This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham] On: 21 March 2015, At: 11:47 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urqe20
What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn during a Field Experience a
Mary O'sullivan & Niki Tsangaridou
a
a
School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation , Ohio State University , Columbus , USA Published online: 26 Feb 2013.
To cite this article: Mary O'sullivan & Niki Tsangaridou (1992) What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn during a Field Experience, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63:4, 381-392, DOI: 10.1080/02701367.1992.10608760 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1992.10608760
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Research Qurt8r1yfor Exercl. . andSport
e 1992 bythe American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Vol. 63,No. 4, pp.381·392
What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn During a Field Experience
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Mary O'Sullivan andNiki Tsangaridou Earlyfield experienas and student teaming have a significant impact on the developmenl ofprospective teachers' perceptions of teaching and themselves as teachers (Dodds, 1989). The purposeof this study was to describe what happened to physicaleducation majuts during a secondary physicaleducation methodology course that included twofield experienas in which the undergraduates taught at least one lesson a day. Thefour research questionsthat guided the study were (a) What issuesdid the majors attend to as significant incidentsfrom their teaching, and did these issueschange during theirfield experiences'(b) What were the characteristics offield experience lessons theyperceived as sucassful7 (c) What were the characteristics offield experience lessons theyperceived as unsuccessful' and (d) What were the physicaleducation majors' conceptions ofteaching' Participants in the study were 39 junior-year physicaleducation teacher education majors. Data were collected using the criticalincident technique(Flanagan, 1954) and an open-ended, written questionnairethat was designed to encourage the majorsto reflect on various aspects oftheir teachingexperience. The questionnaireand criticalincidents were analyzed using an inductive analytical procedure and a series ofcategories developed from several readings ofstudents' writings. The teacher preparationprogram affected how these trainees defined and evaluated their teachingexperiences. In contrast to someofthe earlierUJO'rlc in physical education, the resultsindicated pupil learning, quality lesson planning to ensurepupil learning, and efficient lesson mana~ ment were majOT characteristics of successful lessons fOT these trainees. The trainees presented "theories ofknowledge"that emphasized technicalconcepts ofteaching with little attention to the socialOT ethicaldimensions oftheir worlc OT the content knowledge oftheirfield. Additional research is needed to examine appropriate programmaticeJJarts to help preseroia teachers reflect not only on teaching, learning, and schoolingas a technicalenterprise but also as a moral and ethical enterprise.
Key words: field experience, teaching, preservice teachers
R
esearch on how teachers learn to teach has become a major focus of research in teacher education (Doyle, 1985; Graham, 1991; Liston & Zeichner, 1991; Weinstein, 1989). Research on the role offield experiences in learning to teach has described its influence on the professional development of neophyte teachers as weak, contradictory, and ambiguous (Zeichner, 1986). Some scholars suggest field experiences have a significant impact on teacher learning (Armaline & Hoover, 1989; Ross, 1990). Others have suggested field experiences may not significantly alter the cumulative effects of anticipatory socialization during childhood because many teachers continue to teach as they were taught (Lawson, 1983; Lortie, 1975; Zeichner, 1986). It may even have a negative impact because during field experience student teachers become more negative, custodial, and authoritarian (Templin, 1979).
Submitted: July24, 1991 Revision accepted: May 7, 1992 Mary O'Sullivan is anassociate professor andNiki Tsangaridou is a doctoral candidate inthe School of Health, Physical Education andRecreation at the Ohio StateUniversity, Columbus.
