Examining Middle School Mathematics Student Teachers’ Post-Observation Conferences

Abstract

Teachingpracticum allows prospective teachers to use the theoretical and practical knowledge they have learned as a student. The conferences held with the participation of the cooperativeteachers,prospectiveteachers, and theirpeers that take place after each course, carry great importance for prospective teachers to develop their professional skills. This study aims to examine the conferences held after the practice courses in terms of type and content. Two conferences of 11 prospective teachers, who undertake teaching practicum in Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Department of Elementary Mathematics Education were analyzed through content analysis. It was observed that prospective teachers generally took into account the criticisms in the conferences after the first practice and took action to improve their second teaching session. The criticisms made in the second set of meetings were found to be more positive than the previous ones. Therefore, it can be said that post-conference evaluations of the prospective teachers contribute to their professional skills.

Keywords

• practicum
• prospective teachers’ reflections
• evaluation post-monitoring conferences

References

1. Acheson, K. A., & Gall, M.D. (1997). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers: Prospective and Inservice applications. John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2. Acheson, K. A. & Gall, M. D. (2003). Clinical supervision and teacher development: Prospective and inservice applications. John Wiley and Sons.
3. Arrendondo, D. E., & Rucinksi, T. T. (1998). Using structured interactions in conferences and journals to promote cognitive development among mentors and mentees. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 13(4), 300-327.
4. Baştürk, Ş. (2010). Matematik Öğretmen Adaylarının Uygulama Okullarında Anlattıkları Derslerin Niteliği [Character Of Mathematics Student Teachers’ Lecturing In The Schools ]. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi [Marmara University Ataturk Education Faculty Journal of Educational Sciences], 31, 57-68.
5. Bates, A. J., Drits, D., & Ramirez, L. A. (2011). Self-awareness and enactment of supervisory stance: Influences on responsiveness toward student teacher learning. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(3), 69-87.
6. Blanton, M. L., Berenson, S. B., & Norwood, K. S. (2001). Exploring a pedagogy for the supervision of prospective mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4, 177-204.
7. Borko, H., Mayfield, V. (1995) The roles of the cooperating teacher and university supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(5), 501–518.
8. Boz-Yaman, B., & Tarım, Ş. D. (2017). Matematik öğretmeni adaylarının mesleki gelişimlerine dair görüşleri [Opinions of Preservice Mathematics Teachers on Their Professional Development]. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Çukurova University Education Faculty Journal], 46(1), 1-38.

