Download pdf - Explicating Practical Knowledge: an extension of mentor teachers’ roles

This article was downloaded by: [Florida International University]On: 19 December 2014, At: 07:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

European Journal of TeacherEducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cete20

Explicating Practical Knowledge: anextension of mentor teachers’ rolesAnneke Zanting , Nico Verloop , Jan D. Vermunt & Jan H. VanDrielPublished online: 06 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Anneke Zanting , Nico Verloop , Jan D. Vermunt & Jan H. Van Driel (1998)Explicating Practical Knowledge: an extension of mentor teachers’ roles, European Journal ofTeacher Education, 21:1, 11-28, DOI: 10.1080/0261976980210104

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976980210104

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracyof the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verifiedwith primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

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

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cete20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0261976980210104

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0261976980210104

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

European Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1998 11

Explicating Practical Knowledge: an extension ofmentor teachers' roles

ANNEKE ZANTING, NICO VERLOOP, JAN D. VERMUNT &JAN H. VAN DRIEL

SUMMARY This article provides an overview of various models and interpretations ofmentoring and focuses on a somewhat neglected aspect of mentoring: the explication of mentorteachers' practical knowledge as a contribution to student teachers' learning to teach. From thatperspective, research on mentoring is related to research on teachers' knowledge. The centralquestions addressed in this article are: (a) What role can the explication of practical knowledgeby mentor teachers play in helping student teachers learn to teach?, and (b) How can practicalknowledge be made explicit during mentoring? Although the difficulties involved in elicitingmentor teachers' practical knowledge are recognised, several opportunities for realising this goalare described. Finally, some preconditions for the exploration of mentor teachers' practicalknowledge by student teachers and suggestions for further research are discussed.

RÉSUMÉ Cet article donne un aperçu des différentes interprétations et modèles de momtoratpédagogique et se concentre sur un aspect du monitorat pédagogique assez négligé: l'explicationdes connaissances pratiques du moniteur en tant que contribution à l'apprentissage parl'apprenti enseignant lui-même. Les questions principales posées dans cet article sont: (a) Quelrôle peut jouer l'explication des connaissances pratiques par les tuteurs pédagogiques à aider lesapprentis enseignants dans leur processus d'apprentissage?, et (b) Comment peut on expliciterces connaissances pratiques pendant la période du monitorat? Bien que les difficultés à montrerles connaissances pratiques des tuteurs pédagogiques soient reconnues, plusieurs moyens deréaliser ce but seront décrits. Finalement, quelques préconditions pour l'exploration des connais-sances pratiques des tuteurs pédagogiques par les apprentis enseignants seront discutées et dessuggestions pour des recherches ultérieures seront proposées également.

RESUMEN Este estudio ofrece una sintesis de varios modelos e interpretaciones de la actua-ciôn del mentor y se fija especialmente en un aspecto relativamente descuidado: la explicaciônde los conocimientos prácticos de los que dispone el mentor y la contribuciôn de los mismos ala formación que recibe el joven profesor en su periodo de aprendizaje. Desde esta perspectiva,los estudios dedicados a la funciôn del mentor se relacionan con las investigaciones centradasen los conocimientos docentes del profesor. Las preguntas centrales que se plantean en este estudioson: (a) ¿Qué papel puede desempeñar, en terminos de ayuda el profesor en formaciôn, el que

0261-9768/98/1/01011-18 © 1998 Association for Teacher Education in Europe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

12 Anneke Zanting et al.

se expliquen los conocimientos prácticos del mentor¿ y (b) ¿De qué manera pueden formularseexplicitamente estos conocimientos en los momentos en que el mentor desarrolla su actividad?Si bien es verdad que se reconocen las dificultades que acarrea el proceso de explicitación deestos conocimientos prácticos en torno a la función del mentor, se describen varias posibilidadesde conseguir estos objetivos. Finalmente, se discuten varias condiciones previas al momento enque los profesores en formación puedan explorar los conocimientos prócticos del mentor, al igualque varias sugerencias de temas de investigación relacionados.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Dieser Aufsatz bietet eine Übersicht über unterschiedliche Modelle undInterpretationen der Praktikantenbegleitung ('mentoring') und befaβt sich mit einem

einigermaβen vernachlässigten Aspekt von 'mentoring': der Darlegung praktischen Fachwis-sens des Mentors als einem Beitrag zum Lernen des Praktikanten. Aus dieser Sicht ist dieErforschung der Praktikantenbegleitung aufs engste mit der Erforschung von Fachwissenverbunden. Der vorliegende Artikel stellt folgende Fragen in den Mittelpunkt: (a) Welche Rollekann die Darlegung von Fachwissen durch den Mentor in der Begleitung von Praktikantenspielen? (b) Wie kann Fachwissen im Verlauf des Praktikums explizitiert werden? Obwohl dieSchwierigkeiten im Hervorrufen von Fachwissen des Mentors allgemein erkannt werden,kommen hier unterschiedliche Ansätze zur Erlangung dieses Ziels zur Sprache. Schlieβlich

werden einige Grundbedingungen für die Untersuchung von Fachwissen des Mentors durchPraktikanten, sowie weitere Forschungsvorschläge diskutiert.

Introduction

Practice teaching is considered an essential part of teacher training. Although there aregreat differences between the various practical training courses, such as the amount oftime spent at the school where the student teaching takes place, the teaching activities,and the supervision and organisation of the practical training, they are all based on theassumption that prospective teachers can and should learn from experience. This beliefis generally shared by teacher educators, practicing teachers, and prospective teachers(Watts, 1987). Prospective teachers generally take the view that the practical training isthe most important part of their teacher training because it provides them withopportunities for actual teaching and, according to them, real learning (Calderhead,1988;Franke&Dahlgren, 1996; Johnston, 1994;McNamara, 1995). Correspondingly,practicing teachers also stress the value of practical training for the preparation ofprospective teachers (Applegate, 1987; Calderhead, 1988; Cochran-Smith, 1991; Ko-erner, 1992; Lanier & Little, 1986). Although university supervisors have been con-cerned about the conservative effects of practice teaching (Zeichner & Tabachnick,1981) and researchers take the view that practical training does not guarantee that thestudent teacher will learn to teach (Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1987; Johnston,1994), few will deny that it certainly provides prospective teachers with learningopportunities.

