Teacher Socialization From a Dialectical Perspective: Pretraining Through Induction€¦ · · 2007-08-15JOURNAL OF TEACHING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION, 1992, 11, 329-348 Teacher Socialization

JOURNAL OF TEACHING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION, 1992, 11, 329-348

Teacher Socialization From a Dialectical Perspective: Pretraining Through Induction

Paul G. Schempp Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Universitat

Kim C. Graber University of Arizona

Recent attention has focused on examining the process of becoming a teacher. Researchers have begun studying the stages of socialization that influence the beliefs, behaviors, and perspectives of those who choose to teach. The purpose of this article is to explore the earlier stages of professional socialization, focusing on four periods (pretraining, preservice, field experiences, and induction) that have the potential to significantly impact teacher development. The authors maintain that prospective teachers participate in a dialectical process, determining to some degree which beliefs they will acquire and which they will ignore. Specifically, this article supports the notion that a dialectical process exists during all four selected periods of socialization-a contest between societal expectations and the individual inclinations of prospective teachers.

In any society, teachers are responsible for transmitting and transforming a collected body of knowledge on a given subject. Teachers encourage the skills and dispositions that will serve their students as they make their way in the world. The steps taken in selecting and preparing teachers has much to say about the society itself. Teacher selection and preparation has traditionally been thought the domain of teacher education programs in colleges and universities. Increasingly, however, those who study teacher socialization see such programs as only one segment in a long chain of events.

Teacher educators have long recognized that becoming a teacher represents a struggle between a professional ideal and the individual natures and proclivities of those aspiring to teach. As teacher education has become a subject of scrutiny, socialization theory has been used as a way of understanding how the roles of teacher and coach are assumed (Lawson, 1983a, 1983b; Templin & Schempp, 1989). It has been particularly useful to examine the process as a negotiation betweena social system and a person-in other words, as a dialectical process.

Paul G. Schempp is with the Institut fiir Sportwissenschaften at Johann-Wolfgang- Goethe Universitat, Ginnheimer Landstr. 39, 6000 FrankfurtIMain, Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Kim C. Graber is with the Department of Exercise and Sport Science at the University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721.

SCHEMPP AND GRABER

Dialectic Defined

The word dialectic refers to a process involving the confrontation of contending propositions that ultimately resolve into a synthesis of perspectives and actions of a new and unique design. The dialectic is an ancient philosophy. Plato is considered to be its inventor, and Kant was responsible for resuscitating the term and applying it in his analysis of reason. It was Hegel, however, who demonstrated its universal and systematic application, particularly to the human condition. In Hegel's view, perennial types of human experience give birth to recurrent and different perspectives on life (Loewenberg, 1929). Each view or belief, according to Hegel, is not without its rival, and the struggle to claim its validity over others becomes the struggle for power. A particular view of the world represents a thesis, to which an antithesis exists. In the struggle of thesis and antithesis, both views become changed (synthesis). A dialectic is thus the analysis of the contestation between typical attitudes or beliefs as they define the instability of human experience.

The best known example of a dialectical analysis is Karl Marx's (18671 1927) Capital. Marx inverted Hegel's dialectic and used his "material dialectic" to analyze the historical contradictions between capital and labor. Following Marx's example, social scientists and scholars have found the study of the dialectical process a potent method for analyzing the socio-historical activity comprising human development. Popkewitz (1984) made the point,

Dialectics direct attention to the world in motion, to evolution and development as central to thought and nature. The emphasis on movement and connections focuses upon the social-historical process of individual development. Human understanding is to understand how structures of thought and culture perform their specific functions. (pp. 63-64)

Although characterized by an interpretive set of qualities, flexible in its definition and devoid of universal principles, the dialectic can serve as an appropriate form of analysis for any social phenomenon. As a mode of educational reasoning it has proven useful (Zeichner, 1979). In Giroux's (1980) opinion,

The dialectic functions so as to help people analyze the world in which they live, to become aware of the constraints that prevent them from changing that world, and finally, to help them to collectively struggle to transform that world. (p. 30)

Understanding the making of a teacher from a dialectical perspective makes possible new insights into how and why individuals are recruited, prepared, and inducted into teaching physical education.

The vigor of a dialectic in and of itself is only a measure of change between and within an agency and an individual. It is not necessarily a sign of progress, growth, or development. The presence or absence of a dialectic cannot be construed as good or bad. It is the points of contestation, the method of negotiation, and the power imbedded in the ideas and actions of the dialectic that ultimately determine the worth and value of the exchange. A dialectic can produce a common understanding and mutual beneficence, it can account for domination of one group over another, or it can cause two parties to separate forever. What is consistent is that in a dialectical relationship, both sides become changed, at

TEACHER SOCIALIZATION 331

least to some degree, as the points of contention are negotiated in the actions of everyday life.

Dialectics of Teacher Socialization

It is apparent that from the time students are very young, they are participants in the dialectical process, coming to grips with the role of teacher and developing opinions about how to teach. When students enter formal teacher education programs, the dialectic increases as they negotiate beliefs and knowledge with teacher educators and with others responsible for their professional education. The degree of negotiation is, of course, dependent upon the congruency of the aspiring teacher's a priori beliefs and knowledge and those promoted by the education program. The greater the difference, the more pronounced the dialectic. Upon certification and induction, the novice may discover that he or she must renegotiate certain fundamental perspectives on teaching and learning with students, parents, administrators, and others in the community.

For many years, teachers were regarded as passive entities who willingly adapted and conformed to the forces of socialization (Zeichner, 1979). This functionalist version of socialization was inadequate for explaining why some teachers resisted the forces of socialization-not adapting, conforming, or developing beliefs espoused during teacher education (Templin & Schempp, 1989). As research on teacher education accumulated, it became evident that the recruits were active agents in their socialization, deciding which beliefs and behaviors would be acquired and which ignored (Graber, 1991; Zeichner & Gore, 1990).

When individuals push back against the forces of socialization, covertly or overtly making their own choices based upon the wisdom of their experience and judgment, the process may properly be called dialectical-a contest of social thesis against individual antithesis. That is, teachers assume a leading role in developing their professional perspectives. In the contest of influence and opposing wills, both sides may be reshaped by the exchange. It is important to note that the contest between individual and institution, the balance of power and access to resources, is not equal. The dialectic, therefore, is often contested in forms other than direct opposition. Passive resistance, noncompliance, indirect negotiations, and withdrawal are all symptomatic of the dialectics of teacher socialization (Giroux, 1983).

