ac­tivities . As illustrated in the interv iew excerpts below, many respondent s believedthat success in teacher educa tion co urse wor k was not linked to an indivi dual' s abil­ity to succeed in the cla ssroom as a teacher.

It is easy to sit around and talk with a professor about the nature of the ado lesce nt,hut when one 's sitting right there in front of you, it' s a whole different story . . . .You get a whole different perspect ive from the fie ld . They don 't give you lillie hintsabout what to look for. . . . I learned everything about teach ing from the field ex­periences ... (and] from the stude nt teach ing instead of the course wor k.

(In the co urse work] yo u 're not expe riencing it. The professor can sit there and giveus a cert ain situation and we could te ll him wha t we 're going to do . I co uld tell himwhat I' d do , but once you get out there and there (are] other thing s that come into playthat you have to deal with . .. instantly . So it 's (the course work ] detached . In thefield you can ' t j ust say, "Well, what should I do now?" and sit back and make upyour mind- you have to do something right away . . . you have to .

The oppo rtunity to "prove" one's se lf as a teacher in a real classroom situationis much more importa nt to the preservi ce teacher than success in the uni versity cla ss­roo m as a student. On e respond ent put it this way : "the import ant question lurkin gin the back of my mind all through the program was , ' Would I reall y be able tosurvive in the cla ssroom?' ''

Se lect ive role-modeling . Much of the literature regardin g the inlluence of rolemodels on neoph yte teachers describes the preservice teacher as indiscriminantl ymodel ing the action s and beliefs of the cooperating teacher (e. g., Edgar & Warren,1969; Karmos & Jacko , 1977 ). In contrast with findings in these studies, particip antsin this study exercised grea t se lectivity in role-mode ling . Instead of globally mod -

104

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

e ling a sing le ex pe rieneed teach er . specific attr ibutes (bo th positi ve and negat ive )were identi fied fro m man y di fferent ro le- mo de ls .

Based upon thei r j udgme nt , the respondents se lec te d specific attr ibutes fro m o the rpeople th at they desir ed to incorporate int o their ow n tea ching perspecti ve . The mostfreque ntly menti oned attributes or qu aliti es respondents se lec ted from their ro le-mo delswe re : mastery of conte nt kn o wled ge , fa irness in dealing wi th pupils, tru st worthiness ,humor, co ncern regard ing the holi st ic need s o f pupil s, o utgoing/enthusiast ic nature ,use of teaching techn iqu es th at e m phasized pupil participation , a nd clar ity of in­str uc tio n .

T he appre nticeshi p o f o bservatio n- time spe nt o bserv ing tea ch ers in e leme ntaryand seco ndary sc hoo l- played an impo rta nt role in the prese rvice teach ers ' for­mat ion of perspecti ves o n teach ing . T his was part icul arl y eviden t w ith regard to th eprocess of se lec tive ro le-mo de ling. Du rin g thei r year s as pupils , resp ondents co n­str uc ted im ages of teach ing and teach ers based so le ly up on teach ers ' ac tio ns th atwere readil y o bservable to pupils . Ex pe riences ga ined in un ive rsit y course work andthrough field experiences pro vided preservice teachers with a wid er variety of teachermode ls . T he pro cess of se lec tive ro le- mode ling is described by stude nt teache rs inthe fo llowi ng ways .

I carry my past exper iences with me, but at the same time I'm kind of picking andchoosing . . it's like I' m picking things that I think will fit in with me and I'mrejecting others .

In early field expe riences I mimicked the instructors who were in the schools . . .later on, I modeled their tone rather than spec ific actions .

Fro m the a bo ve examples, it is e v ide nt th at respondents were the arch itec ts ofthe ir ideal mod el of teaching . T hey se lec te d from the va rio us attributes the y hadhad an o ppo rtun ity to o bserve du ring the ir years as pupils and sy nthes ize d them int oa mod el of w hat the y would like to become .

Imp ression mana gem ent , T he third process influen cing tea ch er perspective de­ve lopment was impression m an agemen t. Impression man agement is the process ofe ngagi ng in ac tivities to plea se o ne 's supe r io rs , even w he n th at acti vity is not partof the individual' s beli ef system (Becker, et al. , 1961 : Goffrnan , 1959 : Lacey , 1977 ).M an y of the resp ondents described instan ces from fie ld ex pe rie nces , in whi ch theyexerc ised a fo rm o f im pression man agemen t. In so me cases , beh av ioral co nformi tywa s mot ivated e ithe r by the desi re to please person s wi th e va lua ti ve power ( i.e ..cooperating teach e rs or universit y supe rv iso rs) o r by the beli ef th at beh a vior al co n­fo rm ity was in the best inte res t of the pupil s . In e ithe r case , the respon dents harboredrese rvati on s abo ut things the y had don e in the cl assro om a nd sta ted that they wo uldnot ha ve tak en these acti on s w itho ut the influe nce of si tua tio na l cons traints .