To facilitate student teachers' learning during their practical training, they aresupervised by 'mentor teachers'. In this article, all the mentor teachers' activities,attitudes, and other aspects of their mentorship aimed at assisting student teachersduring their practical training are identified with the term 'mentoring'. In spite of thefact that 'mentoring' is also used to refer to the assistance given to first-year certifiedteachers, the focus of this article is on the support provided to student teachers duringtheir pre-service teacher training.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Explicating Practical Knowledge 13

Mentoring is a topic of current interest in the field of teacher education, both inpractice and research. However, the phenomenon of mentoring has not yet been clearlyconceptualised: many definitions of the concept can be found in the literature andvarious models have been proposed (Mclntyre & Hagger, 1994; Mclntyre, Hagger &Wilkin, 1994). This concept has remained vague because, on the one hand, bothresearchers and mentor teachers are just developing an understanding of mentoring andof mentor teachers' contributions to student teachers' learning (Bush et al, 1996;Edwards & Collison, 1995; Feiman-Nemser & Beasley, 1996). On the other hand, itseems impossible to formulate a standard definition of mentoring, as mentor teachersinterpret their own roles individually and therefore the nature of mentoring is idiosyn-cratic. First of all, mentor teachers' personal conceptions of mentoring result indifferent forms of mentoring (Franke & Dalgren, 1996; Martin, 1997; Wildman et al,1992). In addition, mentoring is highly contextualised and influenced by the expecta-tions of schools, teacher education institutes, and student teachers. As Feiman-Nemser& Parker (1993) stated, "... different forms of mentoring emerge in different contexts.Formal expectations, working conditions, selection, and preparation all create a set ofconstraints and opportunities that shape how mentors define and enact their role"(p. 716).

In spite of the variety of definitions and interpretations of the concept of mentoring,a rather general description can be given. In line with recent contributions in the fieldof mentoring (Edwards & Collison, 1996; Feiman-Nemser & Beasley, 1996; Tomlin-son, 1995), in this article, we consider mentoring as assisting student teachers to learnto teach. Although this approach can include a wide range of mentor teachers'activities, it implies a specific role for mentor teachers. Student teachers are lookedupon primarily as 'learners' of teaching rather than 'performers' of teaching. Theirinitial goal is not to teach 'correctly', but to learn from their teaching experiences byplanning, giving, and analysing lessons and by thinking through and consideringalternative possibilities. Supporting these activities requires mentor teachers to haveskills that are not automatically the same as 'good' teaching skills (Kremer-Hayon,1995).

When describing the mentor teacher's role as above, the question is then what arethe specific functions of the mentor teachers and what activities must they undertake.In the next section, some more or less prescriptive models of mentoring, intended as aresource for mentoring practice, will be described. This will be followed by somedescriptive models and interpretations of mentoring derived from empirical data. Basedon these descriptions of mentoring practice, we will conclude that one aspect ofmentoring, the explication of mentor teachers' knowledge of learning and teaching inthe presence of their student teachers, has been largely ignored. We will explain whythis knowledge, which we term 'practical knowledge', is hard to put into words. We willthen address the central questions: (a) What role can the explication of practicalknowledge by mentor teachers play in helping student teachers learn to teach?, and (b)How can practical knowledge be made explicit during mentoring? The first questionwill be answered by discussing four functions of the explication of mentor teachers'practical knowledge in student teachers' learning to teach. In the subsequent section,we will go into the second question by describing several possible ways to articulatementor teachers' practical knowledge. In the discussion section, we discuss somepreconditions that have to be fulfilled in order to involve the articulated practicalknowledge of mentor teachers in student teachers' learning. We close with suggestionsfor further research.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Mentor Teachers' Roles

Maynard & Furlong (1994) examined the literature on the role of mentor teachers anddistinguished three models of mentoring: the apprenticeship model, the competencymodel and the reflective model. They argued that these models should be successivelyapplied in teacher education, adjusted to the student teachers' stage of development. Atthe start of practice teaching, student teachers can learn from observing their mentorteachers, who fulfil the role of interpreters and models. Then student teachers have todevelop teaching skills through systematic training with the mentor teachers as instruc-tors. Gradually, reflection on their teaching experiences enters with the mentor teachersas co-enquirers.

Two major roles of the mentor teacher, 'the reflective coach' and 'the effectivefacilitator', were distinguished by Tomlinson (1995). The reflective coach fulfils thementor functions that are involved in assisting the development of teaching andreflection skills. In addition, mentor teachers stimulate student teachers' motivationand commitment. According to Tomlinson, mentoring always includes a counsellingaspect, which is part of the role of effective facilitator.

Feiman-Nemser & Parker (1993) specified two goals of mentoring that can easily betransformed into terms of mentor roles. Mentor teachers have to help develop 'good'teachers and, at the same time, have to support the entry of student teachers into theteaching profession. The first goal is assessment-oriented and seems comparable to thereflective coach role described by Tomlinson (1995). The second goal is assistance-ori-ented and parallels the role of effective facilitator. Both aspects of a mentor teacher'srole, being evaluative and supportive, can be an area of tension for mentor teachers.Daloz's model of mentoring (in Martin, 1996) claims that student teachers need bothsupport and challenge for their professional development. Support affirms the experi-ences and ideas of student teachers, while challenge is more evaluative by questioningstudent teachers' assumptions or introducing conflicting ideas. Challenge can thereforeopen up new horizons and stimulate progress and development. In spite of this, Martin(1996) found that mentor teachers adopted primarily the role of supporter and notevaluator or assessor. These mentor teachers thought the assessment role was inconflict with or incompatible with the supportive role.

This discrepancy between models of mentoring and the empirical study conductedby Martin leads to the following question: What is mentoring like in practice? Asmentioned before, personal and contextual influences shape mentor teachers' roles andtherefore 'the' mentoring practice cannot be described. However, several studies haverevealed some common features of mentor teachers' roles. Franke & Dahlgren (1996)studied mentor and student teachers' perceptions and distinguished a traditional and areflective approach to mentoring. In the traditional approach, mentor teachers' pro-fessional knowledge and competence are taken for granted and have to be reproducedby the student teachers. The teaching done by the student teachers and the relatedmentor-student conversations are conceived of as opportunities for practising. Thementor-student conversations are mainly episode-oriented and few references are madeto general principles and ideas. In the reflective approach, however, the emphasis is onthe student teachers' learning rather than on their teaching performance. Mentor-stu-dent conversations create opportunities for reflection, which is supposed to developprofessional knowledge and competence. The conversations between student andmentor teachers are principle-oriented and go beyond the actual teaching episode.

These two approaches, one of which stresses teaching practice and the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


other, reflection on teaching practice illustrate the dichotomy of emphasising eitherteaching performance or thinking about and learning from teaching described byFeiman-Nemser & Parker (1993). They stated that mentor teachers are inclined tofocus on teaching performance. Ben-Peretz & Rumney (1991) also concluded thatmentor teachers in their study emphasised teaching performance, stressing superficialcontent issues during mentor-student conversations instead of reflection on exhibitedand alternative actions.