ROES: December 7992
In recent years, several states have mandated additional field experiences in teacher education programs. Extended field experiences have been added to physical education teacher education programs to provide student teachers with more opportunities to develop effective teaching skills (Pieron & Cheffers, 1988; Taggart, 1988; Tinning, 1988). A few studies have explored the impact of field experiences and studen t teaching on preservice physical education teachers (Behets, 1990; Gusthart & Rink, 1983; Locke, 1984; Placek & Dodds, 1988; Templin, 1979, 1981). Templin (1979) suggested student teaching introduces the neophyte to the realities of education and serves as a miniapprenticeship in which a metamorphosis of the student teacher's teaching self may occur. In the same study Templin (1981) found thatstudentteachers become significantly more custodial and authoritarian following field experiencesand student teaching. Gusthart and Rink (1983) found that, although their undergraduate majors demonstrated an unusually high level of performance on teaching behaviors measured, some discrete teaching behaviors deteriorated when the trainees were confronted with more complex and demanding field experiences. Findings from studies that examined physical education student teachers' perceptions of effective teaching
387
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
during their field experience indicated physical education trainees focused attention on student control instead ofstudentlearning. Placek (1983) found trainees' perceptions of successful teaching revolved around pupils' participation, enjoyment, and learning. Student learning was viewed by both preservice and in service teachers "as relatively unimportant to their perceptions of success in teaching" (p. 49), as only one-third of the respondents viewed lack of learning as a reason for an unsuccessful lesson. Unsuccessful teaching incidents related almost exclusively to student misbehavior, and preservice teachers perceived they had no control over these circumstances. Arrighi and Young (1987) found preservice teachers' perceptions of effective teaching related I more to administrative or discipline-oriented issues rather than subject matter content, instructional method, or studentachievement. Success in teaching was related to positive pupil feedback and attitudes, and less attention was paid to improved skill performance. Schempp (1985) suggested physical education student teachers defined competence in teaching as the ability to control student behavior and incompetent teaching as the lack of such control. Competence had little to do with facilitating and cultivating learning. Studies of preservice and in service physical education teachers' decision-making processes (Bell, Barrett, & Allison, 1985; Housner & Griffey, 1985) support the notion that preservice teachers attend more to classroom management and focus their attention on ensuring children are busy, happy, and well behaved. There is little understanding ofhow preservice teachers' attitudes are formed and what happens to particular dispositions during time spent in field experiences and student teaching (Dodds, 1989). Several physical education researchers have argued that more attention be given to studying the nature of and the processes involved in developing personal conceptions of teaching. Many believe these factors strongly influence both teaching and learning activities (Dodds, 1985; Graber, 1989; Lawson, 1983; Solmon, Worthy, Lee, & Carter, 1991). While there is evidence that current undergraduate programs can change trainees' teaching behaviors with relative efficiency (Dodds, 1989), there is little knowledge ofhow other components oftheir teaching perspectives contradict or complement their training programs. Two premises guided the theoretical framework of this study. First, we believe that a shared vision of the ideal teacher must guide each teacher education program (Dodds, 1989; Graham, 1991). Second, understanding how field experiences and student teaching have an impact on the beliefs, values, and attitudes ofprospective teachers is crucial ifwe are to provide appropriate conditions to socialize trainees toward desired programmatic perspectives. The purpose of this study was to determine physical education majors' conceptions of the teaching-learning
382
process and their role as a teacher in that process. The specific subquestions addressed were (a) What issues did the majors attend to as significant incidents from their teaching, and did these issues change during their field experiences? (b) What were the characteristics of their lessons they perceived as successful? (c) What were the characteristics oftheir lessons they perceived as unsuccessful? and (d) What were their conceptions of teaching?
Method Subjects andSetting The 39 subjects in this study were junior physical education majors in a teacher education program at a major research university. They were enrolled in a secondary methods course, the second of three pedagogy courses before student teaching. The course included their first off-campus teaching field experience (Note 1). The methods course had two components, a theoretical, on-eampus component and two field experiences. The first field experience was during the first 5 weeks, when students practiced instructional and managerial skills by teaching a short instructional unit to groups of6 to 10 middle school students for four lessons over a 4-week period (each ofwhich was supervised). The second field experience was 15 days (3-4 hours each morning) in a secondary school during the last 3weeks of the term (7 of the 14 days were supervised by the instructor or a doctoral student). Both field experiences were integrated with a theory course that provided students opportunities to design instructional units for each setting. A separate grade for the field experience was based on demonstrated instructional and managerial skills developed from the knowledge base ofeffective teaching in physical education. The theory course (Note 2) included topics on American high schools, classroom management, safety, curriculum development, and instructional design as they related to physical education in secondary schools. Trainees completed critical incident (CI) reports and reflective assignments to evaluate what happened in the lesson. Two limitations of the study need to be highlighted. First, the written responses of the undergraduates to the critical incidents and the open-ended questionnaire reflect their beliefs and values about teaching at that time. The extent to which these viewswould change on completion of student teaching or on reentry to schools as certified teachers is unclear. Second, the degree to which the responses of the undergraduates were influenced by the fact that one of the researchers was also the course instructor is unclear. Students may have felt pressured to respond in ways that supported the philosophical perspectives of the instructor and/or the program. Efforts
ROES: December 1992
O·SullivBn Bnd TSBngBridou
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
were made to minimize this concern. Students were held accountable for completion of these assignments but given complete freedom as to the content of their comments and reflections. At the time theywrote the CIs, the subjects were unaware that they would be requested to volunteer their data. The students were not coerced (the percentage of their grade for CIs was less than 2%), and the researchers do not believe studentship was a significant factor in the content of responses to either the critical incident reports or the open-ended questionnaire. Students volunteered these data on completion of the course for the purposes ofthe study, and the studywas conducted in compliance with human subjects' policy at the institution.
