Teacher educators’ expertise: what do novice teachers and teacher educators say?

ARTICLE IN PRESS

0742-051X/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.ta

Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 177–192

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Teacher educators’ expertise: what do novice teachers andteacher educators say?

Kari Smith

Oranim Academic College of Teacher Education, 36006 Tivon, Israel

Abstract

Expertise of teachers has been the topic of many studies in the field of teacher education published in recent years.

Less attention is, however, given to expertise of teacher educators; the focus of this study. The study examines the issue

by discussing some of the literature on the subject, and by asking novice teachers and teacher educators about the

characteristics of good teacher educators, the professional knowledge of teacher educators and the difference between

the expertise of teacher educators and teachers. Findings indicate that even though there is much overlapping in the

expertise of the two groups of professionals, there are also distinct differences of importance to the current discussion

on standards and education for teacher educators.

r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Standards; Competencies; Teacher education; Teaching; Teacher educator

1. Introduction

In recent years the topic of teachers’ expertise(professional knowledge and competence) hasbeen widely discussed in related professionalliterature. There seems to be general agreementamong researchers that teachers’ expertise relatesto subject matter knowledge, knowing how toteach the subject matter to others (didacticalknowledge), knowledge about how children learn,feel and develop (pedagogical knowledge), self-awareness and social skills (Fish, 1995; Beijaard &Verloop, 1996; Day, 1999), and organizationalcompetence (Day, 1999; Christie, 2003). Teachers

e front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserv

te.2004.12.008

have been found to have high demands ofthemselves as professionals and able to documentprofessional competence for appraisal purposes(Smith & Van der Westhuizen, 2000).

During teacher education the seeds for profes-sionalism in teaching are planted and nourished inorder to develop independently after graduationfrom pre-service teacher education. Teacher edu-cators are responsible for providing teachers-to-bewith strong foundations of professional knowledgeand with tools for ongoing, independent profes-sional development. In connection with supplyingtheoretical information, it is taken for grantedthat teacher educators assist teachers-to-be in

ed.

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

ARTICLE IN PRESS

K. Smith / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 177–192178

developing the tacit aspects of professional com-petence. Until recently little attention has beenpaid to the expertise and professional quality ofteacher educators (Korthagen, 2000; Koster &Dengerink, 2001; Koster, Brekelmans, Koetsier,Korthagen, &Wubbels, 2003).

The focus of this study is the composition ofprofessional expertise of teacher educators incomparison to professional expertise of teachers.In the first part of the paper some of the relevantliterature is discussed, and the second part reportson a study which examines novice teachers’ andteacher educators’ responses to three open ques-tions about ‘‘required qualities of good teachereducators’’ and how they differ from ‘‘requiredqualities of school teachers’’.

Novice teachers who recently graduated from apre-service teacher education program have beenexposed to a wide range of teacher educators over4 years (in this specific program). They haveformed opinions about the quality of their educa-tion including its teacher educators. Moreover,they have been educated as teachers and are(hopefully) knowledgeable about what it meansto be a teacher.

Experienced teacher educators were, by help ofthe above questions, invited to express theirpersonal requirements of a role they fulfill and toarticulate their personal understanding of relatedprofessional expertise.

In the last part of the paper similarities anddifferences in the two groups’ opinions regardingteacher educators’ expertise are discussed.

2. Conceptual framework

2.1. Functions of teacher educators

Tamir (1991) defines professional knowledge as‘that body of knowledge and skills which is neededin order to function successfully in a particularprofession. This knowledge is determined by twocommonly accepted procedures: (a) job or taskanalysis; and, (b) consensus of the community ofpeople who are recognized as professionals in aparticular field (p. 263, 264). Koster, Korthagen,

Wubbels and Hoornweg (1996) discuss eightgeneral functions teacher educators fulfill:

1.
facilitator of the learning process of the studentteacher,
2.
encourager of reflective skills, 3. developer of new curricula, 4. gatekeeper, 5. researcher, 6. stimulator of professional development for
school teachers,
7. team-member, 8. collaborator (external contacts).
Koster et al.(2003) report on Dutch teachereducators who listed two areas of competence,content competencies and communicative andreflective competencies as very necessary whereasorganizational and pedagogical competencies werelisted as necessary (p. 7).

Teacher educators are responsible for develop-ing reflection in student teachers, a skill that helpsthem learn from their own and others’ practicalexperience. Korthagen and Kessels (1999) claimteacher education ‘‘should aim at making tacitknowledge explicit’’ (p. 31). Teacher educatorsplay a major role in facilitating and supporting thereflective learning process student teachers gothrough in doing just that.

An additional function of teacher educators is tocreate new knowledge in and about teaching. Thedevelopment of new curricula and learning pro-grams is related to research, and the responsibilityfor creating new knowledge lies more with theinstitution-based teacher educator than with thementor in terms of allocation of time (less teachinghours) and available facilities (better library,offices, computers, and research grants). Teachereducators create new knowledge of two types:practical, in form of new curricula for teachereducation and for schools; and, theoretical knowl-edge generated from research. Standards forDutch Teacher Educators also suggest that re-search adds an extra level to teacher educators’expertise (Koster & Dengerink, 2001) and theseteacher educators ‘‘contribute towards the produc-tion of knowledge in the field of teacher educa-tion’’ (p. 350).

ARTICLE IN PRESS

K. Smith / Teaching and Teacher Education 21 (2005) 177–192 179

Furthermore, teacher educator are, to a largeextent, collaborators with external contacts withother higher educational institutions and decision-makers (Koster, Korthagen, & Wubbels, 1998) inaddition to familiarizing the student teacher withthe context in which practice teaching takes placeand of establishing contact with other teachers,head teachers and the school management.

Teacher educators are involved in helping thestudent teacher develop the skill of collegiality as agood team member, first by modeling this inrelations among the three parties (student teacher,mentor and institution-based teacher educator).Jointly they form a team working together on aspecific project, educating a new teacher. Second,they do this by being involved with teamwork inthe respective contexts they work (university andschool), and by encouraging student teachers tobecome involved in teamwork.