In a study by Elliott & Calderhead (1994), mentor teachers had diverse perceptionsof their roles: (a) being a 'guide' or 'leader', (b) being 'a good listener', 'being a friend',or 'enabling', or (c) being an 'organiser of experiences for the novice'. Most mentor

teachers referred to this latter organisational aspect of their roles. "On balance, thementors appeared to perceive the mentoring role more in terms of nurturing orsupporting the novices so that they can learn 'by whatever works' in their school or theirclassroom" (p. 176). The reason for being mainly supportive is to build studentteachers' confidence (Borko & Mayfield, 1995). In contrast, mentor teachers in a studyby Ben-Peretz & Rumney (1991) mainly gave evaluative comments and were lesssupportive. Wildman et al. (1992) concluded that the mentor teachers in their studyoffered more than just emotional support and seriously tried to develop real com-petence by using such strategies as reflection, modelling, and collaborative problemsolving. These differences can probably be attributed to the contextual differences thatshape different mentor teachers' roles. These differences are mirrored in the researchliterature.

In spite of this, there is general agreement that the mentor teacher's role is veryimportant and influential because of the close interaction with student teachers duringstudent teaching (Huling-Austin, 1990; Koerner, 1992; Smithey & Evertson, 1995). Anumber of studies have shown that mentor teachers even play a more important part inthe learning process of student teachers than university supervisors (Calderhead, 1988;Emans, 1983; Watts, 1987). The large influence of mentor teachers has been a subjectof concern. Sometimes, university supervisors fear that the contribution of the teachereducation institute may be overwhelmed by more conservative mentor teachers (Lanier& Little, 1986; Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). Student teachers' concerns aboutmatching their mentor teachers' teaching style, of being judged, and of performing wellcan lead to mindless imitation of their mentor teachers (Calderhead, 1988). Studentteachers seem especially susceptible to imitation when they have no clear self-image asa teacher (Hawkey, 1996; Kagan, 1992). We recognise that imitation prohibits thedevelopment of an extended teaching repertoire, a personal teaching style, and insightinto the process of teaching.

Obviously, the role of mentor teachers and the content and nature of mentor-stu-dent conversations has been critisised for emphasising teaching behaviour instead ofthinking about and analysing teaching and learning from experiences. Another generalcritique is that mentor teachers mainly fulfil the role of supporter instead of combiningthis with the roles of challenger or evaluator. However, less has been written aboutanother aspect of mentoring that is commonly overlooked during mentoring: theexplication of mentor teachers' knowledge base of learning and teaching in the presenceof their student teachers. This aspect has received scant attention, both in the researchon mentoring as well as in the practice of mentoring. We believe that explicating theirknowledge of learning and teaching is an essential part of the mentor teacher's role thatwe have described earlier as assisting student teachers to learn to teach. We will go intothe specific functions of mentor teachers' explicated knowledge for student teachers'

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


learning in another section. Here, we will give some evidence that the explication ofmentor teachers' knowledge has often been overlooked in the field of mentoring.

Firstly, the skill of making this knowledge explicit is rarely a criterion for selectingmentor teachers (Olson & Carter, 1989). Secondly, mentor teachers generally do notexplicate their own knowledge base of learning and teaching to student teachers(Edwards & Collison, 1995). Elliott & Calderhead (1994) found that only rarely did thementor teachers in their study refer to the articulation of their 'craft knowledge' as amentoring role. "Such articulation was either in response to questions from the novicesor as a result of watching the novices teach and comparing it with their own teaching"(p. 176). However, Penny, Harley & Jessop (1996) found that student teachers did notask questions about their mentor teachers' teaching and that mentor teachers did notspontaneously articulate underlying reasons for their teaching to their student teachers.Although mentor teachers provide student teachers with suggestions based on theirexperience and their knowledge base of teaching, they often do not elaborate on whythese things should be done (Feiman-Nemser & Parker, 1993). Olson & Carter (1989)showed that only a minority of the mentor teachers were able to articulate theirknowledge in ways that would be helpful for student teachers. This includes referringto several possible teaching strategies that student teachers can apply in future teachingsituations. It also includes identifying specific teaching events and actions, as well asgeneral teaching principles which could possibly be applied by the student teachers too.However, most of the mentor teachers in this study did not possess a 'language ofpractice'.

Because mentor teachers seem to be inclined to focus their attention on studentteachers' lessons and student teachers seem disinclined to ask mentor teachers ques-tions about these teachers' lessons, the knowledge base of mentor teachers oftenremains concealed. Brown & Mclntyre (1995) stated that "... the wheels of teachinghave to be reinvented by each new generation" (p. 14) because "... this reservoir ofprofessional knowledge is generally untapped" (p. 113). Therefore, we can concludethat the articulation of mentor teachers' knowledge has been overlooked and should beelaborated on during mentoring. For this reason, the focus of this article is on extendingthe mentor teachers' roles to include being an articulator of their knowledge base oflearning and teaching.

Mentor Teachers' Practical Knowledge

It is generally accepted that teachers develop their own bodies of knowledge with regardto learning and teaching. The literature does not offer just one sound definition of thisteachers' knowledge. Rather, several concepts have been used such as craft knowledge,professional craft knowledge, personal practical knowledge, pedagogical content knowl-edge, or implicit theories (Brown & Mclntyre, 1995; Calderhead, 1996; Carter, 1990;Grimmett & MacKinnon, 1992; Shulman, 1987). In this article we use the term'practical knowledge'. We consider practical knowledge to be an amalgam of allteachers' cognitions, such as declarative and procedural knowledge, beliefs and values,that influences their preactive, interactive, and postactive teaching activities. Thus,practical knowledge underlies the visible teaching behaviour, and insight into teachers'practical knowledge can therefore be of help to understand their teaching. However, wedo not claim that cognitions and analytic thinking are the only guiding principles ofteaching. We acknowledge the influence of affective determinants, but in this article, werestrict ourselves to cognitions when describing practical knowledge.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Our description of practical knowledge approximates Brown & Mclntyre's (1995)definition of 'professional craft knowledge' as "... that part of their professionalknowledge ... which guides their day-to-day actions in classrooms, which is for the mostpart not articulated in words and which is brought to bear spontaneously, routinely andsometimes unconsciously on their teaching" (p. 17). It also goes together with Carter's(1990) description of practical knowledge as "... the knowledge teachers have ofclassroom situations and the practical dilemmas they face in carrying out purposefulaction in these settings" (p. 299).

We assume that the development of practical knowledge is influenced by severalfactors. Much attention has been paid to the role of student teachers' preconceptions,based on former experiences as pupils, in the development of teachers' knowledge(Anderson & Bird, 1995; Borko & Putnam, 1996; Brookhart & Freeman, 1992). Otherinfluences in the development of teacher knowledge are subject matter knowledge,teacher education, and teaching experience and context (Grossman, 1990). Because ofthe assumption that practical knowledge is influenced by different sources of infor-mation, such as teacher education and teaching practice, both 'theoretical knowledge'and 'experiential knowledge' can be incorporated. This contrasts with Brown &Mclntyre's (1995) statement that professional craft knowledge is primarily acquiredthrough teaching practice rather than through formal training. However, we agree withGrimmett & MacKinnon (1992) that teachers construct their knowledge in the contextof lived experiences.