Data Collection Figure 1 shows when and what data were collected. The critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954) was used to determine the nature of incidents the trainees perceived significant in their teaching and to examine their conceptions ofsuccessful and nonsuccessful teaching. During the first field experience the trainees were directed "to describe anything that happened during your experience today that you found particularly significant....When you have described the incidentfinish with the statement: This was significant because...." Following four lessons during this field experience, each student teacher wrote a CI describing what he or she perceived as a significant incident in that lesson. The second field experience occurred in a middle or high school, and the trainees solo taught one class each day and either solo taught or team taught a second class. During a halfdaydebriefing session on campus at the end of the experience, they wrote two CIs, describing a successful and unsuccessful incident from their teaching during the previous 14 days. A content analysis of the subjects' written responses from each ofthe six critical incidents was completed, and seven categories emerged from this process (Patton, 1980). The process of analysis began by reading and rereading the data until some common themes became evident. The inductively derived categories were (a) quality of instruction, (b) teacher's planning, (c) management and organization of the lesson, (d) general demeanor of the students toward the teacher or the lesson content, (e) success or failure of the students in achieving the goal of the lesson, (f) safety issues in the lesson, and (g) influence of peer observation on their teaching. All critical incidents were then coded separately by the researchers into one of the seven categories. Five discrepant cases were found. Following discussion between the researchers, each discrepant incident was categorized. To gather information on the trainees' conceptions of teaching, they were asked to complete an open-ended
ROES: December 1992
questionnaire on their views of effective teaching, teachers, and programming for secondary physical education during the debriefing session (see Figure 2). A series of categories similar to those developed by Arrighi and Young (1987) emerged from a content analysis of the questionnaires. Additional categories included professional support, general organization, and skill progression. The subcategory teacher professionalism included many elements in Arrighi and Young's personal characteristics category. Completion of the questionnaire was part of an in-elass assignment and did not have to be submitted to the instructor. Students were asked to volunteer both their CI forms and their questionnaires to the instructor at the end ofthe course. All questionnaires were anonymous, and all but one student made their completed forms available to the researchers. The subjects were not aware a request to volunteer their data would be made ofthem at the time they completed the CI forms and the questionnaire.
Results and Discussion Results and discussion are presented by research questions. The first research question dealtwith trainees' conceptions of significant incidents in their teaching across two field experiences. The second and third ques-
Figure 1. Procedures fordata collection. Week 1
Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week2
1lesson Critical Incidents Written
Week3
1lesson Critical Incidents Written
Week4
1lesson Critical Incidents Written Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
WeekS
1lesson Critical Incidents Written Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week6
Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week7 Week8
5-10lessons
Week9
5-10 lessons
Week 10
4-8 lessons
Critical Incidents Written Open-ended Questionnaire
3B3
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
tions dealt with the physical education majors' conceptions of successful and unsuccessful incidents in their teaching. The fourth question dealt with students' conceptions of effective teaching, programming, and teachers of secondary physical education. Focus of Trainees' WritingDuring Field Experience
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Thirty-nine trainees wrote 41 CIs for Lesson 1; 51 for Lesson 2; 50 for Lesson 3; 53 for Lesson 4; and 47 for the final debriefing session after the second field experience (some students wrote more than one incident). Of the 242 critical incidents written up, 23% (56) dealt with instructional aspects oftheir teaching (see Table 1). The students wrote about the significance ofchoosing apprc:r Figure 2. Open-ended questionnaire and directions for critical incident reportsfrom secondfield experience. Questionnaire Reflections on Your Field Experience Pleasetake sometime to complete thisform outlining yourthoughts onteachinginthe public schools.Respond to these questions using the experiences yougainedat yourschoolthese last 3 weeks. 1.
Whatare the elements that are mostimportant foran effective physical education program atthe secondaryschool?
2.