Another challenging function of teacher educa-tors is assessment, from formative assessmentwhich enhances learning to summative assessmentwhich makes teacher educators take on the role ofgatekeepers, deciding who can enter the gate to theprofessional community. This dual role, that ofsupporter and judge has been is found to be moreproblematic (Koster et al., 1996; Wilson, Darling-Hammond, & Berry, 2001; Smith, 2001). The Best(Beginning Educators Support and Training)Program in Connecticut has made a clear distinc-tion between mentors (school-based teacher edu-cators) and external evaluators (university-basedteacher educators). Mentors are not summativeevaluators of internship teachers, but focus onproviding coaching and guidance. The gatekeepingresponsibility is left to external evaluators (Wilsonet al., 2001). However, in earlier stages of pre-service teacher education programs which build ona strong and effective cooperation with schools theassessment role of university-based teacher educa-tors is tend to be blurred and confusing for studentteachers and complex for teacher educators.

In most teacher education program the practicalpart is a shared responsibility, partnership, be-tween the field (schools) and teacher educationinstitutions (Smedley, 2001; Sandholtz, 2001). Anintegrated part of such partnerships is involvementof institution-based teacher educators in in-service

professional development activities for schoolteachers. In this way teacher educators stimulateprofessional development of school teachers (Kos-ter et al., 1996).

2.2. Standards for teacher educators

Recently the quality of teacher education hasbeen under public criticism (Apple, 2001; Berliner,2000; Turley & Nakai, 2000) and discussionaround the level of professionalism in teachereducation has increased. Koster and Korthagen(2001) refer to a number of international publica-tions which present a rather poor picture of fewexisting training or education programs forteacher educators. Standards for teacher educatorsare being developed and subjected to professionaland public scrutiny (Koster & Dengerink, 2001;Association of Teacher Educators (ATE), 2002),yet there seems to be a missing link regarding howteacher educators are to reach the expectedstandards.

In Israel the Mofet Institute plays a central rolein the professional development of the country’steacher educators by offering content specific in-service training courses (Korthagen, 2001; Smith,2003), but the institute does not deal with pre-service education of teacher educators. Teachereducators are often accepted into teacher educa-tion because they are good teachers (Korthagen,2000) with advanced academic degrees.

The claim for accountability has triggered adiscussion around professional standards foreducators, including teacher educators. Ozer(1998) defines standards as a defined stock ofknowledge, which needs to be acquired by expertswithin a specific profession. Standards describe arequested level of professionalism, translated intoactions and performances. Standards serve asguidelines for training and evaluation. Murray(2001) expresses concern that there is an over-reliance on standards and that there is, in fact,little consensus about what the explicit standardsfor teacher educators should be. Examples of thisdisagreement, according to Murray (2001) includequestions as to whether faculty in teacher educa-tion institutions should all be qualified teacherswith a teaching license or if they all need to have

ARTICLE IN PRESS


experience in teaching children in school. Little hasbeen written about such external standards,official requirements for licensing of teachereducators issued by bodies and people external tothe teacher educator. Documentation of the extentto which explicit standards are met, is fairly simpleand listed in a curricula vitae containing certifi-cates, diplomas, letters of recommendations, inbrief, mainly official documents.

However, by examining some of the recentliterature on standards for teacher educators it isclear that standards relate mainly to tacit aspectsof teaching, implicit knowledge which can only bedocumented by teacher educators themselves andfrom observing teacher educators in action. TheATE (Association of Teacher Educators) definestandards as agreements about what teachereducators should think about, know, and be ableto do. The standards serve multiple functions; toprovide teacher educators with an opportunity toreview and adopt a knowledge base that can betested, modified and reviewed and to provide theopportunity to coalesce a knowledge base that willmake public the characteristics of the profession,to meet the requirement of transparency. ATEpresents seven standards required of MasterTeacher Educators (Association of Teacher Edu-cators (ATE), 2002).

�
master TEs model professional practices, � master TEs inquire and contribute to teaching/
learning,
� master TEs inquire systematically into and
reflect on own practice for personal professionaldevelopment,

�
master TEs provide leadership in education, � master TEs collaborate inside and outside the
institution,
� master TEs serve as informed and critical
advocates for high quality education,
� master TEs contribute to improving teacher
education.

It is interesting to notice that the ATE standardsdo not explicitly state what formal requirements interms of degrees, certificates and diplomas (hardevidence) are needed to become a teacher educa-tor. The reason is probably because there is an

underlying assumption that all those who teach inschools and colleges of education have doctoratesor are in the process of getting one.

The ATE standards focus on more implicitaspects of teacher educators’ work related tobehavior, actions, beliefs and thinking, much ofwhich can only be self-documented (soft evidence)by teacher educators themselves.

Further examples of standards which aredocumented through soft evidence are presentedin the professional standards for Dutch teachereducation (Koster & Dengerink, 2001):

�
content competencies, � pedagogical competencies, � organizational competencies, � group dynamics and communicative competen-
cies,
� development and personal growth competen-
cies.

Even though it is much more complicated todefine the construct of these competencies and totranslate them into operational performances, itseems that teacher educators and decision-makersconcern themselves mainly with implicit knowl-edge of the profession. Koster and Dengerink(2001) carefully describe examples of translatingthe area of competencies into ability and skills inthe Dutch standards in their paper (which isrecommended for further reading on the subject).

Examples of standards are:

‘‘Teacher educators are able to acquire andmaintain knowledge and skills to do with theirown discipline’’ (Content Competencies, p. 349),explicit knowledge which is more easily documen-ted by means of external evidence than thefollowing example:

‘‘Teacher educators are able to make their ownlearning process visible to colleagues and stu-dents’’ (Developmental and Personal GrowthCompetencies, p. 350). In order to meet thisspecific standard teacher educators are requiredto articulate their professional development pro-cess and thereby presenting personalized evidenceof professional competence.

There is a large overlap between the Dutch andthe American standards. The ATE list emphasizes,

ARTICLE IN PRESS


however, to a larger extent, the responsibility ofthe teacher educator to contribute to education ingeneral and to the professional community ofteacher educators in particular.

2.3. Professional expertise

A major element in a teacher educator’s profes-sional knowledge is the skill of making knowledgeabout teaching and learning explicit. Van Manen(1999) relates to knowledge in practice as the non-

cognitive knowing of teachers. He presents fourtypes of such knowledge:

(a)
Knowledge resides in action as lived and ispart of teachers’ classroom behavior.
(b)
Knowledge resides in the body and is ex-pressed through teachers’ body language andhidden messages.
(c)
Knowledge resides in the world of the near andmore distant context in which teachers act.
(d)
Knowledge resides in relations which is re-flected in teachers’ communication and inter-actions with others (p. 69).
Much of the above is reflected in teachereducators’ tacit professional knowledge, implicitknowledge which only becomes explicit whenteacher educators present soft evidence of profes-sional competence and make the noncognitiveknowledge accessible to others.