Because practical knowledge is construed by individuals who have beeninfluenced by several personal and contextual factors, practical knowledge can differsubstantially among teachers. Notwithstanding, there are indications that experi-enced teachers' knowledge has some points in common at a more abstract level. Withregard to the content of teachers' knowledge, some well-known categories are knowl-edge of subject content and curricular materials, general pedagogical knowledge,knowledge of learners and their characteristics, knowledge of individual pupils,knowledge of classroom management, knowledge of the school and the broadereducational context, and knowledge of transferring subject matter knowledge topupils under specific circumstances (Brown & Mclntyre, 1995; Cochran, DeRuiter &King, 1993; Shulman, 1987).

Practical knowledge seems to guide teachers' actions. However, this practicalknowledge often remains hidden for student teachers. One explanation is that practicalknowledge is often implicit or tacit knowledge (Carter, 1990; Stanulis, 1994). Mentorteachers are often not aware of the knowledge they have developed through the yearsand, as a consequence, it is hard for them to put this knowledge into words. A secondexplanation is that practical knowledge is so intertwined within actions and contextsthat it is difficult to isolate it (Borko & Putnam, 1996). Practical knowledge is anintegrated set of cognitions. Therefore, it is difficult and unnatural for mentor teachersto isolate different parts of their practical knowledge in order to communicate this totheir student teachers (Maynard, 1996). A third explanation is that some mentorteachers believe that their primary task is to create opportunities for student teachers totry out what they have learned at the teacher education institute and to facilitate thedevelopment of independent teaching by asking student teachers questions. They arenot inclined to share their own thinking about teaching with student teachers (Elliott &Calderhead, 1994; Feiman-Nemser & Beasley, 1996). On the whole, the articulation ofone's own practical knowledge seems a complex and unnatural activity for mentorteachers. In spite of this, we believe that the explication of practical knowledge by

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


mentor teachers and access to this practical knowledge by student teachers can bevaluable to student teachers for reasons we will examine below.

The Functions of Mentor Teachers' Practical Knowledge in Student Teachers'Learning

There is general agreement that experienced practitioners who are in an advanced stageof development can facilitate the professional development of novices (Bush et al,1996; Edwards & Collison, 1995). Against the background of this assumption, one ofthe central questions addressed in this article is what the explication of mentor teachers'practical knowledge and the exploration of this knowledge can contribute to studentteachers' learning. We will examine four purposes that articulated practical knowledgecan serve in student teachers' learning to teach: (a) obtaining information aboutteaching that is rather 'new' to student teachers, (b) understanding mentor teachers'thinking on teaching and understanding the nature of teaching, (c) understandingmentor teachers' mentoring and developing personal theories of teaching, and (d)integrating theory with practice.

In the first place, mentor teachers can be a source of information with regard toissues that are rather new to student teachers and that are of immediate importance forthem (Olson & Carter, 1989). In describing the content of practical knowledge, wealready mentioned, among other things, general pedagogical knowledge, knowledge ofpupils, and knowledge of classroom management. However, mentor teachers frequentlydo not explicate all aspects of their practical knowledge. For example, Edwards &Collison (1995) found a lack of explication of general pedagogical knowledge duringconversations with student teachers. On the other hand, the importance of sharingknowledge between mentor teachers and student teachers and between practicingteachers and their colleagues is considered a way to begin and continue professionaldevelopment (Feiman-Nemser & Parker, 1993).

In the second place, the articulation of mentor teachers' practical knowledge canhave an additional value beyond that which comes from observations of mentorteachers' lessons which are typically incorporated in teacher education. This seemsimportant because student teachers will not learn much from observing lessons conduc-ted by their mentor teachers when they only spend time watching their mentor teachersand the pupils (Applegate, 1987). Therefore, it is important that student teachers notonly observe how their mentor teachers teach, but also get to know why and underwhich circumstances they apply certain teaching strategies (Tomlinson, 1995). In otherwords, student teachers should find out what cognitions underlie their mentor teachers'teaching performances in order to understand this teaching. We assume that this insightcan prevent student teachers from mindlessly imitating their mentor teachers' teachingor from misinterpretating their mentor teachers' lessons. Gonzalez & Carter (1996)found that student teachers' interpretations of classroom events during their ownlessons differed from those of their mentor teachers. For example, student teachersinterpreted individual pupils' behaviour as being much more influential on whathappened during their lessons than mentor teachers did. To prevent wrong interpreta-tions of mentor teachers' lessons by student teachers, it seems important that mentorand student teachers not only discuss the student teachers' lessons, but also those of thementor teachers.

The articulation of mentor teachers' practical knowledge can be of use for under-standing mentor teachers' personal way of teaching, but also be broadened to the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


understanding of the nature of teaching that seems even more important to us. AsBrown (1995) stated:

The main, and very important, purpose of such access would be for studentteachers to learn about the nature of the craft they are trying to master. If theycould have a clearer idea of what they are trying to learn, their learning couldbe more self-directed and efficient, their own developing skills would beaccessible to self-examination, and their values, goals, and theoretical ratio-nales would be open to constructive questioning and use. (p. 32)

What is meant by 'the nature of teaching'? Student teachers have to learn that there isno 'one way of teaching' (Tomlinson, 1995). Furthermore, 'good' teaching does notdepend on, just chance or the teacher's personality or charisma. Experienced teacherspossess an extended repertoire of teaching strategies and tactics. In order to attain theirteaching goals, they select the actions appropriate to the specific teaching situation(Brown & Mclntyre, 1995).

The articulation of practical knowledge resembles Schôn's approach of 'educatingthe reflective practitioner' by modelling the thinking processes underlying the visiblebehaviour of expert practitioners when performing complex tasks (Schôn 1983, 1987).In this way, their thinking is made explicit. Schôn's work shows the importance of goingbeyond the observable behaviour of the expert practitioner and of including theirknowledge-in-action in order to learn from the experts. This approach corresponds tothe principles of cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown & Newman, 1989). Animportant aspect of the cognitive apprenticeship approach, the modelling of thinkingprocesses by expert practitioners, can be applied in teacher education. Mentor teacherscan explicate their considerations during lesson planning, conducting lessons, andreflecting on lessons. This "drawing students into a culture of expert practice incognitive domains involves teaching them how to 'think like experts' " (Collins, Brown& Newman, 1989, p. 488).

In the third place, we assume that the explication of mentor teachers' practicalknowledge is important because their teaching as well as their mentoring are groundedin their beliefs (Edwards & Collison, 1996; Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1987;Glover & Mardle, 1996). Student teachers can better understand their mentor teachers'teaching when they are aware of the underlying knowledge, beliefs, and values. Inaddition, student teachers can also better understand their mentor teachers' mentoringand will be able to assess the feedback given by mentor teachers more deliberately. Ofcourse, mentor and student teachers' conceptions about learning and teaching candiffer. However, we assume that, whether they correspond with each other or not, it isextremely important that mentor and student teachers' assumptions are made explicit.Only then, will student teachers be able to think about differences and similaritiesbetween their own beliefs and those of their mentor teachers in order to develop theirpersonal theories of teaching.

