FACILITATION FOR INDONESIAN PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ LEARNING DURING THE ENGLISH

Transcription

FACILITATION FOR INDONESIAN PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ LEARNING DURING THE ENGLISH
FACILITATION FOR INDONESIAN PRE-SERVICE
TEACHERS’ LEARNING DURING THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE PRACTICUM: WORK-INTEGRATED
LEARNING PERSPECTIVES
Rinjani Bonavidi
Work Integrated Learning (WIL)
==============
In a teacher education program, Work integrated learning (WIL)
involves pre-service teachers learning through school-related
activities that are planned for and assessed, e.g
•Classroom observation in schools
•Micro-teaching
•Role-play in professional interactions
•Practicum
Stages in WIL
================
Following Billett (2009 & 2011),
•Before practicum (prepare PSTs for school immersion)
•During practicum (maximize the available opportunities in the
practicum)
•After practicum (combine and reconcile both on- and off-campus
experiences through reflection and encourage long life learning.
(Billett 2009, 2011; Patrick et al. 2009; Brown 2010).
During practicum WIL
================
WIL helps maximize the available opportunities in the practicum
– Providing opportunities for PSTs to fully integrate workplace activities
into their learning to enrich them with practical, actual and authentic
knowledge and skills for their future teaching (Billett 2011a, 2011b,
2011c, 2009a; Choy & Delahaye 2011; Huq & Gilbert 2009)
Focus of during practicum WIL
====================
a) direct guidance from more experienced practitioners
b) sequenced and varied activities
c) engagement in pedagogic activities or interactions
d) effective peer interactions*
e) engagement as learners in workplace setting
(Billett 2009 & 2011)
Features of the practicum in the research context
================
•One practicum only
•8 weeks at start of fourth year (final year)
•Content area: English as an additional language (EAL)
•Advised by school teachers
•10-15 pre-service EAL teachers placed in one school (out of 30
PSTs)
Research questions
====================
• In what ways does the school-based teaching practicum facilitate
PSTs’ learning?”
a)
b)
c)
d)
experienced practitioners
sequenced and varied activities
facilitation for pedagogical activities or interactions*
facilitation for agentic learners
Research methodology
===================
• a qualitative case study
• participants
– 29 PSTs
– 4 university supervisors
– 6 mentors
• data source
– teaching practicum guidelines
– assessment booklet
Research methodology
===================
• data collection methods
– face to face group interviews (one interview for one participant)
– written responses after the interview (questionnaire)
• data analysis  using categories from Billett (2009, 2011).
Research Findings
WIL in the teaching practicum
====================
A. Experienced practitioners
•
Mentors, school principal, counselling teachers, university
supervisors
• Quantitatively insufficient *
• Qualitatively insufficient
• Low task support
• Average emotional support *
WIL in the teaching practicum
====================
A. Experienced practitioners *
Quantitatively
insufficient
Mentor
1:5
School Principal
Counselling
Teachers
Supervisors
1:30
1:30
1:30
(PSTs from 4
different edu. dept.)
(PSTs from 4
different edu. dept.)
(PSTs from 4
different edu. dept.)
WIL in the teaching practicum
======================
B. Sequenced and varied activities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Sufficient types of activities for PSTs to learn to teach and function as a
teacher
orientation and observation
teaching preparation
teaching practice
counselling services
school administration and management
• Lacking of activities enactment
No clear procedures to implement the intended activities
No monitoring and evaluation in the practicum conduct
WIL in the teaching practicum
=======================
C. Facilitation for pedagogical activities or interactions
• Pedagogical activities were not intentionally conducted
• discussion groups, student-led peer learning, group problem solving,
seminars, reflective learning logs, and weekly meetings were not
conducted
• Interactions
• Formal pedagogical interactions mostly between PST and mentor
• Informal pedagogical interactions mostly among peers
However the interactions were not intentionally facilitated, monitored or
evaluated
WIL in the teaching practicum
====================
D. Facilitation for agentic learners
• Since pedagogical activities were not intentionally conducted, and
the quality of interactions were not monitored and facilitated,
characteristics of being agentic learners were inadequately
encouraged.
Conclusion
=================
•
•
Sufficient types of core practicum activities were inadequately
enacted, which in turn, affected PSTs’ experiences and
learning during the practicum. Had pedagogical activities
been intentionally conducted, characteristics of being
agentic learners would have been effectively encouraged.
Thus:
a need for effective communication, mutual understanding
and collaborative partnership between the schools and
universities in designing and implementing the practicum for
PSTs’ effective learning.
Comments and feedback are most welcome
THANK YOU 