Zanting, Verloop, Vermunt, and Van Driel(1998) discuss problems that mentors have inarticulating tacit knowledge they have aboutteaching and difficulties mentors find in developinga language of practice. They focus on three mainreasons for this:

(1)
Practical knowledge is tacit, and experiencedteachers (mentors) find it difficult to put wordsto their professional skills.
(2)
Practical knowledge is part of their holistic actof teaching. It is integrated into teachers’behavior in class, and fragmentation of it,which is essential for explaining practicalknowledge, becomes difficult.
(3)
Some mentors are hesitant to talk about howthey teach and what they do, as they believe
their main task is to bring out teaching abilitieswithin the student teacher and to createopportunities for the student teacher to putthe theory learned at the teacher educationinstitution into practice (p. 17).

Slick (1998) argues that a major role of teachereducators’ roles is to serve as a bridge between thetheory student teachers study at the institution andthe actual teaching practice in school. Therefore,teacher educators need to be able to articulate themore tacit aspects of teaching by explaining theseto student teachers, to develop perceptual knowl-edge: that which has also been called the phronesis

of teaching (Korthagen, 2001). Putting words topersonal practical knowledge and to make itavailable to others is, however, not a straight-forward activity for teacher educators. ‘‘On thewhole, the articulation of one’s own practicalknowledge seems a complex and unnatural activityfor mentor teachers’’ (Zanting et al., 1998, p. 17),and it can be assumed that to a certain degreeteacher educators in universities face the sameproblem.

2.4. Criteria for promotion in the profession

An additional source of information aboutprofessional knowledge required of teacher edu-cators can be found in criteria for promotionwithin teacher education institutions. In Israel, forexample, the main criterion for promotion at theuniversities is the number and quality of publica-tions. Promotion at teacher education colleges, onthe other hand, focuses on a greater variety ofcriteria. There are three domains in which teachereducators are assessed for promotion purposes(see Table 1):

As can be seen from Table 1, the higher thepromotion, the greater the importance accordedacademic excellence (e.g., research) and the less theimportance of excellence in teaching. However,this does not necessarily mean that a seniorlecturer A is not a good teacher. In order to climbthe ladder the quality of teaching is important,but, as teacher educators aim for advancedacademic ranks, academic excellence becomes themajor criterion for promotion. The summaries

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1

Criteria for academic promotion within Israeli teacher education colleges (Oranim College of Teacher Education, 2002; Katz &

Coleman, 2002)

Title Excellence in teaching (%) Initiatives/educational material (%) Publications (%)

Senior teacher 50 30 20

Lecturer 30 50 20

Senior lecturer 20 40 40

Senior lecturer A (Asst. Professor) 20 20 60


(below) of discussions from the promotion com-mittee in an Israeli teacher education college reflecthow an experienced group of teacher educatorsunderstand the components of the above tablewhen granting promotions.

2.4.1. Quality of teaching

Being a good teacher is considered the mostimportant criterion when assessing teacher educa-tors. The quality of teaching relates to theoreticalsubject matter knowledge and the didactics ofteaching it. The teacher educator is required to beupdated in recent developments and acquaintedwith updated professional literature. The practicalaspect of teaching, e.g., organization of courses,clarity, interesting sessions, is found in the criteriaof teaching competence and in the relationship tostudents. The latter is a reflection of more ethicalaspects of teaching; such as respect for the studentas a person, modeling punctuality and moralvalues, and providing feedback which is fair andconstructive. Teamwork is also seen as an integralpart of the quality of teaching.

2.4.2. Initiative and development of programs and

learning material

A good teacher educator is expected to beinvolved with activities within the institution andin the educational community as a whole. Exam-ples of such involvement are providing counselingto schools on staff development and introducingnew teaching methods and programs. It alsoincludes active participation in official committeesat a policy-making level. Teacher educators areexpected to be involved in taking steps to improveteaching within their own institution, and to startpersonal professional development in terms ofadvanced academic degrees.

Teacher educators are expected to producelearning material for schools and material for usewithin the institution for teacher education.

2.4.3. Publication and research

Publication and research are the main criteriafor advanced academic promotion. Israeli teachereducators seeking advanced ranks are expected tobe involved with research and to publish in well-known refereed professional journals.

3. Summary of professional competence of teacher

educators

When comparing standards from Dutch, Amer-ican, Australian and Israeli contexts, there seemsto be is a great overlap. The main requirementsteacher educators are expected to meet are:

1.
Teacher educators are expected to be modelteachers with the ability to articulate tacitknowledge of teaching and to bring practicalexperiences to a theoretical level (Loughran &Berry, 2003) in an empathetic and supportiveenvironment. Pedagogical aspects of teachereducation play a central role in the Dutch list ofcompetencies (Koster & Dengerink, 2001), inthe American list of standards (Association ofTeacher Educators (ATE), 2002), and in theIsraeli promotion criteria (Oranim College ofTeacher Education, 2002; Katz & Coleman,2002).
2.
Teacher educators are expected to be involvedin creating new knowledge of practical (learningmaterials, curricula) and theoretical nature(research, publication in professional journals).Even though the importance of publication is

ARTICLE IN PRESS


not as strongly expressed in the Dutch or in theAmerican standards as in the Israeli promotioncriteria for teacher educators (Oranim Collegeof Teacher Education, 2002; Katz & Coleman,2002), it is an underlying assumption ofSystematic enquiry (Association of TeacherEducators (ATE), 2002) and of the moreadvanced standards for Dutch teacher educa-tors (Koster & Dengerink, 2001).

3.
Teacher educators are expected to engage inand to make an impact on education within andoutside the institution, to be active in pre andin-service education of teachers, to take onleadership roles. The American standardsclearly state that Master teacher educators
provide leadership in education (Association ofTeacher Educators (ATE), 2002 Website,whereas the Dutch proposal has no directmentioning of the leadership role of teachereducators (Koster & Dengerink, 2001). TheIsraeli promotion criteria put considerableweight on educational initiatives (Oranim Col-lege of Teacher Education, 2002; Katz &Coleman, 2002).

4.
Teacher educators are expected to be involvedin ongoing personal professional developmentand to facilitate professional development inothers as found in Dutch standards (Koster &Dengerink, 2001) standard of Development and
personal growth competencies and in the Asso-ciation of Teacher Educators (ATE) (2002)standard which states that Master teacher

educators inquire and reflect into own practice.