Given the domination of institution over teacher, Lacey (1977) concluded that teachers engage three mechanisms to adjust to their situation: (a) internalized adjustment, in which the individual conforms his or her beliefs to the status quo, (b) strategic compliance, in which behavior is adjusted but oppositional beliefs remain, and (c) strategic redefinition, in which the teacher is able to bring new knowledge, values, or skills to bear on the situation. Because the power base between teacher and institution is unequal, the degree to which each is reshaped through the dialectic may also be unequal.

Throughout this article we maintain that all teachers participate to some degree in the dialectic process and that all are in some measure the architects of what they believe and how they behave. Berger and Luckrnan (1966) wrote that "the relationship between man, the producer, and the social world, his product, is and remains a dialectic one. Man and his social world interact with each other.

332 SCHEMPP AND GRABER

The product acts back upon the producer" (p. 61). Berger and Luckman theorized a dialectic as composed in three moments: internalization, extemalization, and objectivation. Put another way, a dialectic incorporates the simultaneous negotiation of belief, behavior, and perception. The process of socialization is thus comprised in an individual's construction of a belief system, acquisition of appropriate ways of acting, and learning to attend to relevant social messages. These three activities occur interdependently and often represent a juncture of individual inclinations and societal standards. In the construction of a belief system between the individual and the social institution a dialectic emerges.

Although few studies of teacher socialization have analyzed all three elements of the dialectic, most investigators have studied at least one and many have focused on more than one. This paper, therefore, represents an analysis of teacher socialization through a review of pertinent literature. Specifically, we attempted to understand the dialectics of teacher socialization by analyzing teachers' beliefs and practices (thesis), the opposition these beliefs and practices encounter in the experiences of becoming teachers (antithesis), and the recreation of these beliefs and practices arising from these institutional conflicts (synthesis).

This paper explores the earlier phases of professional socialization, focusing on four periods that have the potential to significantly influence how teachers develop their professional skills and orientations. Although the periods are presented chronologically, they have another significance. They represent what Van Maanen (1977) called "breakpoints7':

It is a breakpoint in which established relationships are severed and new ones forged, old behavior patterns forgotten and new ones learned, former responsibilities abandoned and new ones taken on. In short, breakpoints require the individual to discover or reformulate certain everyday assumptions about their working life. (p. 16)

The four breakpoints are pretraining, presewice, field experiences, and induction. Each phase represents a different social structure and, therefore, new opportunities for a dialectic to emerge. Each takes place in a unique environment composed of specific actors, times, and places and requires the developing teacher to assume a distinctly new role. And as teachers negotiate these breakpoints, they become, to varying degrees, reshaped in the experience.

Pretraining Socialization

The education of teachers begins long before teaching roles are assumed and even before people enter teacher education programs (Lawson, 1983a, 1983b; Lortie, 1975). Prospective teachers begin internalizing societal expectations and definitions of teachers' work from the moment they enter the public school system. Parents, siblings, friends, and significant others inform youngsters of the occupational status and professional responsibilities of teachers. Membership in social institutions and experiences outside the school also play a role in communicating societal expectations for teachers. These individuals and institutions are the socializing agents that help shape the beliefs and perspectives of future teachers.

TEACHER SOCIALIZATION

Apprenticeship of Observation

First-hand experience of being in a classroom and watching teachers ply their trade represents the first direct introduction to the teaching profession. Certainly, it is life in the classroom that ultimately has the greatest impact on what all children learn about teaching and teachers (Jackson, 1968). This period of time has been referred to as anticipatory socialization (Burlingame, 1972), pretraining (Zeichner & Gore, 1990), recruitment (Dewar, 1989; Lawson, 1983a), and the apprenticeship of observation (Lortie, 1975). It is a time when individuals begin to construct some of the more visible professional values (Western & Anderson, 1968). Lortie (1975) estimated that students spend approximately 13,000 hours in direct contact with teachers, observing what teachers do and say and learning about the everyday routines and rituals of teaching. Children bear witness to the work of teachers longer and more intensely than any other occupational group. They are actively engaged in a dialectic, building strong viewpoints about the teaching role by internalizing classroom experiences and objectifying assumptions about life in -

schools. Lortie's (1975) research led him to conclude that prospective teachers learn

a great deal about their occupation while they are students. These early experiences firm the evaluation screen through which all future experiences will pass. Here, prospective teachers interact with the social structure of the school and begin to determine how they wish to act as future teachers. This period has a distinct and traceable influence on an individual's future decisions, practices, and ideologies as a teacher. Only the teaching career itself represents a socialization phase longer than the apprenticeship of observation.

Recent research on the apprenticeship of observation in physical education has revealed several insights. Through the use of critical-incident reports, Schempp (1989a) found that the apprenticeship appears to be a time when prospective physical educators become acquainted with teaching tasks and begin formulating criteria for assessing teachers. He also found that many teachers did not form an identification with either their future profession or its members. Unlike classroom teachers in Lortie's (1975) study, these future physical educators seldom believed they were in the presence of a "master teacher." Consequently, the prospective teachers appeared to rely heavily on personal likes and interests for selecting pedagogical practices to emulate and for constructing an occupational belief system.

Hutchinson (1990) conducted interviews and role-playing activities with 10 high school students who intended to become physical education teachers. She found that these students had narrow but well-conceived beliefs regarding their chosen occupation. Consistent with prevailing beliefs about recruits (Bain & Wendt, 1983; Chu, 1984), these students saw teaching as the gateway to a coaching career. When discussing their perspectives on teaching, these prospective teachers believed that (a) they would be successful if their pupils had fun and were engaged in activity, (b) instruction was unnecessary because all pupils should be able to perform skills if they try hard enough, (c) curriculum should encompass a multiactivity approach, with the same activities offered on a yearly basis, (d) noncompliance with class rules should result in low grades, and (e) lesson planning should rarely include written plans.


Although all these propositions would be denied by most teacher educators and textbook authors in physical education, the scene becomes clearly set for a potentially vigorous dialectic in preservice teacher education. For example, in determining the quality of a physical education class, a teacher educator may look to student learning as the criterion measure whereas a prospective teacher would more likely focus on student enjoyment. Regardless of how hard teacher educators work to instill new beliefs in a prospective teacher, notions and ideologies acquired during pretraining are, to some degree, still present in the graduate's belief system-even when tempered by a dialectic.

