Skip to Content
  • Clinical Practice
  • By our powers combined…

    February 19, 2015

    Sometimes there
    just aren’t
    enough great teachers
    to go around.

    Placing two, even
    three student teachers in a single classroom is one way that teacher prep
    programs are working around shortages of qualified cooperating teachers.

    But is this a good
    idea?

    We thought we
    might gain insight into the merits of this relatively new practice from a
    recent study, which we won’t name for reasons that will become quickly
    apparent. We assumed it would investigate whether “paired placements”
    (two student teachers in a single classroom) lead to demonstrable gains (or
    losses) in candidate skills. Apparently, as we too often discover in education
    research, what piques our interest bears no relation to teacher education’s
    interest.  

    So why write about
    it here? Because it reveals a lot about the current priorities in teacher
    education and helps to illustrate the deep divide between the issues which
    concern P-12 educators and the issues which concern teacher educators.
    Apparently, we can’t even agree on the questions we should be asking, let alone
    the answers.

    Rather than
    characterizing student teaching as an opportunity for an inexperienced teacher
    candidate to learn from a pro, the article promotes the perspective that such
    “hierarchical dispensation of wisdom” is less valuable than
    “shared inquiries” of the student teacher and mentor – meaning that
    the student teacher is there to both learn from and teach the mentor teacher. Apparently, the authors thought that when
    a cooperating teacher is up against not one but two student teachers,
    she might be more amenable to let the students be the teachers.

    The author’s interviews
    with the student teachers and mentor teachers in the study lead the author to
    three conclusions which we translate here.

    The report laments
    that unless mentors are willing to “challenge orthodoxies”
    (specifically, their own beliefs), they are able to resist the ideas of any
    number of student teachers. To which we respond, providing that mentors are
    effective teachers, shouldn’t student teachers believe that the purpose of the
    placement is to absorb instructional practices, not to challenge them? To
    practice and get feedback, however painful it may be, from an expert and not
    just a peer?

    (Note that because
    our comments pertain to the field and not the article or author, we haven’t
    identified either.)

    More like this