In the first part of this paper I have discussedstandards for teacher educators’ knowledge andactions from a theoretical point of view. Thefollowing section reports on a study whichexamines what professionals (novice teachers andteacher educators) have to say about the expertiseof teacher educators and considers whether or notit aligns with the above theoretical claims.

4. Method

Expert information about professional knowl-edge of teacher educators was collected from two

groups, novice teachers and experienced teachereducators. They were all asked to relate in writingto the following three questions:

1.
What does it mean to be a good teachereducator?
2.
How would you define the professional knowl-edge of teacher educators?
3.
How does the professional knowledge ofteacher educators differ from the professionalknowledge of teachers?
Forty novice teachers and 18 teacher educatorsparticipated in the study. The 40 novice secondaryschool teachers who were in their first year ofteaching, had graduated from the same teachereducation institution, but within different disci-plines (English, mathematics, history, Hebrewlanguage, literature and geography). Thirty fourof the novice teachers were females and six males.This is a true reflection of the gender divisionwithin the teaching force in Israeli schools. Theage range was between 25 and 38. Rudduck (1999)claims that students are expert witnesses onteaching, and teachers who have recently gradu-ated from a 4 year teacher education program are,in this paper, considered expert witnesses onteaching by teacher educators.

Eighteen experienced teacher educators whoteach in the same institution, but represent variousfields of expertise (curriculum development, didac-tics of mathematics, history, Hebrew literature,sociology of education, developmental psychol-ogy, value education, and educational assessment)volunteered their opinion. Twenty eight teachereducators from a group of 102 staff membersfrom the secondary school teacher educationdepartment in a large teacher education collegein Israel had been randomly chosen to participatein the study. Out of these 18 responded andrelated in writing to the three above questions.There were 14 female and four male teachereducators, and the range of experience as teachereducators was from 6 to 22 years with a mean of16 years.

The written responses were analyzed for eachgroup and for each of the three questionsseparately. Two people, the researcher and an

ARTICLE IN PRESS


experienced teacher educator who was not arespondent, read the written answers to the threequestions. The data was listed independently withan agreement of 93% in the grouping of theresponses. There was disagreement if to makeknowledge about evaluation and assessment aseparate category or if to include it in pedagogicaland didactical knowledge (see Table 3) what toinclude in the category practice what is preached

(see Table 2) and finally how to differentiatebetween knowledge about mankind and knowledge

about how to teach adults. The lists presented inTables 2–4 were agreed upon after a moderationmeeting between the two readers.

Table 2

Ranking of answers to the question: ‘‘What is a good teacher educat

Question Novice teachers N ¼ 40

1. What does it

mean to be a good

teacher educator?

Practice what is preached and

relate taught theory to own

practice

35

Recent classroom experience in

teaching children which matches

that of the novice teachers’

context of teaching

29

Give useful feedback 32

Practice a meta-cognitive

approach to teaching: explains

‘‘why’’ and ‘‘how’’ in relation to

own actions while teaching

26

Provide support 24

Manage time and people well 16

5. Results

Tables 2, 3 and 4 present the responses fromnovice teachers and teacher educators to the threeopen questions. The nature of the research instru-ment (open questions) does not allow for statisticalcomparison of the responses elicited from the twogroups. It was found, however, important tohighlight the differences in responses, and theresponses to each of the three questions of the twogroups are therefore presented in the same table.

Table 2 presents the frequency of the responsesto the first question: What does it mean to be a

good teacher educator?

or?’’

% Teacher educators N ¼ 18 %

82.5 Enhance reflection

in trainees

16 88.9

72.5 Create

understanding of

education in trainees

14 77.8

80.0 Show self-awareness 13 72.2

65.0 Engage in ongoing

professional

development

12 66.7

60.0 Show patience and

empathy

12 66.7

40.0 Act assertively and

with confidence

11 61.1

Present various

models of teacher

education

9 50.0

Act upon personal

and educational

values

9 50.0

Research and

publish

9 50.0

Believe in education 8 44.4

Work in teams and

support colleagues

7 38.9

ARTICLE IN PRESS


Novice teachers who have recently been exposedto a variety of teacher educators are very clearabout the statement that teacher educators need topractice what they preach. It is not enough to talkabout good teaching and alternatives in teaching,but teacher educators are expected to practice thisin their own teaching at the teacher educationinstitution. A similar claim is found in the ATEstandards for Master teacher educators where theteacher educator is expected ‘to model professionalteaching practices’ (Association of Teacher Edu-cators (ATE), 2002, standard 1). Teacher educa-tors did not make this explicit in their statements.Student teachers find a gap between theoriestaught and practices exercised by teacher educa-tors, which might indicate that teacher educatorspay less attention to the importance of modeling inteacher education in their work.

Another difference between the two groups isthe claim from novice teachers for teachereducators to have recent experience in teachingchildren in school. School changes, and it is not

convincing when you hear somebody talk about how

it was to teach teenagers ten years ago, the good old

days, when today’s reality is so very different

(teacher). Murray (2001) points out that there isa lack of professional consensus regarding thecredentials of teacher educators, one of which isthe teaching license. Should all teacher educatorsbe qualified teachers with experience in teaching inschools? The findings in this study show that72.5% of the novice teachers would like to studywith teacher educators with recent experience asschoolteachers. The novice teachers in this studyquestion the credibility of teacher educators’knowledge of school and children as of today, animportant factor when preparing teachers to meeteducational challenges in a constantly changingworld. Support for this claim is found in a studyby Kanan and Baker (2002) who found thatPalestinian students prefer mentors who have richand recent experience in teaching children ofsimilar age and level to those found in their ownpractice. The teacher educators in the presentstudy did not relate to school experience at all,recent or in the past. This finding indicates thatthere is a serious discrepancy in what two mainstakeholders of teacher education, teachers-to-be

and teacher educators value in teacher education,and the finding suggests a possible explanation forthe widely documented criticism of the way teachereducation institutions prepare student teachers forteaching. Nieme (2002), for example, reports onFinnish student teachers who ‘‘complain aboutpassive teaching and lack of active learningmethods, and that the contents of the studies didnot have necessary connections to real life’’ (p.770; (see also Korthagen, 2001, pp. 3–5; Stuart &Thurlow, 2000).