Experience as a pupil in the public schools acquaints prospective physical educators with teaching as a profession. It is there that individuals begin internalizing beliefs about teaching and teachers. Although many experiences undoubtedly result in the formulation of perspectives that will be useful when students become teachers, other experiences result in the development of orientations antithetical to good teaching. For example, evidence suggests that students enter teacher education programs believing that they already know what occurs in schools and have little more to learn (Lanier & Little, 1986). This perspective is limiting because, as Lortie (1975) noted, "what students learn about teaching, then, is intuitive and imitative rather than explicit and analytical; it is based on individual personalities rather than pedagogical principles" (p. 62).

The apprenticeship of observation does not represent a professional or systematic introduction to the work of teachers. Rather, it represents collected and recollected experiences from days as a student. These remnants from studentship yield a view of teaching that is decidedly uneven in quality and incomplete. Nevertheless, the influence of these early socializing experiences carry far into teachers' careers (McEvoy, 1986) and provide a continuing influence over the pedagogical perspectives, beliefs, and behaviors of physical education teachers.

Recruitment Into Teaching

All who attend school serve an apprenticeship of observation, witnessing classroom protocol and forming opinions about teachers and teaching. Not everyone who attends school, however, becomes a teacher. Individuals choose careers for different reasons, and many factors appear to influence a person's decision to teach physical education. The purpose here is to examine how recruits become attracted to the teaching profession and how this selection process affects the education and development of teachers. We agree with Dewar (1989) that

recruitment is defined as more than a set of values, attitudes and behaviors. It is seen as a process of selection that can be used to maintain or transform the relations of power and dominance that characterize physical education teaching. (p. 42)

Subjective Warrant. Building on Lortie's (1975) conception of a subjective warrant, Lawson (1983a) theorized that it offered an explanation for recruitment into teaching. Lawson defined a subjective warrant as composed of "perceptions of the requirements for teacher education and for actual teaching in schools" (p. 6). Forming the subjective warrant are the persons' interpretations of their life experiences relevant to teaching physical education, both what they


have come to believe it demands and what they are convinced makes them appropriate postulants for the role. The subjective warrant is informed by personal biography, significant others, social events, and school experiences. It is a recruit's assessment of his or her abilities and aspirations matched against the requirements of a given profession.

Dewar (1984) drew from Lawson's (1983a) conception of subjective warrant for a study of high school students' recruitment into physical education. She found that those who were attracted to the physical education teaching profession had extensive involvement in sport and physical activity, saw this involvement as the main focus in their lives, and perceived physical education as primarily skill oriented. Physical education recruits enter the profession as a means of acting on their desire to associate with sport and to work with children in a familiar, attractive environment.

The subjective warrant plays a substantial role in determining how the dialectical process will evolve during teacher education. Recruits bring to teacher education programs strong beliefs, grounded in personal experience and opinion, regarding their suitability for the teaching role. The dialectic is most active when recruits encounter teacher educators who either challenge their beliefs or present new information that expands their conception of teaching. The dialectic is least active when teacher educators merely confirm beliefs and values that were developed during the long period of pretraining.

To Teach or To Coach? Those who influence a recruit's decision to enter teaching include, among others, physical education teachers, coaches, peers, and family (Pooley, 1972). Although the amount of influence provided by these people varies, in physical education, many students enter teaching so they may later assume coaching positions (Chu, 1984; Lawson, 1983a, 1983b; Templin, Woodford, & Mulling, 1982; Woodford, 1977). Those who aspire to coach often feel they have no other choice than to become physical education teachers.

Recruits often assume coaching is the same as teaching. There are, however, strong differences between the roles (Locke & Massengale, 1978). If students expect to be trained as coaches but encounter almost exclusive emphasis on teacher training, a sharp violation of expectations mediates the acquisition of the orientation that the training program hopes to instill. These opposing viewpoints regarding the form and function of teacher education are likely to result in a dialectic that forces a renegotiation of standards and practices by both parties. Within the context and constraints of their power relationship, teacher educators and their students are simultaneously socialized.

Structural Functionalism. Individuals appear to elect a teaching career because they feel comfortable in the system and want to reproduce their experiences for others. The recruitment of teachers thus appears to perform a structural-functionalist social task. That is, the current pattern of teacher recruitment predominantly attracts those who revere the present social structure of education and wish to function within that system. Given their desire to preserve the system, these people tend to bring with them a conservative ideology. Dewar (1989) made the point that

individuals who perceive physical education as a suitable career may be the ones who have been successful in and are privileged by the system. It is these individuals who are most likely to be committed to and have a vested interest in the preservation of the system. (p. 55)


Given this conservative orientation and commitment to the status quo, recruitment into teaching appears to be a social process ensuring stability to the present social and educational system. The lack of a dialectic between teachers as individuals and teacher education as a social agency means that fundamental assumptions regarding teaching and the processes of education are likely to go unquestioned. In the absence of a vigorous dialectic in teacher education, little is likely to change. Only when recruits encounter teacher educators with alternative orientations is a dialectic likely to emerge and enable change to take place in the teacher education program (Ellsworth, 1989).

Attractors and Rewards. Some students enter teaching because of rewards such as long vacations and short work days. Others enter because they can't gain entry into fields with more stringent entry requirements. Templin et al. (1982) discussed the ease of entry into teaching, of some students entering because of low grade point averages or because of SAT and ACT scores unacceptable for entry into other fields. Finally, some students enter teaching because they perceive education majors have less difficult and less time-consuming courses (Geer, 1968). These individuals see the occupation of teaching as holding more salient rewards than those promoted by teacher educators. More often than not, recruits who enter teacher education for these reasons will prove to be difficult when teacher educators expect them to adopt orientations and behaviors that emphasize the planning, implementation, and evaluation of instruction.

The social process of recruitment brings prospective physical educators to the doors of training institutions. They arrive with powerful ideologies regarding the social role of a teacher or coach, ideologies tempered by years of experience in schools. It would be naive for teacher educators to believe that recruits are waiting to be filled with the professional dogma of teaching or coaching. Instead, they can expect to encounter students who may become active participants in the dialectic of teacher socialization and contest, directly or indirectly, many beliefs the training program attempts to instill.