In the fourth place, the explication of practical knowledge can contribute to theintegration of theory and practice. In the long term, we should work towards thisintegration by letting student teachers link and compare their own preconceptions ofteaching, their mentor teachers' practical knowledge, and educational theories acquiredat the teacher education institute. As Edwards & Collison (1996) stated, "thinkingpractitioners in our definition are able to connect their analyses of what goes on inschools with the frameworks that are available in the professional and research litera-ture" (p. 9). We acknowledge that we still have a long way to go before the integration

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


mentioned above is realised. For example, one precondition is that experienced teach-ers are able to articulate their practical knowledge in terms that student teachers canrelate to theoretical terms. In this article, we restrict ourselves to the first essential step:the articulation of practical knowledge by mentor teachers. We will go into somepossibilities for making mentor teachers' practical knowledge explicit in such a way thatstudent teachers can gain access to this knowledge.

Possible Ways of Explicating Practical Knowledge during Mentoring

Different suggestions for explicating practical knowledge by mentor teachers andmaking it accessible to student teachers have been described in the literature. Firstly,it is stated that by studying their own practice, mentor teachers can become aware oftheir own practical knowledge and of the importance of explicating their practicalknowledge to student teachers. One way to achieve this awareness is by letting mentorteachers contribute to the teacher education program in close collaboration withuniversity supervisors (Stanulis, 1995). Another way is by letting them study theirown mentoring practice, for example, with the aid of stimulated recall interviewsin response to mentor-student conversations (Stanulis, 1994). It would be helpfulfor student teachers if this study of mentor teachers' own practice encouraged mentorteachers "... to think aloud in their conversations with student teachers, that is, tomake their thinking about teaching events explicit" (Carter & Gonzalez, 1993, p. 231).When doing this, it is important that mentor teachers go beyond personal experiences,specific events and subsequent actions by adding a description of underlying generalprinciples that student teachers can adapt in their own teaching practice (Olson &Carter, 1989).

Secondly, mentor teachers can explicate a part of their practical knowledge byreflecting on their own lessons and articulating the 'what', 'how' and 'why' of theirteaching. This strategy can be applied in the presence of student teachers as a way to'model' reflection by an experienced practitioner. In this way, student teachers candevelop an understanding of the nature of teaching (Batten, 1993).

Thirdly, mentor teachers' practical knowledge can be elicited by undertaking jointteaching activities. When mentor teachers and student teachers plan, give and analyselessons together, there is an opportunity for sharing mentor teachers' practical knowl-edge (Mclntyre & Hagger, 1994; Tomlinson, 1995). This can also be reached by jointexploration of dilemmas in teaching practice that both mentor and student teachers areconcerned about. Ben-Peretz and Kremer-Hayon (1990), for example, found that bothsenior and student teachers were faced with professional dilemmas with regard toautonomy, curriculum planning and ethical issues.

Fourthly, student teachers can be stimulated to develop an inquiry attitude duringmentoring. For example, student teachers can question their mentor teachers afterobserving their lessons (Mclntyre & Hagger, 1994). It seems that student teachers needsome assistance in developing this attitude. As mentioned, they rarely spontaneouslyask their mentor teachers questions about their mentor teachers' lessons (Penny, Harleyand Jessop, 1996). However, in a study by Brown (1995), student teachers wereinstructed to interview their mentor teachers after these teachers' lessons. Most of thestudent teachers in this study thought that these post-lesson interviews helped them tounderstand what was happening during their mentor teachers' teaching. According tothem, this inquiry of their mentor teachers' practical knowledge gave the classroomobservations additional value.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Finally, we think that many instruments that are used in the research on teacherknowledge can also be used in the context of teacher education and especially duringstudent teaching. Interviews, concept maps, and stimulated recall interviews have beenapplied in research on teachers' practical knowledge (Kagan, 1990). When adjusted tothe circumstances, the practice teaching, we assume that these instruments can also beapplied by student teachers to gain access to their mentor teachers' practical knowl-edge. In other words, student teachers 'research' their mentor teachers' practicalknowledge. By interviewing their mentor teachers, student teachers can elicit theknowledge, beliefs, and values that underlie their mentor teachers' teaching. By apply-ing the technique of concept mapping, mentor teachers can organise several conceptsrelated to an educational topic. Afterwards, they can discuss the concept map with theirstudent teachers. In this way, student teachers can gain access to general concepts thatare of importance to their mentor teachers' teaching. By conducting stimulated recallinterviews after mentor teachers' lessons and in the presence of student teachers,mentor teachers are stimulated to articulate their thinking during and after teaching,while student teachers are enabled to gain access to this thinking. Of course, the specificcontext, the practice teaching, and the related specific learning goals have to be takeninto account. The exploration of mentor teachers' knowledge by student teachersshould meet the objective of practice teaching and mentoring: helping student teachersto learn to teach.

Discussion

Several mentor teachers' roles have been described in the literature: the mentor teacheras a model and an instructor of teaching behaviour, as a reflective coach or aco-enquirer, as an effective facilitator or supporter, as an evaluator or as an organiserof practising opportunities. However, the role of mentor teachers as articulators of theirown practical knowledge has been given little attention. This can be explained by theimplicit, integrated, and intertwined nature of practical knowledge and by mentorteachers' task conceptions that often do not include sharing their practical knowledgewith student teachers. We argued that the explication of practical knowledge can bevaluable for student teachers for four reasons: (a) obtaining information about teachingthat is rather 'new' to them, (b) understanding their mentor teachers' teaching andunderstanding the nature of teaching, (c) understanding their mentor teachers' mentor-ing and developing personal theories of teaching and (d) integrating theory withpractice. We also stated that there are opportunities for mentor teachers to explicatepractical knowledge and, subsequently, for student teachers to gain access to thisknowledge. Mentor teachers can make parts of their practical knowledge explicit inseveral ways: (a) by making explicit their own thinking about teaching when discussingstudent teachers' lessons, (b) by reflecting on their own lessons and articulating the'what', 'how', and 'why' of their teaching in the presence of their student teachers and(c) by jointly planning, giving, and analysing lessons. In addition, student teachersthemselves can become active inquirers of their mentor teachers' practical knowledgeby applying several techniques that have already been used in research on teacherknowledge: interviewing mentor teachers, discussing mentor teachers' concept maps, orconducting stimulated recall interviews with mentor teachers.