Teacher educators ranked enhancement ofreflection in trainees (88.9%) as the most salientcharacteristic for good teacher educators. This isin full agreement with Korthagen’s realisticapproach theory to teacher education (Korthagen,2001) which emphasizes the importance of devel-oping perceptual knowledge in teachers throughreflection evolving from the trainees’ actualexperiences. Teacher educators are also requiredto be self-aware (72.2%) an integrated componentof ongoing professional development (66.7%).Professional growth based on reflective practiceis represented in the Association of TeacherEducators (ATE) (2002) list and the list ofstandards for Dutch teacher educators (Koster &Dengerink, 2001; Lunenberg, 2002).

Another salient claim from novice teachers(65%) which is not mentioned by teacher educa-tors is the need for teacher educators to be able toteach meta-cognitively and to articulate their tacitknowledge of teaching, explaining the whys andthe hows of their actions and in-action decisionmaking, what Van Manen (1999) calls non-cognitive knowing. Ethell and McMeriman(2000) raises the question how expert practitionersmake sense of their teaching and how this can bemade available to student teachers. The findings inEthell and McMeriman’s study show that thearticulation of the thinking of expert teachersfacilitates the understandings of theoretical andpractical components of teacher education. Thisfinding supports the statement made by noviceteachers in this study.

There is general agreement that good teachereducators provide support to student teachers.Sixty percent of the novice teachers mentioned thiswhereas 67% of the teacher educators made

ARTICLE IN PRESS


similar statements (show patience and empathy).Similar claims are frequently expressed in theliterature (Malderez, 2002; Kanan & Baker, 2002;Ginns, Heirdsfiled, Atweh, & Watters, 2001;Korthagen, 2001; Trumbull, 2001; Fairbanks,Freedman, & Kahn, 2000; among others). Teachereducation is about growth and professional devel-opment, much of which involves changes, and agood teacher educator provides support to studentteachers during the process of professional andpersonal growth.

Forty percent of the novice teachers believe thata good teacher educator is also a good manager oftime and people, a point that is included in thecompetency areas for Dutch teacher educators asdescribed by Koster and Dengerink (2001). Thegroup of experienced teacher educators did notspecifically mention this point in their statements.

In terms of personal characteristics the teachereducators believe a teacher educator should beassertive and confident regarding their work and intheir professional development.

Teacher educators list research as an importantpart of their professional activities. Research isrequired for higher academic promotions forIsraeli teacher educators (Oranim College ofTeacher Education, 2002; Katz & Coleman,2002), it is part of the American (Association ofTeacher Educators (ATE), 2002) as well as theDutch standards (Koster & Dengerink, 2001). Inthis study novice teachers did not relate to researchas a characteristic of good teacher educatorswhereas half of the teacher educators involved(50%) believe that good teacher educators areinvolved with research. Novice teachers, in light oftheir recent experience as students of teaching,related mainly to the teaching quality of teachereducators in their responses. Marsh and Hattie(2002) found that there is not necessarily acorrelation between research and effective teach-ing. The professional community of teachereducators in Israel believe that being involved inresearch advances their career (Katz & Coleman,2002).

Further characteristics of good teacher educa-tors listed by teacher educators and not by noviceteachers are characteristics related to ethicalaspects of the profession, such as acting upon

one’s beliefs (50%) and to believe in education as aworthwhile and rewarding enterprise (44.4%).Eight of the 18 teacher educators mentionedcollegial aspects, focusing on teamwork andsupporting colleagues as characteristics of a goodteacher educator.

Table 3 presents the ranking of the statements tothe question What is the professional knowledge of

teacher educators?

There are several similarities in the answersgiven to the first and second question. It seems tobe problematic to differentiate between the func-tions of teacher educators and the types ofprofessional knowledge they own. There is alsomuch overlapping in the responses of the twogroups.

A vast majority of the novice teachers (97.5%)claim that knowledge about interpersonal com-munication is the most important type of knowl-edge required by teacher educators. This is alsohighly ranked by teacher educators, as it is in thesuggested standards for teacher educators (Koster& Dengerink, 2001).

Novice teachers rank the knowledge of subjectmatter high (90%); teacher educators even higher(94.4%). Teacher educators rank equally highly(94.4) knowledge about teaching (pedagogy) andhow to teach the subject matter to others (didacticsof teaching). So, novice teachers do not onlyexpect teacher educators to be updated in terms ofrecent school teaching experiences, they alsoexpect their theoretical knowledge to be updated:Teacher educators are those who present recent

literature, ideas and changes in education to the

student teachers (teacher). These findings are notunexpected when examining the literature onteacher educators’ professional knowledge (Asso-ciation of Teacher Educators (ATE), 2002 stan-dards; Koster & Dengerink, 2001; Lunenberg,2002). Teacher educators themselves score schoolteaching experience relatively low (33.3%).

Knowledge about assessment is another aspectof professional knowledge appreciated by noviceteachers (85%) and to a smaller extent by teachereducators (55.5%). Novice teachers have recentlyexperienced being assessed by teacher educators,and a major function of assessment in teacher edu-cation is to serve as model for how teachers-to-be

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Ranking of answers to the question: ‘‘What is the professional knowledge of teacher educators?’’

Question Novice teachers N ¼ 40 % Teacher educators N ¼ 18 %

2.What is the

professional

knowledge of

teacher educators?

Knowledge of inter-personal

communication

39 97.5 Subject matter

knowledge and

knowledge of related

subjects

17 94.4

Solid knowledge of subject

matter taught

36 90.0 Pedagogical and

didactic knowledge

17 94.4

Knowledge about assessment 34 85.0 Knowledge about

how to do and make

use of research

12 66.7

Updated and deep knowledge

about changes in education and

in subject matter taught

32 80.0 Knowledge about

evaluation and

assessment

10 55.5

Knowledge of teaching adults 19 47.5 Knowledge about

mankind

9 50.0

Comprehensive knowledge of

the educational system

17 42.5 Knowledge about

how to teach adults

7 38.9

School teaching

experience

6 33.3


are to assess pupil learning when they becometeachers (Smith, in press). The way students arebeing assessed during their studies is reflected intheir beliefs about and approaches to assessinglearning they will practice in their own teaching.This discrepancy between novice teachers andteacher educators is in agreement with findingsfrom a current study examining how assessmentand evaluation is dealt with in terms of assessmentpractices, professional development courses inassessment for teacher educators, and relatedbooks and journals stocked in teacher educationcollege libraries in Israel (Smith & Drori, 2004).Assessment is not a highly prioritized issue inteacher education programs in Israel.

