“…Supervisory discussions are at the center of a large number of research projects (Caroll, 2005;Cartaut & Bertone, 2009;Chal-iès, Ria, Bertone, Trohel & Durand, 2004;Orland-Barak, 2006;Orland-Barak & Klein, 2005). These studies have various objects: beliefs or the transformation of beliefs among pre-service teachers; the different roles teacher educators take on in practicum settings; power relations in the interactions between pre-service teacher (PT), university supervisor (US), and cooperating teacher (CT); mentors' representations of mentoring conversations; and types of conversations and their effects on professional learning.…”
This article is part of a larger research project on professional development, and more specifically the emergence of “professional knowledge” among pre-service teachers. The intent here is to analyze recognition phenomena in supervisory discussions. We consider recognition of pre-service teachers’ discourse as a condition for the emergence of professional knowledge. What “recognition markers” do evaluators seize from this discourse to decode its content and meaning, to adjust and influence it? How do these markers contribute (or fail to contribute) to establishing “shared communicative spaces”? Our analyses show that the emergence of these shared communicative spaces involves tensions that reveal (or fail to reveal) forms of recognition. These forms of recognition affect the shaping of pre-service teachers’ professional knowledge, as well as components of pre-service teachers’ identity that also influence the elaboration of professional knowledge.Cette contribution s’insère dans une recherche plus large portant sur les processus de développement professionnel, plus spécifiquement l’émergence de savoirs professionnels, chez des enseignants en formation. Cet article est centré sur les phénomènes de reconnaissance à l’oeuvre dans les entretiens de stage. Nous considérons en effet la reconnaissance du discours de l’enseignant en formation comme une condition d’émergence des savoirs professionnels. Quels « repères de reconnaissance » les évaluateurs prennent-ils dans ce discours pour en décoder le contenu et le sens, pour s’y ajuster et l’influencer ? En quoi ces repères contribuent-ils ou non à l’établissement de « zones de compréhension mutuelle » ? D’après nos analyses, l’émergence de ces zones de compréhension est soumise à des tensions qui révèlent ou non des formes de reconnaissance. Celles-ci influencent la configuration des savoirs professionnels que l’étudiant élabore, et partant, les composantes identitaires qui entrent dans cette élaboration
“…Supervisory discussions are at the center of a large number of research projects (Caroll, 2005;Cartaut & Bertone, 2009;Chal-iès, Ria, Bertone, Trohel & Durand, 2004;Orland-Barak, 2006;Orland-Barak & Klein, 2005). These studies have various objects: beliefs or the transformation of beliefs among pre-service teachers; the different roles teacher educators take on in practicum settings; power relations in the interactions between pre-service teacher (PT), university supervisor (US), and cooperating teacher (CT); mentors' representations of mentoring conversations; and types of conversations and their effects on professional learning.…”
This article is part of a larger research project on professional development, and more specifically the emergence of “professional knowledge” among pre-service teachers. The intent here is to analyze recognition phenomena in supervisory discussions. We consider recognition of pre-service teachers’ discourse as a condition for the emergence of professional knowledge. What “recognition markers” do evaluators seize from this discourse to decode its content and meaning, to adjust and influence it? How do these markers contribute (or fail to contribute) to establishing “shared communicative spaces”? Our analyses show that the emergence of these shared communicative spaces involves tensions that reveal (or fail to reveal) forms of recognition. These forms of recognition affect the shaping of pre-service teachers’ professional knowledge, as well as components of pre-service teachers’ identity that also influence the elaboration of professional knowledge.Cette contribution s’insère dans une recherche plus large portant sur les processus de développement professionnel, plus spécifiquement l’émergence de savoirs professionnels, chez des enseignants en formation. Cet article est centré sur les phénomènes de reconnaissance à l’oeuvre dans les entretiens de stage. Nous considérons en effet la reconnaissance du discours de l’enseignant en formation comme une condition d’émergence des savoirs professionnels. Quels « repères de reconnaissance » les évaluateurs prennent-ils dans ce discours pour en décoder le contenu et le sens, pour s’y ajuster et l’influencer ? En quoi ces repères contribuent-ils ou non à l’établissement de « zones de compréhension mutuelle » ? D’après nos analyses, l’émergence de ces zones de compréhension est soumise à des tensions qui révèlent ou non des formes de reconnaissance. Celles-ci influencent la configuration des savoirs professionnels que l’étudiant élabore, et partant, les composantes identitaires qui entrent dans cette élaboration
“…El mentor es un docente con experiencia y saber docente reconocido y con formación especializada como formador, que ofrece su apoyo al profesorado principiante (KELLY et al, 2014). Un profesional de la enseñanza que enseña, acompaña, pero que también necesita aprender un nuevo papel (ORLAND-BARAK; YINON, 2005). En las dos últimas décadas los programas de inducción se han centrado en promover la relación entre un mentor y un principiante.…”
“…Bates, Drits, and Ramirez (2011) therefore urge teacher educators to clarify and articulate 'what our supervisors offer our teacher candidates and how this impacts their learning opportunities' (70). Indeed, the mismatch between what is offered and the impact can be stark, as Orland- Barak and Klein (2005) note. Their work describes discrepancies between the symmetrical and harmonious view of how mentors perceived their behavior in mentoring conversations on the one hand, and the highly prescriptive and domineering role they really played on the other.…”
Section: Implications For Supervision Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, research into the discourse that actually takes place during traditional (nonvideo-based) POCs suggests that instead of being a space for genuine dialog, there is limited participation from teacher candidates as the talk is consistently dominated by supervisors (Guyton and McIntyre 1990;Orland-Barak and Klein 2005). Thus, despite a sincere desire to help teacher candidates develop reflective practices (Fibkins 2011), POCs are a unique genre of interaction in which supervisors may inadvertently stifle these opportunities (Fanselow 1988).…”
This study investigated how video-based observation may alter the nature of postobservation talk between supervisors and teacher candidates. Audio-recorded postobservation conversations were coded using a conversation analysis framework and interpreted through the lens of interactional sociology. Findings suggest that videobased observations impacted the content and extent of teacher candidate reflection during post-observation discussions, enabling candidates to comment at greater length about their teaching, initiate topics, and cite evidence through reference to the video data. Implications for the role of supervisors and the potential of video-informed postobservation conferencing are discussed. With video, I can see every part of what's going on and I can see what the kids are saying and you know, this way, it's not like I'm thinking about the observer, instead I'm up there, and I'm concentrating on what I want to do and what I want to accomplish in the lesson. . .then with video it's like I have my own feedback.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.