Preservice Teacher Socialization

Once a student decides on a teaching career, the first step toward formal preparation is selecting and entering a professional teacher education program. As prospective teachers enter these programs, it is assumed they will acquire the orientation and practices prescribed by the teacher education faculty. The faculty have the power to determine what will be taught, how it will be taught, and who shall teach it. In most cases, this process does little to accommodate the knowledge and beliefs constructed from the many years of anticipatory socialization.

The assumption that recruits are blank slates frequently causes conflict between what teacher educators want students to learn and what students believe is important to learn (Graber, 1989). Subjective warrants are inextricable perspectives that are not easily overturned during the process of formal teacher education.

Professional socialization is an interactive process whereby present experiences continually challenge interpretations and assumptions from the past and demand some form of resolution and assimilation. Although it may appear that there is an absence of such resistance and conflict, this is not necessarily evidence that a dialectic is not taking place. Students in preparation programs may employ


a variety of covert behaviors that enable them to retain their own orientation while making it appear that they are acquiring the prescribed orientation.

One aspect of this covert process during preservice teacher education involves "studentship." Graber (1991) described studentship as a set of behaviors students employ in order to progress through a teacher education program with greater ease, more success, and less effort. Studentship behaviors include cheating, taking shortcuts, psyching-out the instructor to determine what might be asked on an exam, and projecting a self-image to the instructor that is not necessarily congruent with what one actually believes. When students, for example, employ image projection behaviors, instructors are likely to believe that students are buying into the orientation of the training program; unfortunately, students do not externalize these behaviors because they have acquired a new orientation but because they want to be perceived favorably by the instructor.

In her study of undergraduates in a physical education teacher education program, Graber (199 1) observed frequent use of studentship behaviors. Although the contextual conditions of the classroom mediated the use of studentship at various points, it became evident that students were skilled in the use of these behaviors, felt little remorse when engaging in them, and believed these behaviors were necessary tools for survival. Studentship enabled prospective teachers to have a degree of control over their lives, providing them with a means for reacting to those who sought to socialize them into a particular, yet not always agreeable, orientation.

Because of the power vested in teacher educators by virtue of their responsi- bility for grades, recommendations, and certification, students have much to lose by directly and defiantly contesting opposing beliefs espoused by teacher educators. Therefore, the dialectics of teacher education are often driven underground, and students are forced to give an outward appearance of acceptance while harboring and restraining their disagreement with and rejection of the official teaching orientation. In short, the construct of studentship provides a window for observing one aspect of the often invisible dialectic of teacher training.

The purpose of preservice teacher education is to prepare qualified teachers who are eager to improve professional practice and who have been socialized into believing that good teaching is important. Based on the experiences recruits bring with them into training programs, students will already have strong beliefs as to what constitutes good teaching. At one extreme are recruits who may believe that a good teacher plans, implements, analyzes, and carefully evaluates his or her teaching for the purpose of helping students learn. At the other extreme are recruits who believe that a good teacher encourages students to have fun in class by providing students with choices for daily activities in the gymnasium and who then rolls out the ball so students may remain active and happy. Unless teacher educators can encourage students to question their assumptions about teaching and reinterpret their past experiences in physical education, recruits may leave their preparation programs untouched by new knowledge and insights. It may appear that what recruits were to have learned during training is washed-out once they leave the program (Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). However, these teachers probably never appropriated the behaviors and beliefs of the education program; they only-through use of studentship behaviors-appeared to.

The disparity between teacher expectations for what students should learn and students' own expectations for what they should learn also appears to


influence the dialectics of teacher education. Graber (1989) noted that when the expectations of these two groups differ markedly, finding a shared and meaningful conception of teacher education will be difficult. For example, aspiring teachers have (a) program expectations concerning course work and clinical experience, (b) training-experience and curriculum expectations, (c) role-training expectations, (d) teacher expectations, and (e) college expectations for life outside the university classroom. She suggested that teacher educators "must work to either meet some student expectations or, at the least, to acknowledge that these expectations do exist and must be subject to open discussion and negotiation with students" (p. 65).

Socialization During Field Experiences

The final act of preparation for entering the professional arena as a certified teacher is field experience. Field experience represents the only time the preparation program coexists with the reality of a teacher's world. For the first time, student culture mingles with teacher culture. Field experiences are the initial steps in the shoes of a physical education teacher. The most influential field experience is traditionally perceived to be student teaching. There is growing recognition, however, that class-related field experiences and other practica also serve as influential sources of socialization for prospective teachers (Dodds, 1989).

Zeichner (1980) contended that field-based experiences have a differential impact on prospective teachers. He saw neophytes as active agents in their own professional socialization. The work of Zeichner and Tabachnick (1983, 1985) provides a vivid portrayal of the dialectical process during field experiences. For example, they found that some teachers complied with the external pressures of student teaching and came to believe the status quo was legitimate, commonsense, and for the best. These recruits were most likely to internalize and adopt the orientation of the schools. Other student teachers, however, pushed back, sometimes vigorously, against the assumptions and notions they encountered during their practicum experience. These recruits were more resistant to socialization pressures (Giroux, 1983).

There are several elements in field experiences that were not previously included in the cosmology of a prospective teacher. In the field experience, the prospective teacher assumes many of the responsibilities of a certified teacher, and the role invariably is as uncomfortable as it is unfamiliar. Having witnessed the role countless times, neophyte assumes competence by observation and is often surprised that being a teacher is different from being a student. Life in the gymnasium looks different through the eyes of a teacher. The student teacher begins, therefore, the struggle of meeting the unanticipated challenges and demands of teaching.

In addition to representing an untried social role, field experiences introduce the prospective teacher to a new group of socializing agents. Freibus (1977) studied 19 classroom student teachers to determine the most influential agents of socialization. Four categories emerged leading to the "development of an image of socialization as an ongoing negotiated reality based on a complex set of interactions among a variety of individuals" (p. 264). In this study, the cooperating teacher was most frequently cited by student teachers as playing a


coaching role when it came to ideas, information, encouragement, and evaluation. Pupils, however, were most frequently cited as playing a significant role in the legitimation of the student teacher. Pupils were again cited as the most influential sources of feelings of success or failure. Pupils of student teachers offer a very persuasive and powerful influence. Misbehaving students play a particularly strong role in providing social shock therapy for student teachers (Templin, 198 1). Negotiating with nonconforming students expands and focuses student teachers' occupational perspective away from student learning and achievement and onto student control and manipulation (Schempp, 1983,1985, 1986; Templin, 1979).