In relation to teacher educators involvementwith research, the data show a slight contradictionbetween the actual involvement with research (inTable 2, 50% of teacher educators claimed that agood teacher educator is involved in research) andthe importance of knowledge about and how to doresearch (in Table 3, 66.7% of the same teachereducators see research as an important part ofteacher educators’ professional knowledge). Katz

& Coleman (2002) found that research was viewedas more instrumentally important for teachereducators in the beginning of their career andmore personally satisfactory for people withtenure and with a rich research record. Asmentioned before, Israeli teacher educators withtenure need to be involved in research to reachadvanced academic rankings (Oranim College ofTeacher Education, 2002; Katz & Coleman, 2002).

An additional issue related to knowledge is theknow-how of teaching adults and children. Bothgroups made statements about the need for teachereducators to be skilled in teaching children andadults. Teacher educators are expected to be awareof differences between teaching children andadults, which are seen as crucial, mainly by noviceteachers.

The final point mentioned by novice teachersrelated to knowledge is related to teacher educa-tors’ ability to see the overall picture of theeducational system (42.5%).

Nine teacher educators (50%) listed knowledgeabout mankind as part of teacher educators’professional knowledge which is, perhaps, related

ARTICLE IN PRESS


to age and experience. As I get older and gain more

experience I seem to be developing a deeper

understanding of mankind expressed in greater

tolerance and patience for the other which has

become an important part of my work in teacher

education (teacher educator).

Table 4 presents the responses to the lastquestion What is the difference between profes-

sional knowledge of teachers and that of teacher

educators?

The responses elicited relate to professionalknowledge, not only as a body of informationbut also to professional actions and behavior, andto the professional expertise of teacher educators.

Data presented in the last part of Table 3 showthat a salient difference between the two groups(82.5% of novice teachers, not mentioned byteacher educators) is the requirement of teachereducators to be able to teach and think aloud, toarticulate their professional content knowledge(Ethell & McMeriman, 2000). Teachers are notexpected to do so, as they do not teach how to

Table 4

Ranking of answers to the question: ‘‘What is the difference betwee

teachers?’’

Question Novice teachers N ¼ 40

3. What is the difference

between the professional

knowledge of teacher

educators and that of

teachers?

TE articulate the tacit part of

teaching

33

TE need to constantly test

theories

23

TE teach adults, not children 19

TE see beyond own class and

school. TE familiar with the

whole educational system

18

teach. Teacher educators need to make theirteaching explicit, so the modeling is brought to aconscious level of student teachers. This requires ahigh-level of meta-cognition, it is verbalizing thereflection in-action (Schon, 1983), the tacit part ofprofessional knowledge in teaching. Loughran andBerry (2003) advocate the importance of modelingin teacher education, modeling various teachingapproaches as well as making decision makingprocesses transparent to student teachers. Accord-ing to Loughran and Berry (2003) teacher educa-tors are in danger of becoming vulnerable byexposing their own questions and reasoning to thestudents, which might suggest why this aspect ofexpertise was not mentioned by teacher educatorsin this study.

57.5% of novice teachers state that teachereducators constantly need to test theories, to trythem out in their own practice before they teachnew theories to student teachers. I wanted to hear

what my teacher educators had to say about the new

theories they taught us, not only to tell about them.

n the professional knowledge of teacher educators and that of

% Teacher educators N ¼ 18 %

82.5 There is much in

common

15 83.3

57.5 TE know more,

especially about

teaching and

learning

13 72.2

47.5 TE have a higher

level of meta-

cognition

12 66.7

45.0 TE have a higher

level of professional

maturity

10 55.5

TE do research 10 55.5

TE enjoy more

professional

autonomy

5 27.8

ARTICLE IN PRESS


I do not have to do that as a teacher of children, I

have to know how to put the theory into my own

teaching practice (teacher).

An additional difference in the professionalexpertise of the two groups of professionals liesin the age of their learners; children and adults.This is related to the depth of knowledge, as bothgroups need to know what it means to teachchildren, whereas teacher educators’ teachingcompetencies are extended to adult learners.Teachers know about their own pupils, class andthe age-group they teach, whereas teacher educa-tors are expected to own comprehensive knowl-edge about the educational system and theteaching of all age groups.

Furthermore, the findings show there is adifference in the context with which teachers andteacher educators are expected to be familiar.Teachers see mainly their own context of teaching,classes, school and themselves, whereas teachereducators are expected to be knowledgeable abouteducation in general at a national and interna-tional level, at least from a theoretical aspect.

Teacher educators (83.3%) believe there is muchcommonality in the professional expertise ofteachers and teacher educators. According to theteacher educators the main differences lie in thecomprehensiveness and depth of knowledge. Tea-cher educators (66.7%) find there are differencesrelated to meta-cognitive aspects of teaching, afinding which can be examined in light of thenovice teachers’ request for listening to teachereducators’ reasoning underpinning their work.Meta-cognition does not necessarily lead toarticulation of tacit knowledge, but is, as I see it,a pre-requisite, related to a more mature under-standing of one’s professional decisions andactivities. 55.5% of the teacher educators believesuch a difference in professional maturity existsbetween their own professional group and that ofteachers. One of the participating teacher educa-tors wrote that: Teacher educators have reached a

level of professional knowledge and maturity, which

is not that crucial for teachers.

There is also difference in the requirements ofteachers and teacher educators in doing researchand developing curricula. Teachers do this at thelevel of their own teaching by producing work-

sheets and programs for their own classes, but theydo usually not develop this into a publication.66.7% of the teacher educators questioned believeresearch is part of a teacher educator’s profes-sional knowledge (see Table 3) and 55.5% pointout that conducting research is a feature of theirwork which differs from that of teachers. It cannotbe concluded from the findings that the same55.5% are involved with research, but researchactivities are growing in numbers within Israeliteacher education colleges.

Finally, five out of the 18 teacher educators(27.8%) mention that they have more professionalautonomy than teachers. College and universityteachers enjoy a large extent of academic freedomin designing courses and assessment approaches,whereas teachers in Israel are required to follow astate syllabus, and they feel the pressure ofpreparing their students for external high-stakesexaminations.

6. Discussion

This study has examined the expertise of teachereducators from various perspectives. Informationhas been taken from relevant literature, fromrecently developed standards and criteria forprofessional promotion. Furthermore, novice tea-chers, and teacher educators from Israel wereasked to characterize good teacher educators, theirprofessional knowledge, and how this differs fromschoolteachers’ professional expertise.