I felt that if it was a class of mine . I might have handled it differently. But. it is hardto corne in when the teacher already has a certai n schedule and change it. . . . It wasreally hard to get the kids motivated . They always had to sit in their seats and keepquiet. so it was impossible to do grou p work or anything constructive. If it had beenmy class. it would have been structured com pletely different. I would have kept trying[to motivate the kids). I would have tried different things, until I got through to them.I thought it was ridiculous to give up.. .. The cooperating teacher told me to forgetit, he said trying to motivate the students was a waste of time. I felt like I couldn' tsay anything to him, because it wasn 't my classroom . I was jus t in a field experience. . . [and] he was eva luating me.

T he use of im pression man age ment strategies illu strat es how a n indi vidual may rna-

105

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

nipul ate a s itua tio n whil e st ill being co ns tra ined by it. Despite structura l co nstra intsduring teache r ed uca tion fie ld ex periences , the respondents were able to play anactive role in the eve nts that occurred.

Se lf -legitimatio n , T he fo urth process illu strati ve of the indiv idua l's ac tive ro le inthe development of teach er perspecti ves is the process of se lf- leg itima tion or se lf­eva lua tion . T he data of this study indi cate that prcscrvicc teacher s . wh en j udg ingthe ir ow n perform an ce and co mpe tence as teachers . pla ced a grea t emphas is on theirse lf-evalua tio n. There we re exceptions to th is patt ern that emphas ized se lf-evalua­tion . pa rtic ularly in cases where the respondent and his or her coope ra ting teach erheld si mi lar per specti ve toward teaching, but these were in the min orit y of cases .Just as preservice teach ers made j udg me nts regarding posit ive and negati ve attributesof ro le mod el s , they also made j udg me nts regard ing their own attr ibutes and ac tions .Th e fo llow ing co m me nt illu strates the process of se lf-leg itima tion as it emerged fro mthe inte rv iew da ta :

My cooperating teacher' s opinions were important, hut my own sense of what wasgoing on was probably the most important. Because in spite of the fact that I thoughtI did a good job [during student teaching}, I don' t want to teach any more. I don't feelthat I'm that great of a teacher, and I don' t think that I would do that well. So I guessit is just more of an internal sense of what was going on. In spite of the fact that mycooperating teacher and the university supervisor said I did a good job. my own eva l­uation was more important.

T he not ion of se lf-legi tima tion was promoted hy respon dents ' be liefs that theknow ledge base o f tea ching is tacit o r personali sti c . That is , they percei ved theknow ledge base of teaching as uncodificd and re lativ ist ic . T his utilitarian per specti vedominated the responden ts ' approaches to the pract ice and study of teach ing . T he irpedagogical attit udes and ac tions we re sum marized in one resp ondent ' s remark that ."wha t is rig ht is wha t works for yo u and what yo u fee l co mforta ble do ing . - T hebe lief that per son alit y charac te ris t ics were more importa nt to success in the class ­roo m than pro fess ion al know ledge or skills wa s widesprea d amo ng the respondents .O ne st ude nt teach er put it thi s way:

I think your personality is going to make you a hetter teacher than all the knowledgein the world . . . It' s a talent. I think it' s just as much of a talent as being a musician.You can learn all kinds of technical things. but if you don ' t have the talent, you cango ahead and play the notes. hut you' re not going to hear the same soul. . . . So, ifyou don ' t have it. no matter what the university docs, they' re not going to make ateacher out of Iyou).

Th is perception of the natu re of ped agogical know ledge resulted in littl e respectfor expert opinion regard ing thei r per forman ce in the classroom an d allo we d theneophyte tea ch er to es ta blish him or her sel f as a co mpe te nt and qu ali fied j udge ofteaching performa nce .