The dialectics of student teaching can, therefore, be seen as a complex set of relationships. Student teachers meet and engage potentially contradictory definitions of what it means to teach physical education in public schools. Cooperating teachers, students, supervisors, and others may challenge, in one way or another, the practices, beliefs, and orientations of the new teacher.

Success in student teaching has largely been perceived as a test of the neophyte's ability to adjust to the new environment. Student teachers confirm their occupational choice, try their hands at time-tested classroom rituals, and measure themselves against the social postures of teachers (Locke, 1979). White (1989) found success in student teaching was contingent upon the resolution of several conflicts and contradictions. These included simultaneously maintaining dominance over and rapport with students, managing the professional work load, and balancing academic instruction and student needs in a rigid workplace.

Student teaching remains the flagship of field experiences for teacher education programs. The experience, however, appears to give prospective teachers little opportunity to evaluate or critique either the existing practices of the school or their own practice as teachers. From their first day in schools, student teachers hold different interpretations of the events they witness (Schempp, 1990; Tabachnick & Zeichner, 1984). The opportunity, however, to critique the present structure and function of schooling is limited or absent altogether. In consequence, they have little choice but to silently and privately attempt to sort out the conflicts and discontinuities between their needs and aspirations as teachers and the overpowering demands of school culture (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1990; White, 1989). Such covert negotiation of meaning and belief is deprived of the benefits of a more open dialectic. It is small wonder, then, that student teaching as a teacher preparation exercise lends stability to the status quo rather than serving as a vehicle for improving practice (Locke, 1979; Schempp, 1987).

Induction

The successful navigation of student teaching leads to certification and potential employment. Entry into the world of schoolteachers presents the inductee with a host of new actors, events, and circumstances. As the move is made from student to teacher, beliefs can be challenged and tested rather vigorously (Veenman, 1984). The dialectic remains active as the beginning teachers make their way in their new environment.

When rookie teachers enter schools they must determine what it means to be a teacher in that particular school (Lawson, 1989). The early years in teaching are spent observing and assessing the landscape of the occupational culture,


interpreting the significance of people and events in that culture, and becoming part of that culture through their own unique contributions. Dialectic tensions emerge as the practices, perspectives, and convictions of the neophytes are pressed and pressured in the immediate and potent demands of teaching in public schools.

The Landscape of Teaching

Myriad variables and agencies play into the socialization of beginning teachers, and no two teachers face the same set of circumstances or conditions. New teachers no longer encounter instruction on the finer points of the teaching profession but must now forge ahead in relative isolation. As Corcoran (1981) observed,

No matter how extensive the beginner's preservice education, beginning teachers are faced by and accountable for or to-sometimes it is not clear which-unknown students, teaching colleagues, administrators, university supervisors, and parents. . . . In addition, the school and community environments have norms and rituals that most probably are new and strange. ( P 20)

In their review of the teacher socialization literature, Zeichner and Gore (1990) argued that the "ecology of the classroom" is part of the socializing process of teachers. They suggested that several factors affect the work of teachers, including teacher-pupil ratios, levels of resources, and time constraints. The unique environment of each classroom places limits and restrictions upon the type of behavior considered acceptable. Successful teachers learn the behaviors appropriate for their settings. The ecology of the classroom is a force that pressures teachers to act in certain ways. The dialectic is situated in the pressure between teacher and classroom demands.

Zeichner and Gore (1990) further suggested that institutional constraints factor into the teacher's world. Policies, traditions, power, and personalities construct a school culture that the beginning teacher must assimilate. This process of assimilation and the influence of these factors remain largely unexplored in the research literature. Initial forays have been undertaken (Lawson, 1989), but the variability between teachers that is attributable to history, context, and individuality makes it difficult to characterize, much less generalize, the influence of institutional factors on teachers' behaviors, beliefs, and interpretations.

Another unexplored area is the role the community plays in the induction of teachers. The norms, standards, and expectations of community members, particularly parents, would appear to form a fundamental element in the teacher's work world. For example, Zeichner and Gore (1990) believed that parental pressure is a "basic mechanism for the socialization of teachers into the traditions of the school" (p. 340). Although teachers do not necessarily yield to parents, they are mindful of their influence (Schempp, 1989b).

Blase and Greenfield (1982) argued that students serve as the most influential agents of socialization for beginning teachers. Interactions with students in classrooms force teachers to rethink previously held conceptions of teaching. As teachers explore ways to establish relationships with students, students play a powerful role in shaping the development of the teachers and represent a major

TEACHER SOCIALIZATION 34 1

force in determining how teachers will actually teach. Blase's (1986) research led him to conclude that given the dominance of students in teacher socialization, school administrators, faculty, and parents may hold a lesser influence over teachers than many believe.

Zeichner and Gore (1990) made the point that the isolation experienced by most teachers logically promotes the importance of students in teacher socialization. Students represent fresh agents in the socialization of teachers, for the teacher now has a vested interest in the behavior, attitudes, and achievements of students. A series of studies by Anighi and Young (1987) found that student responsiveness is a critical index of teacher success. Templin (1981) reached a similar conclusion and emphasized that "physical educators must begin to understand the powerful influence of their students and the implications of this influence on their attitudes and behavior" (p. 77).

The complexity of the dialectic increases for the beginning teacher. In understanding and coming to terms with the landscape of teaching, the inductee must not only seek a balance in the tension between herself or himself as an individual and the school as a social institution but must also accommodate and synthesize the multiple voices and competing concerns of students, colleagues, parents, and administrators. In turn, the school as a social institution must accommodate and adapt to the needs of its beginning teachers in order to sustain itself. The expectations and demands that members of the school community place on beginning teachers are likewise points of mediation and negotiation in a dynamic dialectic.

Developing Professional Practice: Fitting In and Fighting Back

The dialectical tension between the teachers' biographies and the conditions of their workplaces helps shape the professional demeanor and behavior of the inductees. Huberman (1989) characterized the induction of teachers as survival and discovery. Young teachers learn to survive the complexities of classroom operation and professional obligations while discovering themselves as teachers and colleagues. In studying classroom teachers, he concluded that the induction period separates those with easy beginnings from those with painful beginnings. The watershed between easy and painful beginnings included the teacher's ability to negotiate relationships with students, to balance time and responsibilities, to exhibit appropriate pedagogical practices, to establish meaningful ties with colleagues, and to maintain enthusiasm.

