Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education: Understanding Teaching & Learning about Teaching
Teaching: A Problematic Enterprise 4. Making the Tacit Explicit 5. Principles of Practice Section 2: Learning about Teaching 7. Being a Student of Teaching 8.
Teacher Education as a Beginning Not an End Enacting a Pedagogy of Teacher Education. Routledge eBooks are available through VitalSource. The first is their need to be comfortable with, and capable of, handling particular aspects and skills in teaching and these are all impacted by their needs and concerns as learners. The second is the need for student-teachers to see and comprehend the complexity of practice such that they not only concentrate on learning what is being taught the particular subject matter content but also the nature in which that teaching is conducted, that is, that they see teaching as problematic and have opportunities to examine and question it as such.
These two competing agendas make it difficult for student teachers to develop a big picture understanding of their learning to teach and therefore tends to complicate their valuing of practice. That means they easily simplify views of practice to a skill set or to some intangible, knowledge that is tacit and does not fully apprehend the complexity of practice. Inherent in a pedagogy of teacher education is the need to conceptualize teacher education as holistic as well as the importance of articulating knowledge of practice in such a way as to demonstrate scholarship of practice.
- Un matrimonio davvero speciale (Italian Edition).
- Initial Teacher Education Pedagogy Resource List!
- Courtroom and Report Writing Skills for Social Workers (Post-Qualifying Social Work Practice Guides).
Loughran, J. Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London: Routledge. This book offers a conceptual framework for understanding what a pedagogy of teacher education is, how it might be developed, what it looks like in practice and why it is important. The book examines two perspectives on a pedagogy of teacher education: 1 teaching about teaching and 2 learning about teaching. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login. Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions.
Content is integrated when contents of different subjects are in some way connected. How deeply the subjects are integrated can be described as a continuum, starting with studying subjects in parallel in order to view a theme simultaneously from multiple perspectives; the integration can also go as far as the complete abandonment of school subjects [ 13 , 14 ]. In turn, process integration occurs, for instance, when the cognitive side of learning is entwined with the experiential.
The purpose of integrative instruction is to enable the pupils to see the relationships and interdependencies between the phenomena to be studied. It helps the pupils to link knowledge of and skills in various fields, and in interaction with others, to structure them as meaningful entities. Examination of wholes and exploratory work periods that link different fields of knowledge guide the pupils to apply their knowledge and produce experiences of participation in the communal building of knowledge.https://carmepujol.eu/templates/bc/rof-hoteles-playa.php
Initial Teacher Education Pedagogy Resource List
This allows the pupils to perceive the significance of the topics they learn at school for their own life and community, and for the society and humankind. In the learning process, pupils are supported to structure and expand their worldview , p. The core curriculum mixes CI to some extent with inquiry learning.
However, each can be realized independently. Furthermore, it presents CI as a way to enhance the social function of education. The issues of the community, the society or the humankind are usually so-called wicked problems, such as city planning, poverty or climate change. The concept of wicked problems refers to complicated issues that are hard to define, do not have a single solution, and are usually studied in various scientific fields.
Planning of a school curriculum is in itself one example of a wicked problem [ 15 ]. The answers to fundamental questions of our age or of individuals seeking guidance in living must be sought in multiple sources. In schools, this can be called a didactic process, if mere adoption of knowledge is coupled with the aims of Bildung , i.
Put concretely, the core curriculum mentions four ways of organizing cross-curriculum learning or even abandoning subject borders [ 1 ]. First, integration can be achieved through activities such as theme days, events, campaigns, study visits, or school camps. Second, longer integrated study modules can be created around a theme by combining the perspectives of various subjects.
Third, integrated cluster subjects can be formed, for example, a science cluster that includes mathematics, physics, and chemistry. The fourth and most radical way is to organize all schoolwork holistically without any designated subjects. This is a common practice at the pre-school level in Finland. However, to consider CI as the opposite of subject-based education would be incorrect. Integration can be seen as a normal feature in the pursuit of knowledge whenever teachers are constructing cross-disciplinary concepts in a subject-based curriculum [ 17 ].
The core curriculum offers two concrete examples of integration structured on differentiated subjects [ 1 ]. First, studies can be taught in parallel in such a way that one theme is studied simultaneously in different subjects, for example, climate change along with social studies, chemistry, and geography.
- SAGE Reference - The SAGE Handbook of Research on Teacher Education!
- A Pedagogy of Teacher Education - Education - Oxford Bibliographies!
- The SAGE Handbook of Research on Teacher Education!
- chapter and author info;
Second, themes can be sequenced inside a single subject or between subjects so that a topic is learned along a continuum; an example would be studying Middle Eastern religions first in religious studies followed by the rise of the Islamic Empires and the Crusades in history.
