Developing a Pedagogy of Teacher Education

Understanding Teaching & Learning about Teaching

John Loughran

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781134210596
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

A pedagogy of teacher education must go well beyond the simple delivery of information about teaching. This book describes and explores the complex nature of teaching and of learning about teaching, illustrating how important teacher educators' professional knowledge is and how that knowledge must influence teacher training practices. The book is divided into two sections. The first considers the crucial distinction between teaching student-teachers and teaching them about teaching, allowing practice to push beyond the technical-rational, or tips-and-tricks approach, to teaching about teaching in a way that brings in the appropriate attitudes, knowledge and skills of teaching itself. Section two highlights the dual nature of student teachers' learning, arguing that they need to concentrate not only on learning what is being taught but also on the way in which that teaching is conducted.

1 Introduction Developing a pedagogy of teacher education – What does that really mean?

DOI: 10.4324/9780203019672-1

[B]eing a teacher educator is often difficult … in most places, there is no culture in which it is common for teacher education staff to collaboratively work on the question of how to improve the pedagogy of teacher education.

– Korthagen (2001a, p. 8)

Developing a pedagogy of teacher education – What does that really mean? An answer may be found in the importance of the three parts that comprise the whole: developing, pedagogy and teacher education. First, it is important to understand the nature of the term pedagogy. As has been demonstrated in the literature many times, sometimes seemingly familiar terms develop a life of their own as a diversity of definitions, understandings and interpretations emerge over time. Such terms, like that of, for example, reflection, tend to “ring true” with people in ways that carry meaning through the tacit understandings inherent in them. Such tacit understandings can be so strong that they lead to the term being adapted and adjusted to suit a range of contexts and situations. In such situations, ironically, the meaning may then become less definitive, less purposeful and more easily misunderstood so that what may once have seemed obvious can no longer be assumed or taken for granted. As a result of the growing range of interpretations, it may become necessary to (re)define the term so that that which is intended, and that which is not, can be made more explicit. In so doing, acceptance (or rejection) of the arguments, ideas and practices associated with the use of the term may more easily be made.

The term reflection has spawned a number of related terms such as reflective teaching, reflective learning and reflective practice. It has also led to the creation of terms that are sometimes confused with one another because of the similarity in meaning, for example reflexion and reflectivity. Thus the descriptor reflection has led to the underlying concept being adjusted, adapted and changed as individuals have sought to use it to signify issues and practices important to them and so that they might be grasped more easily by others through the link with the original term. Pedagogy, it could well be argued, has suffered in ways similar to that of reflection.

Pedagogy, as described in some of the educational literature (e.g. in the US, Australia, the UK, Canada and New Zealand), is sometimes used as a synonym for teaching. In this sense, pedagogy is seen as a catch-all term for such things as teaching procedures, teaching practice, instruction and so on. Van Manen (1999) explained this trend in some detail when he revisited Simon’s (1981) lament: “Why no pedagogy in England?” (p. 14). However, as he goes on to explain, if one draws more on the roots of European traditions (e.g. The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Scandinavia), pedagogy can be seen to encompass much more than simply teaching (van Manen, 1999). Pedagogy is the art and science of educating children and as van Manen makes clear, focusing on the relationship between learning and teaching such that one does not exist as separate and distinct from the other is crucial to such education.

Importantly, drawing on this European tradition, teaching and learning are seen as being linked in powerful and important ways such that the intention implicit in the use of the term is that teaching purposefully influences learning and vice versa. Therefore, pedagogy is not merely the action of teaching (which itself can easily be misinterpreted as the transmission of information), more so, it is about the relationship between teaching and learning and how together they lead to growth in knowledge and understanding through meaningful practice.

Korthagen (2001b), in building further on the place of relationship in conceptualizing an understanding of pedagogy, goes beyond issues associated with teaching and learning per se and focuses on the importance of self-understanding and connectedness. In so doing, he places emphasis on the development of self-identity and the manner in which that impacts pedagogy. For example, he suggests that he “follow[s] Kohnstamm (1929), who stated that many durable learning experiences are rooted in the I-you relationship between teacher and student, in genuine personal encounters in which both are, within the here-and-now, in contact with their inner selves” (p. 264). Thus, in educational encounters, a teacher’s norms and values, and the extent to which they are enacted in practice, influence the manner which students might develop their own. Thus personal relationship between teachers and students is crucial as identity formation and personal growth combine to shape the nature of pedagogy itself.