The study was conducted in an Israeli teachereducation college with a rather small researchpopulation which limits its generalization in othercontexts. The data collection process was open anddid not allow for advanced statistical analyses.Therefore, the points discussed and the conclu-sions reached need to be viewed in the context ofthe paper and in the limitations of the study.

Nevertheless, the ambitious aim of this paperhas been to add to the understanding of the topic.Teacher educators themselves, as well as noviceteachers who have recently completed their teachereducation were found to be highly valuablesources of information in learning about teachereducators’ professional knowledge.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


Findings show (Table 2) that novice teachersstraight out of teacher education view practicalaspects such as the actual practice of the preachingand recent experience in teaching in schools asthe most importance characteristics of a goodteacher educator. Teacher educators focus onenhancing reflection and creating an understand-ing of education in their trainees, also reflectedin the Dutch standard of ‘development andpersonal growth competencies’ (Koster & Denger-ink, 2001).

According to the Association of Teacher Edu-cators (ATE) (2002) standards and the Dutchstandards (Koster & Dengerink, 2001) teachereducators’ expertise is expected to be rich andextensive in terms of the specific subject mattertaught and of a wide range of related areas, such asdidactics, pedagogy and psychology. These areasform the basis for the professional body ofknowledge of teacher education. The findings inthis study support the above claims, noviceteachers as well as teacher educators attributehigh importance to these areas of knowledge ofteacher educators (Table 3).

Even though, the findings point at similarities inthe expertise of teachers and teacher educators,there are some major differences (Table 4).Teacher educators are expected to be epistemolo-gists (Kessels & Korthagen, 2001), to test newtheories and to link personal practice and students’experiences to known theories and to develop theirown. There is a meta-practical awareness inteacher educators’ work, the importance of mod-eling (Loughran & Berry, 2003) which plays alesser role in teachers’ practice. Teachers aremainly required to be good practitioners.

Based on the above findings professional ex-pertise of teacher educators differs from teachers’professional expertise in the following:

�
Articulation of reflectivity and meta-cognition:Teacher educators are expected to be self-aware,to reflect and articulate in-action reflections, toexplain tacit knowledge of teaching and make itavailable to teachers-to-be, thus bridging theoryand practice.
�
Quality of knowledge: Teacher educators’ pro-fessional knowledge is expected to be compre-
hensive, rich and deep, based on theory andtesting theories in practice.

�
Knowledge of how to create new knowledge:
Teacher educators are expected to engage incurricula writing and research. Research isviewed as ongoing credited professional devel-opment.

�
Teaching children and adults: Teacher educatorsare expected to be skillful in teaching all agegroups of learners.
�
Comprehensive understanding of the educational
system: Teacher educators are expected to havea comprehensive understanding of the educa-tional system which goes beyond their personalteaching context.

�
Professional maturity and autonomy: Teachereducators are expected to have achieved a highlevel of professional maturity which is expressedwithin a framework of professional autonomy.
7. Conclusion

Recently we have seen results of work ondeveloping standards for teacher educators whichprovide guidelines for teacher educators them-selves, for decision-makers, for program designers,which serve as benchmarks for assessment ofteacher educators. Standards need, however, tobe used intelligently (Crooks, 2003) and withawareness for standards sometimes put constraintson professional autonomy and can, if they becometoo detailed and limited, hamper professionalcreativity and development. Like Crooks (2003),I would argue that Standards are best used asguidelines for work within a specific context andallow for individual routes to achieving profes-sional competence.

The findings in this study provide food forthought about how teacher educators are chosenand how they are educated for the job. Doinstitutions of teacher education examine candi-dates for teaching posts in line with the profile ofprofessional competence which has been devel-oped in this paper? Is education available forteacher educators-to-be created around the profes-sional functions and knowledge of teacher educa-tors? It seems that this field is still in its infant

ARTICLE IN PRESS


stage (Ducharme & Ducharme, 1996; Korthagen,2000).

Darling-Hammond, Chung, and Frelow (2002)found that teachers who had been educated in athorough teacher education program feel moreconfident about their teaching than those with noor less solid preparation. Based on these findingsfrom the work of Darling-Hammond and hercolleagues, one could hypothesize that teachereducators would gain confidence by being profes-sionally prepared for their responsibilities.

Challenging questions for teacher education are:How do we design pre-service programs forteacher educators?, What components should beincluded?, Should such programs include practicalaspects as well as theoretical components?, Whatshould the entrance requirements to such aprogram be?, How would a pre-service trainingcourse for teacher educators differ from a coursefor teachers? As for now we do not have sufficientresearch based information to answer these ques-tions—a strong indication of a useful directionsfor future studies. We need to learn more aboutthe expertise of teacher educators and to designpre- and in-service education program for teachereducators.

References

Apple, M. W. (2001). Markets, standards, teaching, and teacher

education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 182–196.

Association of Teacher Educators (ATE). (2002). Standards for

Teacher Educators. Retrieved November, 2002, from http://

www.siu.edu/departments/coe/ate/standards/TEsta-

ndards.html.

Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (1996). Assessing teachers’

practical knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluation,

22(3), 275–286.

Berliner, D. C. (2000). A personal response to those who bash

teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5),

358–371.

Christie, D. (2003). Competences, Benchmarks and Standards

in the Teaching Profession. In T. Bryce, & W. Humes (Eds.),

Scottish Education, (second ed). Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press.

Crooks, T. (2003). Some criteria for intelligent accountability

applied to accountability in New Zealand. Paper presented at

the annual conference of the American Educational

Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.

Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (2002).

Variation in teacher preparation: How well do different

pathways prepare teachers to teach? Journal of Teacher

Education, 53(4), 286–302.

Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: the challenges of lifelong

learning. London: Falmer Press.

Ducharme, M., & Ducharme, E. (1996). Needed research in

teacher education. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research

on teacher education, (second ed) (pp. 1030–1046). New

York: Macmillan.

Ethell, R. G., & McMeriman, M. M. (2000). Unlocking the

knowledge in action of an expert practitioner. Journal of

Teacher Education, 51(2), 87–101.

Fairbanks, C. M., Freedman, D., & Kahn, C. (2000). The role

of effective mentors in learning to teach. Journal of Teacher

Education, 51(2), 102–112.

Fish, D. (1995). Quality learning for student practice: university

tutors’ educational practice. London: David Fulton

Publishers.

Ginns, I., Heirdsfiled, A., Atweh, B., & Watters, J. J. (2001).