Describe the characteristics of an effective lesson you had. Whatwas itthat made it effective?
3.
Describe the characteristicsof a lessonyou had that did not go well (if you had such a lesson). Why do you think it was unsuccessful?
4.
Whatdoes it require to bean effective professional ina secondaryschool?
5.
Whatwas itthat mostsurprised you aboutschoolsduring this experience? (This refers to schools, teachers, students, or programs.)
6.
What advice would you give to a peer who was to begin the three week experience youhave justfinished?
priate critical cues to assist pupil learning, pace and variety in lesson presentation as an indicator of quality instruction, and the importance of progressions and corrective feedback in student learning. Examples of their writings follow: I thought a critical point was the fact that the amount ofinformation given to the students was minimal on how to perform the skills. (Sf #8, L2) (Note 3) When they [students] were instructed to design their own routines incorporating inversion, flight, rhythm, and height, they got a little confused. Although verbal definitions were given of what should be included, thatwas notsufficient....This was significant because it showed how vitally important visual demonstrations are to comprehension of material. (ST #27, L3) Aspects of teaching related to organizing and managing the lesson accounted for 21 % (50) of the critical incidents. These incidents had to do with timing a lesson to ensure adequate content coverage in allotted time, a difficult issue for these novices as the following example shows: Time management, I still have a big problem with it. I flew through the final ~ of my lesson and still had 20 minutes left in the lesson. (ST#26, L3) Coordinating efforts to team teach a group of children effectively was something these undergraduates underestimated as a significant component of wellorganized lessons. They expected it would be easier, as noted in the quote: The most critical incident of our lesson was our lack of ability to coordinate our teaching intentions with each other. At times we found ourselves cutting each other off when we were not finished with our part of the lesson. (ST#2, Ll)
Critics/Incidents Think back over the 3 weeks to a specific incident when you felt especially successful.'Describe the incident as best you can using the following categories: Describe what happened.
Rearranging groups when fewer children came to class and controlling the class were also causes for concern. Inability to adapt on their feet may be the main reason trainees highlighted management as a significant incident in their teaching. Several preservice teachers made comments similar to the following:
Why was it such a successful incident? Whatdoyouthink you learned mostfrom the incident? 'The same directions were provided to describe an unsuccessful incident
384
The biggest thing that I found most significant was the control problem. The students seemed to be extra hyper and not willing to listen to any rules. (ST #23, L3)
RDES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andrsangaridou
For these trainees, successful management related to successful implementation of gymnasium rules and routines to which students responded well and that allowed for easier time management. Issues related to planning accounted for 18% of the critical incidents written up by the undergraduates. The following quote described the impact of planning on their teaching. This lesson was fun. Everything went exactly as planned. This was significant because I learned how valuable a well written lesson can be. (ST #11, L1)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
I
Some differences in the focus of the undergraduates' attention emerged when the critical incidents were analyzed by lesson (see Table 1). Issues about pupil demeanor and quality of planning and instruction, prevalen t in the first lesson, were replaced by incidents describing teacher planning, management and organization, and student skill learning or lack of it in the fourth lesson of the first field experience. Thirty-two percent (13) of the incidents in Lesson 1 related to how students responded to them as teachers, whereas only 7% (3) were concerned that students learn as a consequence of this instruction. Those who wrote about students after the first two lessons did so from two distinct viewpoints. First, they were surprised at the students' low skill level despite interviewing the pupils prior to teaching.
Students were very well behaved and eager to participate. This surprised me because I was expecting the students to be much less receptive. (ST#27, Ll) By the end of the first experience, the focus of their writing shifted to their success in providing opportunity for skill learning. By the end of the second field experience, students focused their writing more on their planning (30%).
Characteristics of Lessons Perceived Successful Students were asked to describe successful incidents from their teaching (see Table 2). Quality ofinstruction was the most frequent indicator of successful lessons (28%). As an example one student teacher wrote of his partner's teaching: The lesson went well because B__ broke down the steps into parts thatwere manageable for the students. He spent the time necessary to get the students to understand and perform the steps correctly. Also the use of modem music really motivated the students to learn and perform. (ST#29, L2) Studentteachers' managementand organization skills (24%) were the second highest indicator of successful lessons. An example of this is seen in the following quote: I felt very good about teaching this lesson...one reason was I knew how much time I spent in getting ready for it. I made sure that I got there early in order to make all my measurements, to get the target made on the wall, as well as the taped lines on the floor....The drills worked out real well and the students enjoyed the modified games competing against the clock as well as each other. (ST #36, L4)
We were both highly surprised and unprepared by the low skill acquisition of3 of the 4 students. (ST#8, L2) Second, they underestimated the willingness and eagerness of these middle school students to participate in instructional tasks they had planned. They expected them to resist their efforts to teach and were surprised by the students' enthusiasm.