Next, consider the term teacher education. In most contexts, the use of the term teacher education is synonymous with pre-service teacher preparation. In pre-service teacher preparation programs, students of teaching (Bullough and Gitlin, 1995, 2001) seek to develop knowledge and skills of teaching and to learn how to competently apply these in practice. So in teacher education, students of teaching enter their programs with a natural concern to learn about teaching while their teacher educators (those associated with teaching in the program) clearly have a major responsibility for, and hopefully, an interest in their teaching about teaching. Hence, teacher education itself has two important foci: learning about teaching and, teaching about teaching, each of which involves complex skills, knowledge, abilities and competences (Koster et al., 2005).

These foci are further complicated by the competing cognitive and affective tensions that influence learning and growth through experiences in the practice setting. In fact, it could well be argued that in much of what we do in teacher education, attention to the cognitive domain too often dominates. Such domination can be to the detriment of the importance of recognizing and responding to one’s emotions, feelings and reactions, all of which are so enmeshed in the experiences of learning and teaching about teaching.

Finally, developing. This is an interesting term as it suggests neither a point of beginning nor an end. Developing implies a sense of “coming to be” or pushing ahead toward a more “advanced state.” If one is developing, then one is growing in understanding, moving forward, purposefully building on that which is already present. Developing then hints at the value in extending that which one already knows (and is able to do) such that questioning and challenging that which might normally be overlooked, or taken for granted, will be reconsidered in such a way as to offer new insights to an open-minded inquirer. Being open-minded is important because “It includes an active desire to listen to more sides than one; to give heed to facts from whatever source they come; to give full attention to alternative possibilities; to recognize the possibility of error even in the beliefs that are dearest to us” (Dewey, 1933, p. 30).

Taken together, the intention is that developing a pedagogy of teacher education signifies that the relationship between teaching and learning in the programs and practices of learning and teaching about teaching might be purposefully examined, described, articulated and portrayed in ways that enhance our understanding of this complex interplay. In so doing, our knowledge of, and practice with, students and teachers of teaching might then be nurtured in ways that can positively influence the manner in which such work is conducted, understood and valued. From this perspective, two crucial aspects of a pedagogy of teacher education need to be fully grasped: teaching about teaching and learning about teaching.

Content and pedagogy in teacher education

In a teaching and learning situation there is an obvious focus on both the content to be taught and the learning to be experienced. In teaching and learning about teaching, the content, or subject matter, comprises at least the “theoretical” aspects of the “knowledge” of teaching (some might describe it as the discipline of teaching). Typically, much of this subject matter is distilled and offered through some form of curriculum (e.g. the knowledge of classroom management, wait time, higher order questioning, learning theories, gender issues, constructivism, co-operative learning, etc.) and is what Russell (1997) has described as the content turn in teacher education. However, an issue that is often easily overlooked in teaching and learning about teaching is the concurrent need to also pay careful attention to the practices employed in presenting the subject matter – the pedagogical turn (Russell, 1997). Hence, for both the teacher and the student of teaching, ongoing and conflicting roles continually complicate the competing agendas of teaching and learning about teaching. Not only must both teachers and students of teaching pay careful attention to the subject matter being taught, they must also simultaneously pay attention to the manner in which that knowledge is being taught; and both must overtly be embraced in a pedagogy of teacher education.

Learning about teaching

Preservice teachers also should be encouraged to be metacognitive and become more aware of how they learn in teacher education courses with the intention of informing their decision-making as they construct their personal pedagogies. (Hoban, 1997, p. 135)

At first Hoban’s suggestion sounds quite straightforward; perhaps more a subtle point rather than an outstanding revelation and so it is not difficult to see why it might initially be viewed as self-evident. However, on closer examination, the requirements for, and expectations about, appropriate actions and responses are far from simple. What Hoban’s suggestion really means for the student of teaching is that at any given time in the teaching and learning environment there is a need to be learning that which is being taught while at the same time questioning, examining and learning about the way in which it is actually being taught: asking questions about the nature of the teaching; the influence of the practice on the subsequent learning (or lack thereof); the manner in which the teaching has been constructed and is being portrayed; how the teaching-learning environment has been created and so on.

