I fully share your remark -- even though my experience is from two environments different than yours: Switzerland and Greece...
I suspect that Blair, like Thatcher, is trying to reduce the influence that tutors at university have on what goes on in the classroom. From my experience, they tend to be more progressive in their views than most classroom teachers.
Teacher Training: Plumber's Apprenticeship?
Posted 09 February 2004 - 05:08 PM
Posted 09 February 2004 - 10:08 PM
Edited to remove the name of this GTP student
Edited by Carole Faithorn, 09 February 2004 - 10:30 PM.
Posted 09 February 2004 - 10:33 PM
I firmly believe the quality you get out of the process is dependent on the effort the school is prepared to make.
I do believe student teachers should have a more secure entitlement than this, and also suspect that the experience GTP's enjoy in your school is probably unusual.
Posted 04 March 2004 - 06:03 PM
To this end every teacher surely needs to be able to master a broad range of methods whether this be; classroom management, preferred learning styles, differentiation, subject knowledge etc. Just as when we teach our students history, this requires mastery of both skills and knowledge in order to develop understanding that can be applied to developing solutions (in our case classroom solutions, pedagogy).
I had, and still have many criticisms of the training I received, but it did provide me with the tools to reflect on my practice and thus continue to develop professionally. This has proved invaluable to me in my work as a history teacher, Head of Dept, mentor, senior manager and advisor.
Posted 05 March 2004 - 02:09 AM
The problem we are finding here with teacher trainees from Colleges, is that they are overloaded with theory, with very little preparation for the practicalities of teaching. The standard of trainees and graduates is abysmal. Nearly all bemoan a system in which they waste valuable time in endless irrelevant lectures on philiospohy they will never use.
My experience as a trainee came from a private provider where the focus came from learning through practical teaching experiences. I spend most of my time in a class with an associate teacher, but it was not their responsiblity to help me. We had highly qualified tutors who were on call at any time to come and watch us teach. Afterwards they would give us systematic one to one feedback.
The theoretical aspects were done in a co-opeartive learing environment with assignment based material. We were encouraged to think for ourselves and develop our own philosphies.
The whole course was standards based. I could not graduate until I demonstrated fluency in all the professional stadards provided by the National Qualifications authority. This included theories of learning and assessment. No one can qualify unless they show they can teach, however long that takes.
Personally I have never learned so much in one year (it took me five terms, or one and a bit years). It showed that university education lacks any real rigour at all. We all had to be graduates from university on entry to the course, so we certainly had the basis for comparison
My point is that this course was largely based on the practical aspects of teaching. I spent a lot of time in the classroom and with tutors and my peers in discussion and reflection on what had happened. This is how you learn to teach. I had enough on the theory to contiue this in my professional practice. I personally find educational theory fascinating and see it as a professional requirement to continue to develop my knolwedge in these areas.
As a new graduate though, it was more important that I could do more than survive in the classroom, I could actually teach as well.
I firmly believe a 70/30 approach is best. Largely practical, with some theory.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users