Tablet Frequency and percentage of critical incidents by category and by lesson Final
Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
F
0/0
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Instruction Planning Management andOrganization Student Demeanor Skill Development Safety/Space Observe Peer
8 10 6 13 3 1 0
19 24 15 32 7 2 0
19 6 13 7 3 1 2
37 12 25 14 6 2 4
15 7 8 3 13 2 2
30 14 16 6 26 4 4
8 8 10 9 13 5 0
15 15 18 17 24 9 0
6 14 13 5 8 1 0
13 30 28 11 17 2 0
56 45 50 37 40 10 4
23 18 21 15 16 4 2
Total"
41
100
51
100
50
100
53
100
47
100
242
100
Categories
Total
"There are more than39 critical incidents per lesson, as some of the 39trainees included more than 1 critical incidentfor a lesson.
RaES: December 1992
385
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
Planning was the third most frequent indicator of a successful lesson (21 %), as this teacher noted: The lesson was well organized and well planned. The students were greatly enthused and wanted to participate ....Demonstrations were well provided and critical elements shown correctly. (ST#19,1.3)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Examples presented below show the undergraduates' concern for student skill learning was more prominentat the end ofan instructional unit than at any other time during their teaching. Th'e first of the significant factors today was the post-test, Injust4 meetings thatwe have had Ifelt that the improvementwas outstanding....Having seen the improvement through the post-test I felt much more confident that when we got to games the skills would be used effectively and under control. (ST #14, L4)
lesson planning was associated with student organization and class operation. According to Schempp (1989) the undergraduates considered that "planning was necessary so that students were kept active (not necessarily learning anything) and classroom time was not wasted" (p. 25). It should be noted that Schempp's subjects were student teachers and may have been more removed from the teacher preparation program.
Trainees'lndicators of Unsuccessful Teaching Experience We categorized 123 incidents describing aspects of unsuccessful lessons (see Table 3). Trainees' failure to achieve the instructional goal for the lesson (23%) was the most frequently cited reason for an unsuccessful lesson. They pointed out that Today we worked on the forearm pass. The students demonstrated the task adequately but only one girl met our instructional goal. (ST #1, L2)
I felt successful when the students performed the skills I was teaching. (ST #33, 1.5) These results do not support Placek's (1983) and Schempp's (1989) work on what preservice teachers and student teachers perceived as successful teaching in physical education. Placek (1983) found teachers defined success according to student enjoyment, student participation, and student misbehavior. In her study of preservice teachers, they equated success with student enjoyment and participation as much as with student learning. She concluded that "our goals as teacher educators to produce teachers who are concerned not only with student enjoyment, but also student learning, may be fantasy" (Placek, 1983, P: 55). Schempp (1989) found pupils' participation and enjoyment were the most important measures of teaching success. For the students in Schempp's study,
One of the less positive incidents was the lack of specific feedback. The students could have progressed through the steps more quickly if more feedback had been given. (ST #29, L2) The second indicator of unsuccessful lessons was student demeanor (22%). The following comment was an example from this category: T was off task the whole time this morning. He did not want to participate in the drill. (ST #6, L3) Inappropriate or inadequate planning (17%) and weak management and organizational strategies (17%) were other major reasons attributed to their unsuccessful lessons (see Table 3). Students wrote:
Table2. Trainees' indicators of successful lessons Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
Final"
Total
Categories
F
o/a
F
0/0
F
o/a
F
o/a
F
o/a
F
o/a
Instruction Planning Management andOrganization Student Demeanor Instructional Goal Safety/Space Observe Peers
7 8 1 5 0 1 0
32 36 4 23 0 4 0
14 2 11 2 0 1 0
47 7 37 7 0 3 0
10 3 6 3 3 1 0
38 11 4 11 11 4 0
2 7 7 1 4 4 0
8 28 28 4 16 16 0
2 6 5 2 8 0 0
9 26 9 35 0 0
35 26 30 13 15 7 0
28 21 24 10 12 5 0
22
100