However, this exploration of mentor teachers' knowledge can involve some pitfalls.Some preconditions have to be fulfilled before the practical knowledge of mentorteachers can play a role in student teachers' learning to teach. We will discuss three sets

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


of preconditions which relate to: (a) embedding the exploration of mentor teachers'practical knowledge in the teacher education course, (b) mentor teachers' attitudes,task conceptions, and skills and (c) student teachers' attitudes, learning conceptions,and skills.

Embedding the Exploration of Practical Knowledge in the Teacher Training Course

The exploration of mentor teachers' practical knowledge must be adjusted to thedevelopmental stage of student teachers. We already referred to the three mentoringmodels of Maynard & Furlong (1994). They recommended the apprenticeship modelat the stan of teacher education. Mentor teachers then have the role of 'models' forstudent teachers. The explication of practical knowledge by mentor teachers can beperfectly combined widi this role. Then student teachers not only have a model ofteaching behaviour, but also a model of teacher thinking.

However, to prevent individual mentor teachers from becoming the 'one and only'model for their own student teachers, student teachers should try to gain access to thepractical knowledge of several experienced teachers. The teacher education instituteshould, in consultation with the schools, create opportunities for student teachers tomeet different school teachers and to inquire about their practical knowledge. If that isnot possible, the teacher education institute should at least organise meetings duringwhich different views are elaborated. Student teachers can then explore and discuss thepractical knowledge of their own mentor teachers and the practical knowledge of othermentor teachers that has been elicited by their fellow student teachers. By comparingthe practical knowledge of different teachers and identifying differences and similarities,student teachers might realise that their is no 'one way to teach' and diat there is no'one model of teaching'. The university supervisors have a role to play too: helpingstudent teachers compare the practical knowledge of different mentor teachers. Studentteachers should also link the practical knowledge of dieir mentor teachers to their ownpreconceptions of teaching. To be able to do this, student teachers first have to makeexplicit their own preconceptions of teaching. Here again university supervisors canplay an important role, namely, helping student teachers to explicate their preconcep-tions of teaching. In the long term, we advocate the integration of mentor teachers'practical knowledge, student teachers' preconceptions, and educational theories. Toachieve such an integration, all the actors, namely, the student teachers, the mentorteachers, and the university supervisors, should be involved.

Student teachers should not only inquire about the practical knowledge of severalteachers, they should also explore this practical knowledge in several ways. Practicalknowledge comprises various cognitions that can only be elicited by using a combi-nation of instruments (Kagan, 1990). This means that forming ideas of mentorteachers' practical knowledge is a time-consuming and intensive activity that will onlybe successful when it is performed by motivated student teachers.

In order to motivate student teachers to explore their mentor teachers' practicalknowledge, their own interests and concerns should be taken into account. We alreadyargued that the exploration of mentor teachers' practical knowledge is appropriate atthe start of the teacher education programme. At that moment, the student teachers'main concerns are discipline, classroom management and adequate responses to pupilsbehaviour (Kagan, 1992). The exploration of practical knowledge should match theseconcerns. This means that student teachers themselves should be given a certainamount of freedom to decide which aspects of their mentor teachers practical knowl-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


edge they are going to inquire. On the other hand, teacher educators and mentorteachers can stimulate student teachers' progress and development by introducingspecific educational topics. For example, Kagan (1992) stated that preservice teachersneed to acquire knowledge of pupils which includes pupils' social, academic andindividual needs. When student teachers have overcome their first concerns of survivaland have learned to know the pupils, mentor teachers or teacher educators canintroduce topics that are not directly related to classroom teaching, such as schoolorganization or school policy.

Mentor Teachers' Attitudes, Task Conceptions and Skills

Before the exploration of mentor teachers' practical knowledge by student teachers canbe accomplished, mentor teachers must have acquired a positive attitude to theexplication of their own practical knowledge. They should recognise the value ofarticulating their practical knowledge and explicating the motives underlying their ownteaching. They should also interpret the explication of their practical knowledge as oneof their mentoring functions. In the introduction, we referred to mentor teachers whobelieved their primary task is enabling student teachers to apply the things they havelearned at the teacher education institute in real classrooms. Some mentor teachersseem to be rather reserved about telling student teachers their own knowledge, beliefs,and teaching values. They believe they are showing respect for student teachers'individual beliefs and desires and do not want to be directive. Although, in our view,the importance of student teachers developing personal teaching styles is beyondquestioning, this should not suggest that mentor teachers have nothing to report.Mentor teachers are more experienced practitioners who are in a further stage ofdevelopment than their student teachers and can therefore contribute to studentteachers' learning by sharing their thinking on teaching. However, it seems that mentorteachers still have to acknowledge the articulation of their practical knowledge as a newand valuable aspect of their mentoring. In many cases, they even have to become awareof the practical knowledge they possess. For this reason, helping mentor teachersdevelop the skills to articulate their practical knowledge is one precondition for lettingthis knowledge be a part of student teachers' learning process. There are indicationsthat mentor teachers can develop their ability to articulate their practical knowledgewhen they are consciously oriented towards putting their thinking into words (Brown,1995; Feiman-Nemser & Beasley, 1996).

Of course, access to mentor teachers' practical knowledge also depends on precon-ditions that are applicable to all mentor functions. Indispensible to student teachers'learning are a good interpersonal relationship between student and mentor teacher,respect for each others' opinion, a reflective approach both by student and mentorteacher, and enough time.

Student Teachers' Attitudes, Learning Conceptions and Skills

In order to explore their mentor teachers' practical knowledge, student teachers needto be inquiry-oriented. This attitude corresponds with student teachers' perceptions ofthemselves as 'active learners'. This means that, in order to learn, the learner under-takes various learning activities (Simons, 1993; Vermunt, 1996). Student teachers willnot learn much from listening passively when their mentor teachers are delivering amonologue. Student teachers should be actively involved in regulative learning activi-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


ties: deciding what they want to know, monitoring whether their mentor teachers areproviding the information desired and checking whether their questions are beinganswered. Student teachers also have to undertake affective learning activities. Whileinquiring about their mentor teachers' practical knowledge, they have to concentrateand to control their emotions. For example, they should discuss their mentor teachers'practical knowledge, but should not show disapproval in cases when their mentorteachers' beliefs oppose their own beliefs. Furthermore, student teachers should processthe explicated practical knowledge by undertaking several cognitive learning activities,for example, selecting information during the mentor teachers' articulation of theirknowledge, relating the mentor teachers' practical knowledge to their own developingpractical knowledge, and analysing the articulated knowledge. Whether student teach-ers undertake these learning activities depends on student teachers' learning styles.Research on learning styles has shown that learners differ in the manner they carry outlearning activities (Vermunt, 1996). Not being able to undertake the learning activitiesrequired to explore mentor teachers' practical knowledge can therefore hamper thisinquiry.