Researchers have described the first 3 to 5 years of teaching as a difficult and complex time (Corcoran, 1981; Pataniczek & Isaacson, 1981). The evidence does suggest, however, that by the end of the 3rd year, teachers have learned to manage a class and teach content and have developed the skills to establish pedagogically functional relationships with students (Blase & Greenfield, 1982). Beyond the mechanics, neophytes must also come to grips with teaching as a profession and with the influence that the profession has on them and their students (Veenman, 1984).

The experience of induction shapes critical teaching skills and helps form long-term attitudes and ideologies. This is, unquestionably, an important time in the life of a teacher. Yet the completed research on teacher induction in physical education is sparse (Freedman, 1985; O'Sullivan, 1989). The evidence to date is sufficiently strong to suggest that the induction into a career as a physical


education teacher may differ from the induction of classroom teachers (O'Sulli- van, 1989; Veenman, 1984).

The induction phase is often depicted as a survival period, for it is rife with problems (Bullough, Knowles, & Crow, 1989; Huberman, 1989). Some teachers enter the school setting confident and willing to accept the challenges lying ahead. There are, however, vivid accounts of teachers who encounter problems and dilemmas that aren't easily overcome. Teachers in this case begin to do what is necessary for survival, with little help from others. Lortie (1975) noted that

fully responsible for the instruction of his students from his first working day, the beginning teacher performs the same tasks as the twenty-five-year veteran. Tasks are not added sequentially to allow for gradual increase in skill and knowledge; the beginner learns while performing the full complement of teaching duties. (p. 72)

Lortie (1966) compared the 1st-year teacher to Robinson Crusoe, both of whom struggle to survive in an alien environment without the help of colleagues. They are too frightened to ask for assistance-afraid that an appeal for help reveals incompetence. If they do ask for help, they will only rely on a few individuals (Lortie, 1975; Newbeny, 1977).

The pervasiveness of these portraitures in the literature would lead one to assume that teachers encounter a baptism by fire in their first years on the job. In his analysis of teachers, Lortie (1975) described this stage in a teacher's career as "sink or swim." This can easily lead to the assumption that teacher education programs in physical education are low-impact enterprises (Locke, 1984) and that teachers enter the 1st year unprepared to competently meet the responsibilities and decisions that await them. However, the evidence that is beginning to accumulate specific to physical education does not support this assumption.

O'Sullivan (1989) for example, studied two of her former students in their beginning year of teaching. While undergraduates, these two had been recognized for their outstanding potential as teachers. O'Sullivan found that neither experienced the reality shock often associated with 1st-year teachers. In a self-report, Kreider (1985) also failed to characterize the 1st year of teaching as a shock.

Freedman (1985) reported few differences in either attitudes or behavior between 1st-year teachers and student teachers. Further, the inductees in Freed- man's study reported satisfaction with their teacher education program and identified related field experiences as a beneficial aspect of the program. Freed- man's findings fit with the discovery that student teachers and novice teachers do not differ in their perceptions of stressful teaching events (Wendt & Bain, 1989). The result of these investigations indicate that attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions of certain teaching events show little difference between student teaching and the 1st year of teaching. The transition shock experienced by classroom teachers may, therefore, not be characteristic of physical education teacher induction.

Although the number of beginning physical education teachers studied to date is relatively small, they all appeared to experience what Huberman (1989) described as "easy beginnings." With so few studies completed, only very tentative conclusions can be drawn. The little available evidence does. however, suggest that by the time one is certified to teach physical education, the


accumulated skills and constructed perceptions permit an eased entry into the profession. Giroux (1981) offered this explanation:

In the most general sense, teacher-education programs represent socializing agencies that embody mles and patterns for constmcting and legitimizing categories regarding competence, achievement, and success. Moreover, they serve to define specific roles (teacher, student, principal) through the language they use and the assumptions and research they consider essential to the teaching profession. (p. 146)

It seems that the move from training program to induction by way of student teaching provides a social structure that permits both preservation of the status quo for schools and an eased entry for inductees.

Beginning teachers often report a connection between the demands of the profession and their preparation. Insight into the experiences drawn upon by physical education inductees may be found by reading Kreider's (1985) account of her 1st year of teaching:

In facing these incidents [of the first year], I referred to my own student teaching experiences, in-class teachings at the university, and even some of the theory classes I had taken. . . . In all, I felt adequately prepared to deal with my new teaching situation. (pp. 263, 265)

Teachers in other studies also reported their teacher education program to be a valuable resource in negotiating their 1st teaching year (O'Sullivan, 1989; Templin, 1989).

The dialectic stirred by the tensions of 1st-year teaching seems, at this point, relatively mild for physical education teacher inductees. Without evidence, it is difficult to explain the differences in entry for classroom teachers and physical education teachers. One reason may be the status of physical education in schools. The marginal nature of physical education as an academic subject may lead to lower pedagogical expectations for physical educators (i.e., "students aren't supposed to learn anything in P.E. anyway"). Lower pedagogical expectations would lead to lower performance expectations for physical educators and thus ease the entry process (Sparkes, Templin, & Schempp, 1990). The isolation experienced by physical education teachers (Templin, 1989) would also logically decrease the amount of social pressure and adjustment beginning teachers face.

This is not to say that a dialectic does not exist for beginning physical educators. It merely takes place in a different arena. The teachers in O'Sullivan's (1989) study reported repeated attempts, and expressed frustration in their struggle, to establish the academic legitimacy of their subject matter. There existed opposing views on the purpose and value of physical education as school knowledge. The dialectic of induction for physical education teachers may focus, then, on the tension created by the institutional message that physical education as subject matter is not important and, therefore, neither are its teachers.

So On It Goes

In the course of analyzing induction, it has become popular to blame teacher education programs for the ills that befall beginning teachers (Borko, 1986). It seems more appropriate to consider teacher education as but one factor involved


in the induction of teachers. The range of environmental conditions and social agents and the powerful influence of students are only a few of the contingencies suggesting that deficiencies in teacher education are not the sole (or even major) contributor to the dialectical tensions teachers face in the initial year. Considerable evidence indicates that teacher education actually aids teachers in solving many problems they face (Veenman, 1984). Further, the skills acquired in preparation programs appear to form the foundation for the pedagogical practices of beginning teachers (Corcoran, 198 1 ; O'Sullivan, 1989).