Beginning teachers becoming professionals through action

research. Educational Action Research, 9(1), 11–133.

Kanan, H. M., & Baker, A. M. (2002). Palestinian novice

teachers’ perception of a good mentor. Journal of Education

for Teaching, 28(1), 35–43.

Katz, E., & Coleman, M. (2002). The influence of research on

career development at academic colleges of education in

Israel. Journal of Education for Teaching, 28(1), 45–61.

Kessels, J., & Korthagen, F. (2001). The relation between

theory and practice. In F. A. J. Korthagen, J. Kessels, B.

Koster, B. Lagerwerf, & T. Wubbels (Eds.), Linking practice

and theory—the pedagogy of teacher education (pp. 20–32).

Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Publishers.

Korthagen, F. A. J. (2000). Teacher educators: from neglected

group to spearhead in the development of education. In G.

M. Willems, J. H. J. Stakenborg, & W. Veugelers (Eds.),

Trends in Dutch teacher education (pp. 35–48). Leuven-

Apeldoorn: Garant.

Korthagen, F. A. J. (2001). Teacher education: a problematic

enterprise. In F. A. J. Korthagen, J. Kessels, B. Koster, B.

Lagerwerf, & T. Wubbels (Eds.), Linking practice and

theory—the pedagogy of teacher education (pp. 1–19).


Publishers.

Korthagen, F. A. J., & Kessels, J. P. A. M. (1999). Linking

theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher

education. Educational Researcher, 28(4), 1–14.

Koster, B., Brekelmans, M., Koetsier, C., Korthagen, F., &

Wubbels, T. (2003). Teacher Educators tasks and compen-

tencies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the

American Educational Research Association, Chicago,

Illinois.

Koster, B., & Dengerink, J. (2001). Towards a professional

standard for Dutch teacher educators. European Journal of

Teacher Education, 24(3), 343–354.

Koster, B., & Korthagen, F. (2001). Training teachers for the

realistic approach. In F. A. J. Korthagen, J. Kessels, B.

Koster, B. Lagerwerf, & T. Wubbels (Eds.), Linking practice

http://www.siu.edu/departments/coe/ate/standards/TEstandards.html



ARTICLE IN PRESS


and theory- the pedagogy of teacher education (pp. 239–254).


Publishers.

Koster, B., Korthagen, F. A. J., & Wubbels, Th. (1998). Is there

anything left for us? Functions of cooperating teachers and

teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education,

21(1), 75–89.

Koster, B., Korthagen, F. A. J., Wubbels, Th., & Hoornweg, J.

(1996). Roles, competencies and training of teacher educa-

tors: A new challenge. In E. Befring (Ed.), Teacher

Education for Quality (pp. 397–411). Oslo: Lobo Grafisk.

Loughran, J., Berry, A. (2003). Modelling by Teacher

Educators. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the

American Educational Research Association, Chicago,

Illinois.

Lunenberg, M. (2002). Designing a curriculum for teacher

educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 25(2),

263–277.

Malderez, A. (2002). Mentoring: The missing link. IATEFL

Teacher Development and Teacher Trainers & Educators

Special Interest Groups Newsletter, Special Edition, Summer,

2002, pp. 4–8.

Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between

research productivity and teaching effectiveness. The

Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641.

Murray, F. B. (2001). The overreliance of accreditors on

consensus standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2),

211–222.

Nieme, H. (2002). Active learning—a cultural change needed in

teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 18(7), 763–780.

Oranim College of Teacher Education. (2002). Regulations and

criteria for promotion of teacher educators. Oranim Aca-

demic College of Education: Israel.

Ozer, F. (1998). Standards in teacher training. European

Education, 30(2), 20–25.

Rudduck, J. (1999). Teacher practice and the student voice. In

M. Lang, J. Olson, H. Hansen, & W. Bunder (Eds.),

Changing schools/changing practices: perspectives on educa-

tional reform and teacher professionalism (pp. 41–55).

Louvain: Garant.

Sandholtz, J. H. (2001). Inservice training or professional

development: contrasting opportunities in a school/univer-

sity partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7),

815–830.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how profes-

sionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Slick, S. K. (1998). The university supervisor: A disenfranchised

outsider. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8), 821–834.

Smedley, L. (2001). Impediments to partnership—a literature

review of school–university links. Teachers and Teaching,

7(2), 189–211.

Smith, K. (2003). So, What about the professional development

of teacher educators? European Journal of Teacher Educa-

tion, 26(2), 201–215.

Smith, K. Modeling educational assessment in teacher educa-

tion. In: Smith, K., Frenkel, P. (Eds.), Functions of

Assessment in Teacher Education. Tel Aviv, Israel: Mofet

Institute (in Hebrew), in press.

Smith, K., & Drori, E. (2004). The place of assessment and

evaluation in Israeli teacher education colleges. Tel Aviv,

Israel: Mofet Institute, forthcoming.

Smith, K., & Van der Westhuizen, G. (2000). Teachers’

portfolio reflections: A comparative study. The Journal of

Teacher Development, 4(3), 339–351.

Smith, P. (2001). Mentors as Gate-keepers: an exploration of

professional formation. Educational Review, 53(3), 313–324.

Stuart, C., & Thurlow, D. (2000). Making it their own: pre-

service teachers’ experiences, beliefs and classroom prac-

tices. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(2), 113–121.

Tamir, P. (1991). Professional and personal knowledge of

teachers and teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 7(3), 263–268.

Trumbull, D. J. (2001). Thinking about theorizing in profes-

sional development. Teachers and Teaching, 7(2), 121–143.

Turley, S., & Nakai, K. (2000). Two routes to certification:

What do student teachers think? Journal of Teacher

Education, 51(2), 122–134.

Van Manen, M. (1999). Knowledge, reflection an complexity in

teacher practice. In M. Lang, J. Olson, H. Hansen, & W.

Bunder (Eds.), Changing schools/changing practices: per-

spectives on educational reform and teacher professionalism

(pp. 65–75). Leuven: Garant.

Wilson, S.M., Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B. (2001). Con-

necticut’s story. A model for state teaching policy. Teaching

Quality Policy Briefs, 4, 1–8.

Zanting, A., Verloop, N., Vermunt, J. D., & Van Driel, J. H.

(1998). Explicating practical knowledge: an extension of

mentor teachers’ roles. European Journal of Teacher

Education, 21(1), 11–27.

Documents

Teacher educators’ expertise: what do novice teachers and teacher educators say?