Examining the University-Profession Divide: An Inquiry into a Teacher Education Program’s Practices

Abstract

This paper focuses on the divide between the university as a site of teacher education and the profession of practicing teachers. We employed a theoretical inquiry methodology on a singular case study which included formulating questions about the phenomena of the university-profession divide (UPD), analysing constituents of the UPD, and developing a language system to represent our findings about the UPD. The questions guiding our examination were: How do we conceptualize this divide? How are these concepts represented in the literature? How can a Teacher Education Program (TEP) respond to the divide? The theoretical inquiry was conducted within a singular case study of a TEP in order to explore the chasm between these two settings in a limited and focused manner. Our inquiry led to the identification of three key concepts: competing cultures, competing expectations, and theory-practice dichotomy. In analyzing these concepts and responding to questions which drove this inquiry from the beginning, we assert that these concepts contribute to the divide and therefore, have implications for teacher education programming. We summarize findings about these three concepts, suggest causes for the chasm, and offer recommendations to address the divide. Finally, we argue that while it is important to address the divide to enhance teacher education, the divide itself is a potentially rich site of possibilities. We contend that a reconceptualization of the UPD in this way might mitigate its negative impact on teacher education curriculum and programming. Cet article se concentre sur l’écart qui existe entre l’université en tant que lieu de formation des enseignants et la profession d’enseignant en exercice. Nous avons employé une méthodologie d’enquête théorique basée sur une seule étude de cas qui comprenait des questions sur l’écart entre université et profession, l’analyse des composantes de cet écart et le développement d’un système de langue pour représenter nos résultats concernant l’écart entre université et profession. Les questions qui ont guidé notre examen étaient les suivantes : Comment conceptualisons-nous cet écart? Comment ces concepts sont-ils représentés dans les publications? Comment un programme de formation des enseignants peut-il répondre à cet écart? L’enquête théorique a été menée sur une seule étude de cas d’un programme de formation des enseignants afin d’explorer le gouffre qui existe entre ces deux domaines d’une manière limitée et ciblée. Notre enquête a permis d’identifier trois concepts clés : la concurrence entre les cultures, la concurrence entre les attentes et la dichotomie entre théorie et pratique. Suite à l’analyse de ces concepts et aux réponses obtenues aux questions qui étaient à l’origine de cette enquête dès le départ, nous pouvons affirmer que ces concepts contribuent à l’écart et, par conséquent, ont une incidence sur les programmes de formation des enseignants. Nous résumons nos résultats concernant ces concepts, suggérons des raisons à l’origine du gouffre et proposons des recommandations pour remédier à l’écart. Pour finir, nous suggérons que, bien qu’il soit important de remédier à l’écart afin d’améliorer la formation des enseignants, l’écart lui-même est un lieu potentiellement rempli de riches possibilités. Nous soutenons qu’une reconceptualisation de l’écart entre université et profession selon cette manière pourrait mitiger ses effets négatifs sur le curriculum et les programmes de formation des enseignants.

Aligning Goals for Certification and Professional Growth: Building Cooperation Among Bachelor of Education Programs in Alberta

“…For reflection to result in better teaching, PSTs must become reflexive in their thinking (Hill et al, 2018;Naested et al, 2010). Reflexivity involves not just reflecting about what went well and what did not, but also considering how to change teaching practice to improve (Broad & Tessaro, 2010;Hattie, 2009;Hill et al, 2018;Sivia & MacMath, 2016). These elements found in literature were also evident in the TQS, highlighting the relevance of this document in practicum experiences for preservice teachers.…”

“…However, practicums must do more than just provide an opportunity to practice teaching; they need to provide opportunities for PSTs to try new ideas and learn from their teaching (Johansson & Sandberg, 2012;Schulz, 2005;Sivia & MacMath, 2016). In order to learn from their teaching, PSTs must engage in reflection about their teaching (Brookfield, 2009;Mulholland et al, 2010;O'Connor et al, 2015;Schön, 2009).…”

Particulars of Practice: A Collaborative Self-study of Mentoring Practicum-based Seminars

“…Martin and Russell (2010) specify this even further by identifying the field experience as the focal point for the development of candidates' authority of experience. Consequently, we viewed these POPS as sites for learning in which the central focus was to illuminate candidates' experiences within the schools (Cuenca et al, 2011;Sivia & MacMath, 2016). As discussed by Dillon (2017) in his self-study of teacher education seminars, it was critical for seminars to focus on candidates' experiences in the field.…”

“…The research consistently alludes to the issue of "the perpetual struggle to integrate theory and practice" (Hirschkorn et al, 2009, p. 7). This struggle is accentuated by what Zeichner (2010) refers to as the third space of practicum resulting in the implementation of a variety of structures, such as in school seminars, realistic approaches (Korthagen, 2001), and practicum-integrated coursework (Dillon, 2017;Sivia & MacMath, 2016). Such structures are designed to maximize teacher candidates' opportunities to link theory and practice and to reflect on their experiences (Schön, 1987) as they develop their pedagogies.…”