At the conclusion of induction and ascension into veteran status (Lawson, 1989), teachers have struggled to establish the legitimacy of their beliefs in the dialectics of their school experiences. The success of their struggles determines the access to power and status they are accorded in the school community. It would be incomt to assume that professional socialization and learning to teach cease after the induction years. We agree with Lacey (1987), who wrote, "It is important to notice that the process of professional socialization does not end at the point of entry into the profession or at any arbitrary point during the early career of the teacher" (p. 634).

Membership in professional organizations and in-service training will continue to modify both behaviors and perspectives, but these efforts are commonly regarded as not producing significant changes in the basic professional orientation of teachers. Instead, the most significant agents of teacher socialization will continue to be administrators, parents, colleagues, and, especially, students. As teachers live their lives in schools, they both shape and become shaped by the experience. So on it goes.

Conclusion

The cumulative experiences of life in school as a student serve as a powerful and pervasive introduction to life as a teacher. The fabric of teaching perspectives appears tightly woven by years of familiarity with the social environment and cultural codes of schools. Those entering the occupation of teaching do so with almost 2 decades of experience.

Studying the continuum from being a student to becoming a teacher reveals much about teachers and the development of their beliefs. Understanding the process of teacher socialization allows educators to better reflect on the orientations and practices they incorporate into education classes. Knowledge about teacher socialization can inform educators as to why recruits are resistant to change and unlikely to incorporate some facets of training into their future teaching practices. Firm understanding of all phases of professional socialization may enable teacher educators to more fully comprehend the consequences of their actions and to better plan for interactions with tomorrow's teachers.

Understanding teacher socialization as a dialectical process may lead to reflection on the part of teacher educators. Recognizing that the practices and orientations they offer in their preparation classes are negotiated through a dialectic and not simply accepted by students (regardless of outward appearances) may have implications for not only the information conveyed in teacher education programs but also the manner in which it is presented. Discussions of previous student experiences and the presentation of alternate forms of pedagogy are but two examples that convey the message that teacher educators recognize the value and power of the students' own belief systems in the construction of their teaching orientation and practice.


Understanding teacher socialization also sheds light on the value that society places on physical activity and those who teach physical education in our schools. Knowledge regarding the orientations teachers cany forth to their work and the messages teachers receive regarding their pedagogical practice can be an informa- tive conduit for discerning the traditions, morals, and values defining contemporary culture. Notions of privilege and power in society become comprehensible as socialization research naturally leads to identifying the cultural mechanisms used to transmit societal values and knowledge. Who teaches our children and what do they believe are important questions for any society to address.

A trend in socialization research is to analyze the reality of the classroom from only the teacher's perspective. Perceptions of the workplace, task requirements, attitude adjustments, social compliance, and identity construction are taken almost exclusively from teachers' eyes. It would be instructive to gain a triangulated picture of the life and times of a teacher by conscripting the perceptions and observations of teacher development from mentor teachers, teacher educators, public school students, administrators, parents, and community members.

A f i understanding of professional socialization includes recognizing not just the stages that prospective teachers go through but also how the dynamics of the dialectic influence the construction of beliefs, behaviors, and professional orientations. To simply recognize that recruits encounter various stages of professional training is a limited recognition unless one also understands that prospective teachers are active participants in their development. During all four breakpoints in the continuum, pretraining through induction, prospective teachers will to some degree encounter a pushing and pulling of forces in which social thesis is tested against individual antithesis. In the dynamic tension of the dialectic, both sides are reshaped as they come to know the other, and in the reshaping, new perspectives are forged. The emerging result is a teacher whose perspectives and practices are formed in the dialectical relationship between individual and society.

References

Arrighi, M.A., & Young, J.C. (1987). Teacher perceptions about effective and successful teaching. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 6 , 122-135.

Bain, L., & Wendt, J. (1983). Undergraduate physical education majors' perceptions of the roles of teacher and coach. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 54, 112-1 18.

Berger, P., & Luckman, T. (1966). The social construction of knowledge. New York: Doubleday. Blase, J. (1986). Socialization as humanization: One side of becoming a teacher. Sociology

of Education, 59, 100-1 13. Blase, J., & Greenfield, W. (1982). On the meaning of being a high school teacher: The

beginning years. The High School Journal, May, 263-271. Borko, H. (1986). Induction years. In J. Hoffman & S. Edwards (Eds.), Reality and reform

in clinical teacher education (pp. 45-63). New York: Random House. Bullough, R.V., Knowles, J.G., & Crow, N.A. (1989). Teacher self-concept and student

culture in the first year of teaching. Teachers College Record, 91(2), 209-233. Burlingame, M. (1972). Socialization constructs and the teaching of teachers. Quest, 18,40-56. Chu, D. (1984). Teacherlcoach orientation and role socialization: A description and

explanation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 3(2), 3-8. Corcoran, E. (1981). Transition shock: The beginning teacher's paradox. Journal of

Teacher Education, 32(3), 19-23.


Dewar, A.M. (1984, July). High school students' subjective warrants for physical education. Paper presented at the Olympic Scientific Congress, Eugene, OR.

Dewar, A.M. (1989). Recruitment into physical education teaching: Toward a critical approach. In T. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 39-58). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Dodds, P. (1989). Trainees, field experiences, and socialization into teaching. In T. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 81-104). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn't this feel empowering: Working through repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59, 297-324.

Freedman, M. (1985). Research on follow-up of teacher education: Promise of the future. In C.L. Vendien & J.E. Nixon (Eds.), Physical education teacher education (pp. 156-162). New York: Macmillan.

Freibus, R.J. (1977). Agents of socialization involved in student teaching. Journal of Educational Research, 70(5), 263-268.

Geer, B. (1968). Occupational commitment and the teaching profession. In A.S. Becker, B. Geer, D. Riesman, & R.S. Weiss (Eds.), Institutions and the person (pp. 221- 235). Chicago: Aldine.

Giroux, H.A. (1980). Dialectics and the development of cumculum theory. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 2(2), 27-36.

Giroux, H.A. (1981). Ideology, culture & the process of schooling. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Giroux, H.A. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Gawey.

Graber, K.C. (1989). Teaching tomorrow's teachers: Professional preparation as an agent of socialization. In T. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 59-80). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Graber, K.C. (1991). Studentship in preservice teacher education: A qualitative study of undergraduates in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62(1), 41-51.

Hoy, W.K., & Woolfolk, A.E. (1990). Socialization of student teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 279-300.