For a student of teaching, to consistently pay attention to these competing agenda (learning about the particular content that is being taught and learning about teaching) is difficult; to respond to both is demanding. It is clearly much easier for a learner to pay attention (or not) only to the content that is being taught. For most students of teaching, that is what 13 years of formal schooling has encouraged. More so, for the large majority of students of teaching, that is also what traditional university teaching has more than likely further reinforced. Therefore, for students of teaching to shake themselves out of their well-established comfort zone of (perhaps passive) learning and to begin to question the taken for granted in their learning about teaching at both levels requires energy. It also requires an expectation, or belief, that there is real value and purpose for so doing. This is then where metacognition begins to play an important role.

In learning about teaching, students of teaching need to be conscious of their own learning so that they overtly develop their understanding of the teaching practices they experience in order to purposefully link the manner in which they learn in a given situation with the nature of the teaching itself. Therefore, for students of teaching, their learning agenda includes learning about the specific content being taught, learning about learning and learning about teaching. All of these inevitably shape their developing understanding of the complexity of teaching and learning but may not be fully apprehended if not explicitly linked to their learning agenda. I would argue that there is little doubt that creating such an agenda is important because:

Student teachers’ expectations of their preservice programs are strongly influenced by their prior experiences as learners, together with popular stereotypes about teachers’ work. Student teachers commonly enter their teacher education with a view of teaching as simple and transmissive. They believe that teaching involved the uncomplicated act of telling students what to learn. (Berry, 2004a, pp. 1301–1302)

At the same time the teacher of teaching also has a competing agenda to manage.

Teaching about teaching

becoming a teacher educator (or teacher of teachers) has the potential (not always realized) to generate a second level of thought about teaching, one that focuses not on content but on how we teach…This new perspective constitutes making the ‘pedagogical turn’, thinking long and hard about how we teach and the messages conveyed by how we teach…I have come to believe that learning to teach is far more complex than we have ever acknowledged… (Russell, 1997, p. 44)

Just as the student of teaching is confronted by the need to pay attention to both the content and the manner of teaching, so too the teacher of teaching is confronted by a similar situation. The need to teach the given content is obvious but, sadly, it is all too often the only focus of attention. However, if students of teaching are to genuinely “see into teaching,” then they require access to the thoughts and actions that shape such practice; they need to be able to see and hear the pedagogical reasoning that underpins the teaching that they are experiencing (Loughran, 1996). For the teacher of teaching this raises similar competing agenda as that which students of teaching experience as there is the need to simultaneously pay attention to two different things.

It has been well illustrated in the literature how difficult this can be to do (Berry, 2001; Hutchinson, 1998; Nicol, 1997) because the manner in which a teacher educator might come to know that which is worth investigating in teaching about teaching, and for whom it is helpful (the teacher educator and/or the student-teacher), is exceptionally challenging.

Learning how to teach about teaching can be confusing as the purpose and value of “unpacking” the teaching is buffeted by recognizing and responding to the needs of the learner as well as the learning needs of the teacher educator. Thus making “the right decisions” about that which might be seen as a teachable moment can be exceedingly difficult for the teacher of teaching, especially when complicated by needing to know when and how to respond in the crucible of practice.

I have therefore sought to develop a pedagogy of teacher education that seriously attempts to address the prior beliefs that prospective teachers bring with them to the course by expanding teachers’ visions of what is desirable and what might be possible in teaching… The pedagogical challenge for me then has been to develop instructional moves, activities, tasks, and problems which will encourage and open prospective teachers to asking questions, analysing, taking new perspectives, and considering alternatives as well as developing defensible arguments for teaching practices that move beyond their personal experiences of studenting… But the challenge is also for me to do this in a way which authentically represents the nature of teaching, its inherent uncertainty and complexity….I want my prospective teachers to be investigating genuine pedagogical problems through which they might develop reasoned arguments about the problems and dilemmas of practice. However, this is no simple task. (Nicol, 1997, pp. 97–98)

Teaching about teaching should not be confused with modeling teaching practice. Teaching about teaching goes beyond the traditional notion of modeling, for it involves not just teaching in ways congruent with the expectations one has of the manner in which pre-service teachers might teach, it involves unpacking teaching in ways that gives students access to the pedagogical reasoning, uncertainties and dilemmas of practice that are inherent in understanding teaching as being problematic. It involves helping to make clear how the teaching approach purposely encourages learning and how learning influences teaching i...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction Developing a pedagogy of teacher education – What does that really mean?
• Part I Teaching about teaching
• Part II Learning about teaching
• References
• Index