Close to practice research as a means of rethinking elements of student–teacher's classroom practice

Karen Blackmore, Jenny Hatley
{"title":"Close to practice research as a means of rethinking elements of student–teacher's classroom practice","authors":"Karen Blackmore, Jenny Hatley","doi":"10.1002/curj.262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores a form of classroom inquiry linked to postgraduate primary student–teachers’ education, whilst on practicum in England. The inquiry model is congruent with Stenhouse's’ notions of ‘teachers as researchers’ undertaking ‘systematic’ inquiry in a ‘naturalistic’ environment. Feldman further develops Stenhouse's conception into a definition of action research, where teachers come to a better understanding of their practice. The inquiry bases itself on the central tenants of close to practice (CtP), which is defined as research that: focuses on issues defined by practitioners as relevant to their practice and involves collaboration between people whose main expertise is research, practice, or both. As teacher educators, we evaluated the potential of CtP inquiry, by undertaking a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of sixteen student–teacher research reports. CDA revealed that several socio‐cognitive processes took place as a result of, student–teachers engaging in CtP research, including explorations of identity, beliefs and values and negotiation of power relationships and structures. Further analysis provided insights into Stenhouses' conceptualisation, firstly, how student–teachers committed to developing their understanding of the curriculum with respect to teaching design. Secondly, the findings resonate with student–teachers rejecting acting as ‘docile agents’ within existing structures and developing ‘pathways to emancipation and autonomy’. Thirdly, testimony revealed that student–teachers valued this mode of learning and developed critical attitudes to educational research. This study has clear implications for the design of initial teacher education programs and the continued professional development of teachers in England and potentially further afield.","PeriodicalId":93147,"journal":{"name":"The curriculum journal","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The curriculum journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.262","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores a form of classroom inquiry linked to postgraduate primary student–teachers’ education, whilst on practicum in England. The inquiry model is congruent with Stenhouse's’ notions of ‘teachers as researchers’ undertaking ‘systematic’ inquiry in a ‘naturalistic’ environment. Feldman further develops Stenhouse's conception into a definition of action research, where teachers come to a better understanding of their practice. The inquiry bases itself on the central tenants of close to practice (CtP), which is defined as research that: focuses on issues defined by practitioners as relevant to their practice and involves collaboration between people whose main expertise is research, practice, or both. As teacher educators, we evaluated the potential of CtP inquiry, by undertaking a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of sixteen student–teacher research reports. CDA revealed that several socio‐cognitive processes took place as a result of, student–teachers engaging in CtP research, including explorations of identity, beliefs and values and negotiation of power relationships and structures. Further analysis provided insights into Stenhouses' conceptualisation, firstly, how student–teachers committed to developing their understanding of the curriculum with respect to teaching design. Secondly, the findings resonate with student–teachers rejecting acting as ‘docile agents’ within existing structures and developing ‘pathways to emancipation and autonomy’. Thirdly, testimony revealed that student–teachers valued this mode of learning and developed critical attitudes to educational research. This study has clear implications for the design of initial teacher education programs and the continued professional development of teachers in England and potentially further afield.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将实践研究作为重新思考学生-教师课堂实践要素的一种手段
本文探讨了在英国实习期间与小学教师研究生教育有关的一种课堂探究形式。这种探究模式与斯滕豪斯提出的 "教师作为研究者 "在 "自然 "环境中进行 "系统 "探究的概念是一致的。费尔德曼将斯腾豪斯的概念进一步发展为行动研究的定义,即教师更好地了解自己的教学实践。这种探究以 "贴近实践"(CtP)为核心原则,其定义是:研究的重点是由实践者确定的与其实践相关的问题,并涉及主要专长是研究、实践或两者兼具的人员之间的合作。作为教师教育者,我们通过对 16 份学生-教师研究报告进行批判性话语分析(CDA),评估了 CtP 探究的潜力。批判性话语分析揭示了学生-教师参与 CtP 研究的若干社会认知过程,包括对身份、信仰和价值观的探索,以及对权力关系和结构的协商。进一步的分析为斯滕豪斯的概念化提供了见解,首先,学生教师如何致力于发展他们对教学设计方面的课程的理解。其次,研究结果表明,学生教师拒绝在现有结构中充当 "顺从的代理人",而是发展 "解放和自主的途径"。第三,研究结果表明,学生教师重视这种学习模式,并对教育研究持批判态度。这项研究对英国教师初始教育课程的设计和教师的持续专业发展有明显的启示,也有可能对更远的地方产生影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Toward a grammar of curriculum practice: Embracing new conceptions of curriculum and curriculum planning By Edmund C.Short, State University of New York Press. 2023. 160 pp. $33.95 (paperback). ISBN: 9781438493473 Rethinking student teachers' professional learning in Wales: Promoting reflection‐in‐action Development and evaluation of neuroscience lesson content to improve Key Stage 3 (11–14 year old) students' understanding of the early years in England Reclaiming accountability through collaborative curriculum enquiry: New directions in teacher evaluation Barriers to curriculum accessibility for students with visual impairment in general education setting: The experience of lower secondary school students in Senegal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1