9. Chaliès, S., Ria, L., Bertone, S., Trohel, J., & Durand, M. (2004). Interactions between preservice and cooperating teachers and knowledge construction during post-lesson interviews. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(8), 765-781.
10. Clarke, A., Triggs, V., & Nielsen, W. (2014). Cooperating teacher participation in teacher education: a review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 84(2), 163–202.
11. Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). One piece of the whole: Teacher evaluation as part of a comprehensive system for teaching and learning. American Educator, 38(1), 4.
12. Darling-Hammond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L. (2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond, & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 390-441). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
13. Douglas, A. S. (2011). The different learning opportunities afforded student teachers in four secondary school subject departments in an initial teacher education school–university partnership in England. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(1), 93-106.
14. Emre-Akdoğan, E., & Yazgan-Sağ, G. (2019). Transformation of theoretical knowledge into instructional practice: A mathematics teacher's journey. Issues in Educational Research, 29(1), 55-69.
15. Eraslan, A. (2008). Fakülte-Okul İşbirliği Programı: Matematik Öğretmeni Adaylarının Okul Uygulama Dersi Üzerine Görüşleri [A Faculty–School Partnership Programme: Prospective Mathematics Teachers’ Reflections On School Practice Course]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [H. U. Journal of Education], 34, 95-105.
16. Erbilgin, E. (2014). Examining a program designed to improve supervisory knowledge and practices of cooperatives teachers. Teaching Education, 25(3), 261-293.
17. Fernandez, M. L., & Erbilgin, E. (2009). Examining the supervision of mathematics student teachers through analysis of conference communications. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(1), 93-110.
18. Frykholm, J. A. (1996). Pre-service teachers in mathematics: Struggling with the standards. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(6), 665–681.
19. Gibbons, L. K., & Cobb, P. (2017). Focusing on teacher learning opportunities to identify potentially productive coaching activities. Journal of teacher education, 68(4), 411-425.
20. Giebelhaus, C. R., & Bowman, C. L. (2002). Teaching mentors: Is it worth the effort?. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 246-254.
21. Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guy (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 548- 594). Macmillan
22. Grosser-Clarkson, D., & Neel, M. A. (2019). Contrast, commonality, and a call for clarity: a review of the use of core practices in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 71(4), 464–476.
23. Hoffman, J. V., Wetzel, M., Maloch, B., Greeter, E., Taylor, L., DeJulio, S., & Vlach, S. (2015). What can we learn from studying the coaching interactions between cooperating teachers and preservice teachers? A literature review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 53, 99–112.
24. Ibrahim, A. S. (2013). Approaches to supervision of student teachers in one UAE teacher education program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 38-45.
25. Kemmis, S., Heikkinen, H. L., Fransson, G., Aspfors, J., & Edwards-Groves, C. (2014). Mentoring of new teachers as a contested practice: Supervision, support and collaborative self-development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 154-164.
26. Klette, K., & Hammerness, K. (2016). Conceptual framework for analyzing qualities in teacher education: Looking at features of teacher education from an international perspective. Acta Didactica Norge, 10(2), 26-52.
27. Köksal, N. & Demirel, Ö. (2008). Yansıtıcı düşünmenin öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik uygulamalarına katkıları [The contributions of reflective thinking to pre-service teachers’ teaching practice]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [H. U. Journal of Education], 34, 189-203.
28. Kreis, A. (2019). Content-Focused Peer Coaching – facilitating student learning in a collaborative way. In T. Janík, I. M. Dalehefte, & S. Zehetmeier (Eds.), Supporting teachers: improving instruction. Examples of research-based in-service teacher education. Waxmann.
29. Kuran, K. (1992). Eğitim yüksekokulları programında yer alan uygulama ve staj çalışmalarının önemi ve işlevi. bu çalışmaların program açısından değerlendirilmesi. [The importance and function of practice and internship studies in the education colleges program. Evaluation of these studies in terms of the program]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [H. U. Journal of Education], 8, 291-300.
30. Leatham, K. R., & Peterson, B. E. (2010). Secondary mathematics cooperating teachers’ perceptions of the purpose of student teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(2), 99-119.
31. Lee, G. C., & Wu, C. C. (2006). Enhancing the teaching experience of pre-service teachers through the use of videos in web-based computer-mediated communication (CMC). Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(4), 369-380.
32. Lopez-Real, F., Stimpson, P., & Bunton, D. (2001). Supervisory conferences: An exploration of some difficult topics. Journal of Education for Teaching, 27(2), 161-173.
33. Lyle, S. (1996). The education of reflective teachers? A view of a teacher educator. Journal of Teacher Development, 5(2), 4-11.
34. Marcos, J. J. M., Miguel, E. S., & Tillema, H. (2009). Teacher reflection on action: What is said (in research) and what is done (in teaching). Reflective Practice, 10(2), 191– 204.
35. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd Ed). Sage.
36. Pajak, E. (2000). Approaches to clinical supervision: Alternatives for improving instruction (2nd ed.). Christopher Gordon.
37. Paker, T. (2008). Öğretmenlik uygulamasında öğretmen adaylarının uygulama öğretmeni ve uygulama öğretim elemanının yönlendirmesiyle ilgili karşılaştıkları sorunlar [Problems of Student Teachers Regarding The Feedback of University Supervisors and Mentors During Teaching Practice]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Pamukkale University Journal of Education], 23(23), 132-139.
38. Peterson, B. E., Williams, S. R., & Durrant, V. (2005). Factors that affect mathematical discussion among secondary student teachers and their cooperating teachers. New England Mathematics Journal, 36(2), 41-49.
39. Staub, F. C. (2004). Transforming educational theory into usable knowledge: A case of co-constructing tools for lesson design and reflection. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.), Quality of practice-oriented research in science education (pp. 41-52). Shaker.
40. Tang, S.Y.F., & Chow, A.W.K. (2007). Communicating feedback in teaching practice supervision in a learning-oriented field experience assessment framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1066-1085.
41. Thobega, M., & Miller, G. (2007). Supervisory behaviors of cooperating agricultural education teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(1), 64-74.
42. Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., & Stijnen, S. (2013). Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective. Educational Research Review, 9, 1-15.
43. Tsui, A. B. M., Lopez-Real, F., Law, Y. K., Tang, R., & Shum, M. S. K. (2001). Roles and relationships in tripartite supervisory conferencing processes. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 16(4), 322-344.
44. Valencia, S. W., Martin, S. D., Place, N. A., & Grossman, P. (2009). Complex Interactions in Student Teaching: Lost Opportunities for Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 304–322.
45. Vartuli, S., Snider, K., & Holley, M. (2016). Making it real: A practice-based early childhood teacher education program. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(5), 503-514.
46. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2003). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (3nd ed.). [Social science qualitative research methods]. Seçkin Yayıncılık.