Beside learning skills, student teachers need some research skills when applyingsuch research instruments as interviewing, concept mapping, or stimulated recall. Forexample, Brown (1995) found that student teachers who stated that post-lessoninterviews of mentor teachers did not provide them with additional information, mainlyasked inappropriate, closed questions. This implies that student teachers need toacquire some basic skills such as conversation and discussion techniques, before theystart exploring their mentor teachers' practical knowledge.

Putting the Exploration of Mentor Teachers' Knowledge in Perspective

Access to mentor teachers' practical knowledge by student teachers is not 'the only wayof learning to teach'. This access is a valuable complement to the standard activitiesundertaken during practice teaching. Student teachers should continue giving lessons,discussing their lessons with the mentor teachers, and reflecting on their lessons.Similarly, the role of mentor teachers as a knowledge source does not eliminate theother mentor teacher roles we discussed earlier. In this article, we focused on theexplication and exploration of mentor teachers' practical knowledge because it hasreceived limited attention until now. This extension of the mentor teachers' roles hasto serve the goal of helping student teachers learn to teach. How this can be realisedneeds further research.

The first important question for further research is which aspects of practicalknowledge are most valuable for student teachers: general vs more specific practicalknowledge, reflection-in-action vs reflection-on-action, or practical knowledge thatcorresponds with student teachers' concerns and interests versus practical knowledgethat broadens their minds.

The second question is which instruments, applied in the research on teacherknowledge, can be most helpful for student teachers to gain access to these aspects ofpractical knowledge. When answering this question, the specific context of the teachereducation programme must be taken into account.

The third question to be answered is how can student teachers be motivated toexamine the practical knowledge of other teachers when they probably give their ownteaching and surviving the highest priority. The exploration of mentor teachers'practical knowledge can provide student teachers with insight into the thinking under-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


lying teaching, but will not provide student teachers with immediate solutions to theirown teaching problems. Especially in a teacher education course, when student teach-ers are usually focusing on practical relevance and application of the learning content,this can be a problem. An important question is, how can student teachers with thisapplication-directed learning style (see Vermunt, 1996) recognise the value of theexploration of the teaching and the underlying thinking of more experienced teachers.

The last question we suggest for further research is exactly which learning processesare triggered when student teachers are exposed to the explication of practical knowl-edge by their mentor teachers. In Brown's (1995) study, student teachers reported thatthey better understood their mentor teachers' teaching after post-lesson interviews. Wesuggest research on this new understanding of student teachers. Do they betterunderstand specific teaching situations and the subsequent actions of their mentorteachers or do they better understand general principles of teaching? Similarly, whatinfluence does the explicated practical knowledge have on student teachers' ownteaching? In order to answer these questions, the exploration of mentor teachers'practical knowledge by student teachers must be studied over a period of time. Onlythen can we gain more insight into the contribution of explicated practical knowledgeof mentor teachers to student teachers' learning to teach.

REFERENCES

ANDERSON, L.M. & BIRD, T. (1995) How three prospective teachers construed threecases of teaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, pp. 479-499.

APPLEGATE, J.H. (1987) Early field experiences: three viewpoints, in: M.H. HABERMAN

& K.J.M. BACKUS (Eds) Advances in Teacher Education, Vol. 3, pp. 75-93 (Nor-wood, NJ, Ablex).

BATTEN, M. (1993) The identification, development and sharing of professional craftknowledge, in: C. DAY, J. CALDERHEAD & P. DENICOLO (Eds) Research on TeacherThinking: understanding professional development, pp. 177-184 (London, FalmerPress).

BEN-PERETZ, M. & KREMER-HAYON, L. (1990) The content and context of professionaldilemmas encountered by novice and senior teachers, Educational Review, 42,pp. 31-40.

BEN-PERETZ, M. & RUMNEY, S. (1991) Professional thinking in guided practice,Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, pp. 517-530.

BORKO, H. & MAYFIELD, V. (1995) The roles of the cooperating teacher and universitysupervisor in learning to teach, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, pp. 501-518.

BORKO, H. & PUTNAM, R.T. (1996) Learning to teach, in: D.C. BERLINER & R.C.CALFEE (Eds) Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 673-708 (New York,MacMillan).

BROOKHART, S.M. & FREEMAN, D.J. (1992) Characteristics of entering teacher candi-dates, Review of Educational Research, 62, pp. 37-60.

BROWN, S. (1995) The professional craft knowledge of teachers: student teachersgaining access to it, in: R. Hoz & M. SILBERSTEIN (Eds) Partnerships of Schools andInstitutions of Higher Education in Teacher Development, pp. 25-38 (Beer-Sheva,Israel, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press).

BROWN, S. & MCINTYRE, D. (1995) Making Sense of Teaching (Buckingham, OpenUniversity Press).

BUSH, T., COLEMAN, M., WALL, D. & WEST-BURNHAM, J. (1996) Mentoring and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


continuing professional development, in: D. MCINTYRE & H. HAGGER (Eds)Mentors in Schools: developing the profession of teaching, pp. 121-143 (London, DavidFulton).

CALDERHEAD, J. (1988) The contribution of field experiences to student primaryteachers' professional learning, Research in Education, 40, pp. 33-49.

CALDERHEAD, J. (1996) Teachers: beliefs and knowledge, in: D.C. BERLINER & R.C.CALFEE (Eds) Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 709-725 (New York,Macmillan).

CARTER, K. (1990) Teachers' knowledge and learning to teach, in: W.R. HOUSTON

(Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, pp. 291-310 (New York,Macmillan).

CARTER, K. & GONZALEZ, L. (1993) Beginning teachers' knowledge of classroomevents, Journal of Teacher Education, 44, pp. 223-232.

COCHRAN, K.F., DERUTTER, J.A. & KING, R.A. (1993) Pedagogical content knowing:an integrative model for teacher preparation, Journal of Teacher Education, 44,pp.263-272.

COCHRAN-SMITH, M. (1991) Reinventing student teaching, Journal of Teacher Edu-cation, 42, pp. 104-118.

COLLINS, A., BROWN, J.S. & NEWMAN, S.E. (1989) Cognitive apprenticeship: teachingthe crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics, in: L.B. RESNICK (Ed) Knowing,Learning, and Instruction: essays in honor of Robert Glaser, pp. 453-494 (Hillsdale,NJ, Erlbaum).

EDWARDS, A. & COLLISON, J. (1995) What do teacher mentors tell student teachersabout pupil learning in infant schools?. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,1, pp. 265-279.

EDWARDS, A. & COLLISON, J. (1996) Mentoring and Developing Practice in PrimarySchools: supporting student teacher learning in schools (Buckingham, Open UniversityPress).

ELLIOTT, B. & CALDERHEAD, J. (1994) Mentoring for teacher development: possibilitiesand caveats, in: D. MCINTYRE, H. HAGGER & M. WILKIN (Eds) Mentoring: perspec-tives on school-based teacher education, pp. 166-189 (London, Kogan Page).