30
100
26
100
25
100
23
100
126
100
Total
22
"These critical incidents were written following completion of the 14-day field experience. Students were asked to describe a successful and unsuccessful incident
386
ROES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
I thought that I could have been more organized and enthused about my teaching. I could have placed more time into planning. (ST #19, L2)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
There was lot of time spent on management to set up the different equipment. This cut down on activity time. The students were standing around not doing anything. This was significant because it shows that it's important to get things set up quickly so you can have the kids more active. (ST #16, L3) A separate analysis ofthe end ofunit responses shows a different pattern. In the first field experience (class sizes of ~10 pupils), failure to have pupils demonstrate the goal of the lesson was cited frequently as an indicator of unsuccessful lessons. However, in teaching classes ranging in size from 20 to M pupils in the second field experience, no student teacher cited failure to achieve the goal of the lesson as a reason their lessons were unsuccessful. The data suggest the trainees were more concerned about their managerial and instructional skills than how students were responding to that instruction. Kids were out ofcontrol because I had explained too much and the drills were very boring. (ST#21,1.5) Unlike students in Placek's (1983) study, 73% of these trainees attributed unsuccessful lessons to their lack of instructional and managerial skills, whereas only 22% indicated the student was the source of their unsuccessfullessons. Once the students were divided into two teams for group routine practice, activity time almost ceased for one group. The reason I believe this last point is significant is due to the fact that S and I did not give a demonstration of
what was expected of them. I feel that we were totally at fault for the somewhat inactive group's lack of participation and understanding. (ST #28, L3) In con trast with these results, Placek (1983) found that 65% of the teachers attributed unsuccessful teaching to problems of student behavior over which they believed they had no control, whereas 35% attributed an unsuccessful lesson to something over which they had control, such as management, instruction, and planning. The findings from this study suggest that undergraduates expected and focused on student learning during their field experience. Their undergraduate curriculum articulated such a philosophical position, and university and school-based educators with whom they worked shared this view. The trainees defined and evaluated successful and unsuccessful teaching experiences using criteria similar to qualities espoused in their teacher preparation program. It could be suggested that their writings were evidence of studentship (Graber, 1989). Given our knowledge of the students involved, the efforts made to create a "safe" environment in which to communicate their ideas and beliefs and the fact that the con ten t of their writings was not related to their grades, we believe the critical incidents are examples of the undergraduates' values and beliefs and not studentship behavior.
Conceptions of Teaching by Undergraduate Majors Physical education undergraduates were asked to respond in writing to six open-ended questions during the debriefing session following their 14-dayfield experience to determine their ideas, beliefs, and values about teaching physical education (see Figure 2). They were asked to describe elements of an effective secondary school physical education program and an effective sec-
Tabl. 3. Trainees' indicators of unsuccessful lessons Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
Final"
Total
F
0/0
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Instruction Planning Management and Organization Student Demeanor Instructional Goal Safety/Space Observe Peers
1 4 5 10 5 0 0
4 16 20 40 20 0 0
4 4 3 5 3 0 2
19 19 14 23 14 0 9
5 4 2 0 11 0 2
21 16 8 0 46 0 8
6 1 3 9 9 1 0
21 3 10 31 31 3 0
4 8 8 3 0 1 0
17 33 33 12 0 4 0
20 21 21 27 28 2 4
16 17 17 22 23 2 3
Total
25
100
21
100
24
100
29
100
24
100
123
100
Categories
"These critical incidents were writtenfollowing completion of the 14-day field experience. Students were asked to describe a successful andunsuccessful incident.
