What Is Needed for Better Professional Outcomes? Reflections of Pre-Service English Teachers on the Erasmus Student Traineeship Programme

Öz

There have been a large number of studies about mobility programmes; however, few studies have focused on traineeship programmes. Thus, this descriptive narrative study aimed to reveal the reflections of pre-service English teachers on their Erasmus student traineeship programme experiences via retrospection. The participants were four female English teachers who were chosen via convenience sampling. The participants were, in fact, in-service English teachers in Türkiye; however, they reflected upon their past experiences in the Erasmus student traineeship programme when they were pre-service teachers. The data were collected via semi-structured, online interviews, and analysed according to the steps of conventional content analysis. The participants reported that they participated in the programme to benefit from travelling opportunities, practice teaching skills, and improve English speaking skills. Although the participants shared some cultural, linguistic, and personal contributions, the professional contributions were reported to be weak, and teaching expectations were partially met. They attributed the mismatch between their expectations and experiences to the lack of support of their sending institutions, insufficient amount of grant, limited duration of the programme, and language barrier.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• The Erasmus student traineeship programme
• English teacher education
• Professional development
• Descriptive narrative research

Daha İyi Mesleki Sonuçlar İçin Neye İhtiyaç Duyulmaktadır? İngilizce Öğretmen Adaylarının Erasmus Öğrenci Staj Programı Üzerine Düşünceleri

Öz

Hareketlilik programları hakkında çok sayıda çalışma yapılmıştır; ancak, staj programlarına odaklanan çok az çalışma vardır. Bu nedenle, bu betimleyici anlatı çalışması, dört İngilizce öğretmeni adayının Erasmus öğrenci staj programı deneyimleri hakkındaki düşüncelerini retrospektif olarak ortaya koymayı amaçlamıştır. Kolaycı örnekleme yoluyla seçilen dört kadın İngilizce öğretmeni çalışmaya katılmıştır. Katılımcılar Türkiye'de görev yapan hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerinden oluşmaktadır. Ancak, katılımcılar öğretmen adayı oldukları dönemde Erasmus öğrenci staj programındaki geçmiş deneyimleri hakkındaki düşüncelerini paylaşmışlardır. Veriler yarı yapılandırılmış, çevrim içi görüşmeler yoluyla toplanmış ve geleneksel içerik analizi adımlarına göre analiz edilmiştir. Katılımcılar, seyahat fırsatlarından yararlanmak, öğretim becerilerini uygulamak ve İngilizce konuşma becerilerini geliştirmek için programa katıldıklarını bildirmişlerdir. Katılımcılar ayrıca bazı kültürel, dilsel ve kişisel katkıları paylaşsalar da mesleki katkıların zayıf olduğunu ve öğretim beklentilerinin kısmen karşılandığını ifade etmişlerdir. Beklentiler ile deneyimler arasındaki uyumsuzluk, gönderen kurumlarının desteğinin olmamasına, yetersiz hibe miktarına, programın sınırlı süresine ve dil engeline bağlanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Erasmus öğrenci staj programı
• İngilizce öğretmeni eğitimi
• Mesleki gelişim
• Betimleyici anlatı araştırması

Kaynakça

1. Adams, W. C. (2015). Conducting semi-structured interviews. In K. E. Newcomer, H. P. Hatry, & J. S. Wholey (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 492–505). Jossey-Bass.
2. Altbach, P. G. & Teichler, U. (2001). Internationalization and exchanges in a globalized university. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(1), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/102831530151
3. Altıntaş, N. & Sarıçoban, A. (2023). The impacts of Erasmus+ on foreign language development. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 12(2), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.1034878
4. Aslan Özdemir, G. (2019). The effect of studying in elf context on Turkish Erasmus exchange students’ L2 English language proficiency development [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Kocaeli University.
5. Borm, J. (2020). Making mobility the norm-NORM. IO1 desk research report. Retrieved on August 10, 2023, from https://projects.uni-foundation.eu/norm/
6. Bryła, P. (2015). The impact of international student mobility on subsequent employment and professional career: A large-scale survey among Polish former Erasmus students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 633-641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.521
7. Chase, S. E. (2008). Narrative inquiry: Multiple lenses, approaches, voices. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials (pp. 57-94). Sage Publications.
8. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). Routledge.

9. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
10. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
11. Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W. E., Plano Clark V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236-264.
12. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 209–240). Sage.
13. Cuzzocrea, V., & Krzaklewska, E. (2023). Erasmus students’ motivations in motion: Understanding super mobility in higher education. Higher Education, 85(3), 571–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00852-6
14. Di Pietro, G. (2022). International internships and skill development: A systematic review. Review of Education, 10(2), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3363
15. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.
16. Erdem Mete, D. (2017). Turkish students’ Erasmus experiences: Challenge of facing the unknown. Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37, 141-152. https://doi.org/10.21497/sefad.328309
17. European Commission. (2014). The Erasmus impact study: Effects of mobility on the skills and employability of students and the internationalization of higher education institutions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/13031399-9fd4-11e5-8781-01aa75ed71a1.
18. European Commission. (2023). Erasmus+ programme guide, version 3. https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/erasmus-programme-guide.
19. Fernández Agüero, M. (2017). Erasmus mobility and the education of interculturally competent European teachers. Journal of Supranational Policies of Education, Extraordinario, 142-158. doi: https://doi.org/10.15366/jospoe2017.m1
20. Fidan, N. & Karatepe, Ç. (2021). How do Erasmus students evaluate their language learning experience abroad? Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 93, 51-72. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2021.93.3
21. Flander, A. & Korada, B. (2020). Do international traineeships have more impact on the development of cognitive, interpersonal and intrapersonal competences than study abroad? A case study of Slovene student perceptions of their competence development through their Erasmus mobility. Portuguese Journal of Social Science, 19(2&3), 155-187. https://doi.org/10.1386/pjss_00025_1
22. Floersch, J., Longhofer, J. L., Kranke, D., & Townsend, L. (2010). Integrating thematic, grounded theory and narrative analysis: A case study of adolescent psychotropic treatment. Qualitative Social Work, 9(3), 407-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010362
23. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
24. García-Siso, I. M., Peña, J. C. V., & Garrido, L. S. (2023). Self-reported impact of Erasmus+ mobilities on Sancti Petri students. In L. Daadaoui et al., (Eds.), Proceedings of the Erasmus Scientific Days 2022 (ESD 2022) (pp. 127–134). Series: Atlantis Highlights in Social Sciences, Education and Humanities. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-036-7_12
25. Gürel, E. & Aslan, B. (2022). Internationalizing teacher education: What is the Erasmus exchange program’s contribution in Turkey? Higher Education Studies, 12(1), 131-154. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v12n1p131
26. Hamilton, L., & Corbett-Whittier, C. (2013). Using case study in education research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
27. Hauerwas, L. B., Skawinski, S. F., & Ryan, L. B. (2017). The longitudinal impact of teaching abroad: An analysis of intercultural development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 202-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.009
28. Holicza, P. & Tóth, K. (2018). Erasmus student exchange: Key motivations and future expectations of participants. Retrieved on August 15, 2023, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325763530_Erasmus_Student_Exchange_Key_Motivations_and_Future_Expectations_of_Participants.
29. Hsieh, H. F. & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
30. Jacob, S. A., & Furgerson, S. P. (2012). Writing interview protocols and conducting interviews: Tips for students new to the field of qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 17(2), 1-10. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17/jacob.pdf
31. Jacobone, V. & Moro, G. (2015). Evaluating the impact of the Erasmus programme: Skills and European identity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(2), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.909005
32. Kayaoğlu, M. N. (2016). Reality of Erasmus through the eyes of students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, Special Issue for INTE, 315-320.
33. Kırkgöz, Y. (2016). Integrating study abroad curriculum in teacher education. In J. A. Rhodes & T. M. Milby (Eds.), Advancing Teacher Education and Curriculum Development Through Study Abroad Programs (pp. 177–197). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9672-3.ch010
34. Kondracki, N. L., Wellman, N. S., & Amundson, D. R. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34(4), 224–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1499-4046(06)60097-3
35. Lee, J. F. K. (2009). ESL student teachers’ perceptions of a short-term overseas immersion program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 1095–1104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.004
36. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
37. Lindgren, B. M., Lundman, B., & Graneheim, U. H. (2020). Abstraction and interpretation during the qualitative content analysis process. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 108, 103632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103632
38. Mackey, A. & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
40. Nedelcu, A. & Ulrich, C. (2014). Are we ready for international students? Our university as window and mirror. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 142, 90 – 96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.593
41. Nunan, D. & Bailey, K. M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research: A comprehensive guide. Heinle Cengage Learning.
42. Önen, S. (2017). An investigation into the experiences of Erasmus students. Hasan Ali Yücel Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14-1(27), 339-367.
43. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
44. Riessman, C. K. & Quinney, L. (2005). Narrative in social work: A critical review. Qualitative Social Work, 4(4), 391-412. https://doi.org/10.1177/147332500505864
45. Roy, A., Newman, A., Ellenberger, T. & Pyman, A. (2019). Outcomes of international student mobility programs: A systematic review and agenda for future research. Studies in Higher Education, 44(9), 1630-1644. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1458222
46. Sahin, M. (2008). Cross-cultural experience in preservice teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1777–1790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.02.006
47. Souto-Otero, M., et al. (Eds.) (2019). Erasmus+ higher education impact study, final report. Luxembourg:
48. Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved on August 15, 2023, from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/94d97f5c-7ae2-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
49. Temel, B. (2022). A qualitative case study of ELT pre-service teachers: Gains of study abroad and perceptions of ICC [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
50. Unlu, I. (2015). Teacher candidates’ opinions on Erasmus student exchange program. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(1), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.1.2176
51. Van Hoof, H. B. & Verbeeten, M. J. (2005). Wine is for drinking, water is for washing: Student opinions about international exchange programs. Journal of Studies in International Education, 9(1), 42-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315304271480
52. Vossensteyn, H., Beerkens, M., Cremonini, L., Besançon, B., Focken, N., Leurs, B., … de Wit, H. (2010). Improving the participation in the ERASMUS programme. Report prepared for the European Parliament, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Policy Department B: Structural and cohesion policies.