SUMMARY

T his study was und ert aken to invest igate the processes th rou gh which prcscr viccsoc ia l studies teach er s ' per specti ves a rc develop ed . Anal ysis of the data suppo rtedthe hypothesi s th at prcscrvice teach ers ' per spect ives arc the product of a di alect icalprocess of pro fession al soc ia liza tio n . T he inlluen ce of social struc tura l forces, suchas teacher educa tion co urse work and field ex pe riences, was marginal and did notproduce deep internal cha nges in the beli ef systems o f the respondents . Preserviceteacher s we re ac tive in the ir res istance to the co ns tra ints placed upon them by these

106

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

forces . T hey functioned as active mediators of socia lizing forces as represent ed bythe schoo ls and university teacher education. The active role of the individual in thedeve lopme nt of a teach ing per specti ve was illustrated through the respond ent s' useof four strategies : (a) role-p layi ng , (b) selective role-model ing , (c) impress ion man­age me nt, and (d) se lf-legi timation.

W ith these findings in mind , teacher educators should reevalu ate the purpose andfunc tion of education cou rses and fie ld ex perie nces in the preparation of prospecti veteachers . By ack now ledgi ng the active role of the individu al in the process of learn ­ing to teach , we may be able to provide preservice teachers with ways in whichthey ca n beco me more effective and reflecti ve practitioners .

To achieve the goa l of bu ilding an act ive and reflec tive cadre of teachers . coursework in teacher educa tio n should attempt to make preservice teachers more awa reof the ir own past ex periences and preconceived bel iefs about teachin g in orde r tosubject them to sc rutiny . The goa l would not be to disp rove the releva ncy of pastexperiences , but simp ly to ex pose ind ividual beliefs to critica l exa mination and dis­co urage "perso na lized" vers ions of pedagogical knowledge . As Dewey ( 1904/ 1964)sta ted over 80 years ago, the efforts of teacher educa tors should be directed towardmak ing prese rvice teachers thought ful about their work in light of principl es as wellas prac tices (Dewey. 1904 /1 964 ). This co urse of action wo uld help break downwhat has bee n descr ibed as the intellec tual seg rega tion betw een sc ientific reasoningand pedagogical practice (Lortie , 1975).

Recent litera ture provides seve ral exa mples of how teacher education courses canencou rage preservice teachers to think cr itica lly about and reflect upon their class­roo m ex periences (e .g .. Adler & Goo dma n. 1986; Ross & Hann ay. 1986; Lauder­dale. 1986 ; Stove r. 1986).

The role and purp ose of field ex periences should also be close ly exa mined byteacher ed uca tors . Because of the importance of role-playi ng in the professionaldevelopment of teachers, field ex perie nces are co nside red the most sig nifica nt eve ntsin the preservice teac her's professional preparation . However . as Goodma n ( 1986b)states, ~ i t ca nnot be ass ume d that just placin g stude nts in practicum sites will au­tomatically prov ide them with valuable ex periences " (p. 35 1). As illustrated in thisresea rch, field ex perie nces may prom ote the development of utilitar ian teacher per­spec tives . Utilitarian perspecti ves arc dem onstrated in " tria l and error" approac hesto teach ing and are the res ult of two sig nificant limitat ion s facing neoph yte teachers:(a) they are not able to perceive and interpret the professionally significant featuresof the classroom situa tion. and (b) they lack the knowledge that would enable themto choose appro pria te actio ns for producin g desired co nsequences (Sa nders &Mcf.utchcon, 1986 ).

The limitation s of field ex perie nces as they are curre ntly co nducted in teachereduca tio n, may be ove rco me through a closer coordination with the meth ods courseac tiv ities cited above as we ll as by having students participate in st ruct ured inquiryand reflection about the curr iculum and prac tices of schoo ls. For example. Beyer( 1984 ) and Goo dman ( 1986a) describe field ex perience programs that approximatea laboratory ex per ience by emphas izing experime ntation, reflect ion, critique , anddiscussion. Having students participate in ethnog raphic studies of schoo l life mayalso pro mote teaching as an invest igative rather than replicative activi ty (e .g . . Git lin& Tei telbaum, 1986: Biott , 1983).

The most important impli cation of thi s research is that we . as teacher educa tors,must ack now ledge the act ive role of beg inning teachers in the socialization process

107

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

by crea ting teacher preparat ion program s that enco urage neophytes to be studentsof teachin g and by providing them with the tools necessary for continued profes­sional grow th and development.