EMANS, R. (1983) Implementing the knowledge base: redesigning the function ofcooperating teachers and college supervisors, Journal of Teacher Education, 34,pp. 14-18.

FEIMAN-NEMSER, S. & BEASLEY, K. (1996) Discovering and sharing knowledge: invent-ing a new role for cooperating teachers, Michigan State University, East Lansing,MI.

FEIMAN-NEMSER, S. & BUCHMANN, M. (1987) When is student teaching teachereducation?, Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, pp. 255-273.

FEIMAN-NEMSER, S. & PARKER, M.B. (1993) Mentoring in context: a comparison oftwo U.S. programs for beginning teachers, International Journal of EducationalResearch, 19, pp. 699-718.

FRANKE, A. & DAHLGREN, L.O. (1996) Conceptions of mentoring: an empirical studyof conceptions of mentoring during the school-based teacher education, Teachingand Teacher Education, 12, pp. 627-641.

GLOVER, D. & MARDLE, G. (1996) Issues in the management of mentoring, in: D.MCINTYRE & H. HAGGER (Eds) Mentors in Schools: developing the profession ofteaching, pp. 75-95 (London, David Fulton).

GONZALEZ, L.E. & CARTER, K. (1996) Correspondence in cooperating teachers' and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


student teachers' interpretations of classroom events, Teaching and Teacher Edu-cation, 12, pp. 39-47.

GRIMMETT, P.P. & MACKINNON, A.M. (1992) Craft knowledge and the education ofteachers, in: G. GRANT (Ed.) Review of Research in Education, Vol. 18, pp. 385-456(Washington, DC, American Educational Research Association).

GROSSMAN, P.L. (1990) The Making of a Teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher education(New York, Teachers College Press).

HAWKEY, K. (1996) Image and the pressure to conform in learning to teach, Teachingand Teacher Education, 12, pp. 99-108.

HULING-AUSTIN, L. (1990) Teacher induction programs and internships, in: W.R.HOUSTON (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, pp. 535-548 (NewYork, Macmillan).

JOHNSTON, S. (1994) Experience is the best teacher; or is it?: an analysis of the role ofexperience in learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 45, pp. 199-208.

KAGAN, D.M. (1990) Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: inferences concerning theGoldilocks principle, Review of Educational Research, 60, pp. 419-469.

KAGAN, D.M. (1992) Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers,Review of Educational Research, 62, pp. 129-169.

KOERNER, M.E. (1992) The cooperating teacher: an ambivalent participant in studentteaching, Journal of Teacher Education, 43, pp. 46-56.

KREMER-HAYON, L. (1995, August) On becoming and being a mentor: a road of rosesand thorns, Paper presented at the 6th European Conference for Research onLearning and Instruction, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

LANIER, J.E. & LITTLE, J.W. (1986) Research on teacher education, in: M.C. Wit-TROCK (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd edn, pp. 527-569 (New York,Macmillan).

MARTIN, D. (1997) Mentoring in one's own classroom: an exploratory study ofcontexts, Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, pp. 183-197.

MARTIN, S. (1996) Support and challenge: conflicting or complementary aspects ofmentoring novice teachers?, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 2, pp. 41-56.

MAYNARD, T. (1996) Mentoring subject knowledge in the primary school, in: D.McINTYRE & H. HAGGER (Eds) Mentors in Schools: developing the profession ofteaching, pp. 34-55 (London, David Fulton).

MAYNARD, T. & FURLONG, J. (1994) Learning to teach and models of mentoring, in:D. MCINTYRE, H. HAGGER & M. WILKIN (Eds) Mentoring: perspectives on school-based teacher education, pp. 69-85 (London, Kogan Page).

MCINTYRE, D. & HAGGER, H. (1994) Teachers' expertise and models of mentoring, in:D. MCINTYRE, H. HAGGER & M. WILKIN (Eds) Mentoring: perspectives on school-based teacher education, pp. 86-102 (London, Kogan Page).

MCINTYRE, D., HAGGER, H. & WILKIN, M. (1994) Introduction, in: D. MCINTYRE, H.HAGGER & M. WILKIN (Eds) Mentoring: perspectives on school-based teacher edu-cation, pp. 11-20 (London, Kogan Page).

MCNAMARA, D. (1995) The influence of student teachers' tutors and mentors upontheir classroom practice: an exploratory study, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11,pp. 51-61.

OLSON, P.M. & CARTER, K. (1989) The capabilities of cooperating teachers in USAschools for communicating knowledge about teaching, Journal of Education forTeaching, 15, pp. 113-131.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14


PENNY, A.J., HARLEY, K.L. & JESSOP, T.S. (1996) Towards a language of possibility:critical reflection and mentorship in initial teacher education, Teachers and Teach-ing: Theory and Practice, 2, pp. 57-69.

SCHÖN, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action (NewYork, Basic Books).

SCHÖN, D.A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass).SHULMAN, L.S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform,

Harvard Educational Review, 57, pp. 1-22.SIMONS, P.R.J. (1993) Constructive learning: the role of the learner, in: T.M. DUFFY,

J. LOWYCK & D.H. JONASSEN (Eds) Designing Environments for Constructive Learn-ing, pp. 291-313 (Berlin, Springer).

SMITHEY, M.W. & EVERTSON, C M . (1995) Tracking the mentoring process: a multi-method approach, Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 9, pp. 33-53.

STANULIS, R.N. (1994) Fading to a whisper: one mentor's story of sharing her wisdomwithout telling answers, Journal of Teacher Education, 45, pp. 31-38.

STANUUS, R.N. (1995) Classroom teachers as mentors: possibilities for participation ina professional development school context, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11,pp.331-344.

TOMLINSON, P. (1995) Understanding Mentoring: reflective strategies for school-basedteacher preparation (Buckingham, Open University Press).

VERMUNT, J.D. (1996) Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning stylesand strategies: a phenomenographic analysis, Higher Education, 31, pp. 25-50.

WATTS, D. (1987) Student teaching, in: M. HABERMAN & J.M. BACKUS (Eds) Advancesin Teacher Education, Vol. 3, pp. 151-167 (Norwood, NJ, Ablex).

WILDMAN, T.M., MAGLIARO, S.G., NILES, R.A. & NILES, J.A. (1992) Teacher mentor-ing: an analysis of roles, activities, and conditions, Journal of Teacher Education, 43,pp.205-213.

ZEICHNER, K.M. & TABACHNICK, B.R. (1981) Are the effects of university teachereducation 'washed out' by school experience?, Journal of Teacher Education, 32,pp. 7-11.

Correspondence: Anneke Zanting, ICLON, Graduate School of Education, LeidenUniversity, P.O. Box 9555, 2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands. Tel: + 31 715273858; Fax: + 31 71 5275342; e-mail <[email protected]> .

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

7:58

19

Dec

embe

r 20

14