Lee Shulman has described the development of teacher education as a process in which pedagogical knowledge has become more and more openly acknowledged as essential competence along with subject matter content knowledge. However, according to Shulman, not enough attention has been given to the pedagogical skills necessary for teaching certain subject contents.
Instead, Shulman stresses the importance of pedagogical knowledge with which teachers can teach specific content in different subjects. The content of every subject needs its own pedagogical approach, i. This is what Shulman has called the missing paradigm [ 2 ], although it has been argued that the paradigm has not been entirely missing, because it has long been a central feature of the German tradition of subject didactics Fachdidaktik [ 18 ].
Shulman presented his argument three decades ago, and the tradition of didactics has a much longer history.
Understanding Teaching & Learning about Teaching, 1st Edition
This can be called the missing paradigm of today. There are many manuals of CI and reports of experiments on CI, but the question of what kind of pedagogical knowledge CI requires from teachers is rarely answered. Generally, researchers have been more interested in well-working performance than in the knowledge base and reasoning of teachers [ 20 ]. In any case, Shulman sees CI as one possible way of constructing a curriculum.
However, he claims that if CI is taken seriously, it will have profound consequences when the discussion of how a scientific discipline becomes a school subject changes to something else [ 21 ], because if a curriculum is integrated, then there are no longer subjects with parallel disciplines. Finally, his examples come mostly from secondary schools. This suits the level of interest in this chapter. Shulman presented interdisciplinarity as a part of content and curriculum knowledge [ 22 ]. He has not explained all these knowledge categories at length and has used them in an inconsistent way in different texts [ 23 ].
For those reasons, some of categories are seen to be partly overlapping [ 24 ]. In this section, another category is added as the aforementioned knowledge categories are interpreted and discussed from the perspective of CI. This category can be called integrative pedagogical knowledge , which crosses all categories. It is not an independent knowledge category, but an approach to each category from the perspective of CI.
The following sections describe what kinds of integrative pedagogical knowledge teachers need in order to implement CI. In short, teachers need understanding of CI as one option for constructing a curriculum, and they need broad knowledge of the current curriculum, including the content and objectives of subjects they are not teaching themselves. For CI to be successful, its purpose has to be clearly comprehended. Furthermore, in collaborative forms of CI, teachers need good skills and conditions for cooperation across subject borders. In addition, a teacher must know why these are the accepted facts in a given field, how knowledge is constructed, why some aspects of the field are more important than others, what alternative understandings of a subject exist, how the facts are related to other concepts within and outside of the discipline, and why these things are worth knowing in the first place [ 2 , 3 ].
Shulman does not problematize the relation between scientific disciplines and school subjects. In this way, the fundamental question of content knowledge is left open. According to Stengel [ 25 ], Shulman assumes that disciplines precede school subjects and that the task of teachers is to modify disciplinary content knowledge into learnable form, i. Direct transformation of a scientific discipline into a school subject is hardly a reality, even with subject teachers who have received a disciplinary education. For example, a subject teacher who graduated as a history major might have strong content knowledge of the Cold War period, but only fragmented knowledge of antiquity.
However, history as a school subject should cover all relevant historical periods, not just those in which a teacher has specialized. He shows an empirical example of how teaching becomes different when instruction based on good content knowledge changes to subject content with which a teacher is not well acquainted. Rich, versatile teaching then turns into rigidly planned, inflexible pedagogy. Thus, the better content knowledge a teacher has, the better chances there are to develop a good level of pedagogical content knowledge.
This is why it is worth spending a bit more time to consider what content knowledge really is.
The SAGE Handbook of Research on Teacher Education
The most common assumption about the origin of knowledge for teaching is the one Shulman presents, namely, that scientific disciplines are transformed into school subjects [ 25 ]. This is the case in teacher education programs, such as in Finnish subject teacher education, in which student teachers study scientific disciplines at the university level and are educated as specialists in certain disciplines and then equipped with pedagogical knowledge.
However, Lopes and Macedo [ 8 ] claim that there is not necessarily a relationship between scientific disciplines and school subjects. They represent school subjects as autonomous communities that are socio-politically constructed and constantly mutating. The social objectives of school subjects are viewed differently than the objectives of science. However, to answer the question of why some things are worth knowing, for instance, one might look for very different explanations in school contexts as opposed to the contexts of scientific inquiry.
According to Deng [ 26 ], an integrated curriculum distances school subjects from scientific disciplines.
Recommended For You
If subjects are integrated into broader clusters, the new integrated subjects might create their own fields of knowledge without a corresponding scientific discipline. Deng uses science and technology studies as an example of a commonly integrated subject. However, Deng does not point out that disciplines can also be integrated into a form of interdisciplinary science. It is not rare to find interdisciplinary science programs combining natural sciences and technology. Thus, CI might find correspondence in interdisciplinary science projects.