REFERENCESI . Adler , S . ( 1984) . A field study of selec ted stude nt teacher perspect ives toward

social studies . Theory and Research in Social Educatio n, 12 , 13-30.2. Ad ler , S ., and Goodma n, J . ( 1986) . Cri tica l theory as a foundation for methods

courses . Journal oj Teacher Educa tion, 37( 4), 2-8 .3 . Becker , H. S., Gee r, B. , Hughes , E ., and Strauss , A . L. (1961 ). Boys in white .

Chicago: University of Chicago Press .4 . Beyer , L. E. (1984). Field ex perience, ideology , and the development of cr itica l

refl ecti vity . Journal oJ Teacher Education, 35(3), 36- 4 1.5. Biott , C. ( 1983) . Th e foundations of classroom action-research in initi al teacher

trainin g . Journal oj Educatio n Jor Teaching , 9(2) , 152-1 60.6 . Cruickshank , D. R. , Kenn edy , J . J . , and Myers , B. (1974 ). Perceived problems

of secondary schoo l teachers . Journal of Educa tional Research, 68 , 154­159 .

7 . Dew ey , J . ( 1904/ 1964) . The relatio n of theory to pract ice in education. InR. D. Arc hambault (Ed .) , John Dewey on education: Se lected writings (pp .3 13-338) . Chicago: University of Chicago Press .

8 . Edga r , D., and Warren R. ( 1969) . Power and autonomy in teacher soc ializa tion.Sociology of Educa tion , 42 , 386-399 .

9 . Fuller , F . , and Bown , O. H. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K, Ryan (Ed.) ,Teacher educatio n (Part II , the 74th yearboo k of the National Society for theStudy of Educa tion, pp . 25-52). Ch icago: University of Chicago Press .

10 . Gitlin, A ., and Teitelb aum , K. (1983). Linking theory and practice: The useof ethnog raphic meth odology by prospect ive teachers . Journ al oj Educationfo r Teaching, 9(3),225-234 .

I J . G laser, B ., and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery oj grounded theory: Strat­egies for qualitat ive research . Chicago: Aldin e.

12. Goo dma n, J . (l 986a). Mak ing early field experience meanin gful: A cri tica l ap­proach . Journal oj Educa tion for Teaching , 12(2), 109- J25.

13 . Goodman, J . (l 986b ). University educa tion courses and the professional prep­ara tio n of teachers: A descriptive analysis . Teaching and Teacher Education,2(4) ,34 1-353 .

14. Goffma n, 1. (1959). The prese nta tion of self in everyday life . Gard en City, NY :Anchor.

15 . Karm os, A. , and Jacko , C. (1977 ). The role of significant others during thestude nt teach ing exper ience . Journal of Teacher Education , 28 , 5 1-55 .

J6 . Lacey , C. (1977) . The socia lization of teachers . Lond on : Metheun .17. Lauderd ale, W . B. ( 1986) . Future teachers recover the past through ora l history .

Journal of Teacher Education, 37( 4) , 16-1 9 .18. Lorti e , D . (19 75) . Sc hoo lteacher: A sociolog ical study . Ch icago: University of

Chicago Press.19 . Miles , M . B. , and Hub erman , A. M . (198 4) . Qua litat ive dat a analysis . Beverly

Hills: Sage .20 . Ross , E, W . , and Hann ay , L. M. (1986). To wards a critica l theory of reflecti ve

inquiry . Journal of Teacher Education, 37( 4) , 9-15.21. Sand ers , D. , and McCut cheon , G. (1986). Th e development of practical the-

108

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14

ories of teaching . Journal of Curric ulum and Supe rvis ion. 2(1), 50- 67 .22 . Sprinthall, N. A . . and Thies-Sprinthall , L. ( 1983) . The teacher as an adult learner :

A cognitive- developme nt view. In G . A . Gr iffi n (Ed .) , Staff Developm ent(E ighty-second Yearbook of the Nat ional Society for the Study of Education.pp . 13- 35). Chicago : University of Chicago Press .

23 . Stover. L. ( 1986). Wr iting to learn in teacher education. Journal of TeacherEducation. 37(4) . 20-23 .

24 . Vec nman, S . ( 1984) . Perceived problem s of beginning teachers . Review of Ed­ucational Research. 54(2). 143-178.

25 . Ze ichner. K. M . ( 1980) . Key processes in the socialization of student teachers:Lim itations and consequences of oversocialized conceptions of teacher so­cialization . Paper present ed at the meetin g of the Ameri can Educa tional Re­sea rch Associatio n. Boston .

109

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Okl

ahom

a St

ate

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

7:56

20

Dec

embe

r 20

14