Huberman, M. (1989). The professional life cycle of teachers. Teachers College Record, 91(1), 31-57.

Hutchinson, G.E. (1990, April). Would-be teachers' perspectives about the physical education teacher role. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

Jackson, P. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Kreider, S.E. (1985). First-year teaching: Secondary level. In C.L. Vendien & J.E. Nixon

(Eds.), Physical education teacher education (pp. 262-265). New York: Macmillan. Lacey, C. (1977). The socialization of teachers. London: Methuen. Lacey, C. (1987). Professional socialization of teachers. In M.J. Dunkin (Ed.), The

international encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 634-645). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Lanier, J.E., & Little, J.W. (1986). Research on teacher education. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 527-569). New York: Macmillan.

Lawson, H.A. (1983a). Toward a model of teacher socialization in physical education: The subjective warrant, recruitment and teacher education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 2(3), 3-16.


Lawson, H.A. (1983b). Toward a model of teacher socialization in physical education: Entry into schools, teachers' role orientations, and longevity in teaching (Part 2). Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 3(1), 3-15.

Lawson, H.A. (1989). From rookie to veteran: Workplace conditions in physicaI education and induction into the profession. In T. Templin & P. Schempp @Is.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 145-la). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Locke, L.F. (1979). Supervision, schools and student teaching: Why things stay the same. In G. Scott (Ed.), The Academy Papers, No. I3 (pp. 65-74). Washington, DC: The American Academy of Physical Education.

Locke, L.F. (1984). Research on teaching teachers: Where are we now? Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, Summer (Monograph 2), 1-86.

Locke, L.F., & Massengale, J. (1978). Role-conflict in teacher-coaches. Research Quar- terly, 71, 27-40.

Loewenberg, J. (1929). Hegel selections. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Lortie, D.C. (1966). Teacher socialization: The Robinson Crusoe model. In The real world

of the beginning teacher (pp. 54-66). Washington, DC: National Education Association. Lortie, D.C. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Marx, K. (1927). Capital (Vol. 1, B. Fowkes, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. (Original

work published 1867) McEvoy, B. (1986, April). "She is still with me": Influences offormer teachers on teacher

practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

Newbeny, J.M. (1977, April). The first year of experience: Influences on beginning teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

O'Sullivan, M. (1989). Failing gym is like failing lunch or recess: Two beginning teachers' struggle for legitimacy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 8, 227-242.

Pataniczek, D., & Isaacson, N. (1981). The relationship of socialization and the concerns of beginning secondary teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 14-17.

Pooley, J. (1972). Professional socialization: A model of the pre-training phase applicable to physical education students. Quest, 18, 57-66.

Popkewitz, T.S. (1984). Paradigms & ideology in educational research. Lewes, England: Falmer Press.

Schempp, P.G. (1983). Learning the role: The transformation from student to teacher in physical education. In T. Templin & J. Olson (Eds.), Teaching in physical education (pp. 109-1 17). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Schempp, P.G. (1985). Becoming a better teacher: An analysis of the student teaching experience. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 4, 158-166.

Schempp, P.G. (1986). Physical education student teachers' beliefs in their control over student learning. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 5, 198-203.

Schempp, P.G. (1987). The beliefs of student teachers regarding student decision making in physical education. International Journal of Physical Education, 24, 31-34.

Schempp, P.G. (1989a). Apprenticeship-of-observation and the development of physical education teachers. In T. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 13-38). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Schempp, P.G. (1989b, March). From the outside in and back again: A sociological analysis of the acquisition, evaluation and utilization of a teacher's occupational knowledge. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, San Francisco.


Schempp, P.G. (1990). Student teaching: Day one. In M. Lirette, C. Pare, J. Dessureault, & M. Pieron (Eds.), Physical education and coaching: Present state and future outlook (pp. 144-150). Quebec: University of Quebec Press.

Sparkes, A., Templin, T., & Schempp, P. (1990). The problematic nature of a career in a marginal subject. Journal of Education for Teaching, 16, 3-28.

Tabachnick, B.R., & Zeichner, K.M. (1984). The impact of the student teaching experience on the development of teacher perspectives. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), 28-36.

Templin, T.J. (1979). Occupational socialization and the physical education student teacher. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 50(3), 482-493.

Templin, T.J. (1981). Student as socializing agent. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, Spring (Introductory Issue), 71-79.

Templin, T.J. (1989). Running on ice: A case study of the influence of workplace conditions on a secondary school physical educator. In T. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach (pp. 165-197). Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Templin, T.J., & Schempp, P.G. (Eds.) (1989). Socialization into physical education: Learning to teach. Indianapolis: Benchmark Press.

Templin, T., Woodford, R., & Mulling, C. (1982). On becoming a physical educator: Occupational choice and the anticipatory socialization process. Quest, 34(2), 119-133.

Van Maanen, J. (1977). Organizational careers: Some new perspectives. New York: Wiley. Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational

Research, 54(2), 143-178. Wendt, J.C., & Bain, L.L. (1989). Physical educators' perceptions of stressful teaching

events. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 8, 342-346. Western, J.S., & Anderson, D.S. (1968). Education and professional socialization. The

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 4(2), 91-106. White, J.J. (1989). Student teaching as a rite of passage. Anthropology and Education

Quarterly, 20, 177-195. Woodford, R.C. (1977). The socialization offreshman physical education majors into role

orientations in physical education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

Zeichner, K.M. (1979, December). The dialectics of teacher socialization. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Teacher Educators, Orlando, FL.

Zeichner, K.M. (1980). Myths and realities: Field-based experiences in preservice teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 31, 45-55.

Zeichner, K.M., & Gore, J.M. (1990). Teacher socialization. In W.R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 329-348). New York: Macmillan.

Zeichner, K.M., & Tabachnick, B.R. (1981). Are the effects of university teacher education "washed out" by school experience? Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 3-9.

Zeichner, K.M., & Tabachnick, B.R. (1983, March). Teacher perspectives in the face of institutional press. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educa- tional Research Association, Montreal.

Zeichner, K.M., & Tabachnick, B.R. (1985). The development of teacher perspectives: Social strategies and institutional control in the socialization of beginning teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 11(1), 1-25.

Documents

Teacher Socialization From a Dialectical Perspective: Pretraining Through Induction€¦ · · 2007-08-15JOURNAL OF TEACHING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION, 1992, 11, 329-348 Teacher Socialization