ROES: December 1992
387
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
ondary school physical education teacher and characteristics of effective and ineffective teaching in physical education. We gathered from ~9 undergraduates 100 descriptors on effective programs, 77 descriptors on effective professionals, 70 descriptors ofeffective teaching, and 47 descriptors of ineffective teaching (see Table 4). Program. A third of the descriptors of effective physical education programs described components of the instructional system (see the total for all ofthe subcatego-
ries ofTeaching Strategies in Table 4), a third related to managementand organizational issues, and a third to the combined categories of professional support factors (17%), personal characteristics (1~%), and knowledge of content (4%). The subcategory of the Organization/Management section, general organization, received the greatestnumber of responses (20%). Undergraduates described the establishment and maintenance ofrules and routines as a critical element of effective programs stating:
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Table 4.Characteristics of effectivesecondary physicaleducation programs,teachers, and effectiveand ineffective teaching as perceived by undergraduate majors
Categories TeachingStrategies Planning Feedback Student learning/activity time Evaluation Individualization Observation Skills Flexibility ClearGoaVDemonstratiorVlnstruction Skill progression
Subtotal Management/Organization Generalorganization Student control Record keeping Communication Student motivation Safety Equipment
Subtotal Content Sport knowledge Skill knowledge
Subtotal Personal Characteristics Fitness Professionalism
Subtotal Support Administration Faculty Parents Equipment/Facilities
Subtotal Total
388
Program F %
Teacher F 0/0
Effective Teaching Characteristics F %
Ineffective Teaching Characteristics F %
11 2 8 2 2 0 2 5 1 33
11 2 8 2 2 0 2 5 1
9 2 4 0 3 0 7 0 0
12 3 5 0 4 0 9 0 0
16 1 14 0 1 1 2 B 4
23 1 20 0 1 1 3 8 6
8 0 5 1 1 0 3 8 2
17 0 11 2 2 0 B 18 4
33
25
32
45
64
28
59
20 8 0 3 2 0 0
20 8 0 3 2 0 0
9 14 0 7 0 0 0
12 18 0 9 0 0 0
14 7 3 0 7 0 0
5 B 0 1 4 0 0
11 13 0 2 8 0 0
33
33
30
39
10 5 2 0 5 0 0 22
32
76
34
4 0
4 0
4 3
5 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4
4
7
9
0
0
0
0
1 12
1 12
0 15
0 19
0 3
0 4
0 3
0 6
73
73
75
79
3
4
3
6
5 4 2 B
5 4 2 B
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
77
77
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
77
100
70
100
47
100
RDES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Having an effective management strategy, including the development of rules, routines, and expectations which creates an environment conducive for learning, is the most vital aspect towards building upon an effective PE program. (ST#12, Ql) Other trainees described good management skills, such as getting students to transition quickly into activity and minimizing management time, as specific ways a physical education program demonstrated its effectiveness. Professionalism of teachers in a program was the second most frequently cited characteristic of effective programs (12%). They defined professional teachers as those who maximize student participation, have high clear expectations for students, and incorporate fun into activities while still emphasizing skill development (ST #39, Ql) Planning (11%), in terms of statements such as "thoughtful lesson planning, " "proper planning for various situations," and "well-prepared lesson plans," was cited by undergraduates as important to an effective program. However, planning for individual lessons and not program or unit planning was the focus of their comments. Teacher. Characteristics of an effective secondary school physical educator cited were organization and management skills, teaching skills, personal characteristics, and content knowledge (see Table 4). To these undergraduates, professional physical educators were described as "enthusiastic," "spent time with students in extracurricular activities," "gave studen ts the feeling they wanted to be there, " "showed patience, " "motivated students," "had good rapport with students," and "showed caring and a willingness to improve." Control of student behavior was cited by 35% of the majors as a characteristic of an effective physical educator. Control of students was operationalized as "being a good disciplinarian," "having control over student behavior, " and "knowing how to deal with discipline." The establishment and enforcement of rules for behavior were skills perceived necessary to establish and maintain "control. " Twelve percent of the undergraduates cited planning and general organization as significant characteristics of an effective physical educator. Planning meant a teacher had "good planning skills," "was thoroughly prepared," and "had good lesson plans." No description of the purpose or substance of these plans was provided in their responses. Effective Teaching. The third question addressed characteristics of effective teaching. In describing character-
RQES: December 1992
istics ofsuccessful teaching in physical education, almost 65% of the undergraduate responses addressed aspects ofinstruction, whereas 32% addressed management and organization variables (see Table 4). The undergraduates described specific characteristics of effective teaching as lesson planning (23%), student learning as observed through high-activity time (20%), and general organization. The following statements include characteristics ofeffective teaching described by most trainees:
An effective lesson for me consisted of routines which had been followed in previous lessons. For example, beginning class with the same warm-up every day, learning the new stroke according to a method used in a past lesson, and performing the drills which had been performed in the past and were known by name created quick transition and high activity. For me, the highly structured class was the most effective. (ST #12,Q2) Much of the literature on conceptions of a good teacher indicates that teacher education students "conceive of teaching primarily in terms of positive interpersonal relationships" (Weinstein, 1989, P: 58) and their descriptions of a good teacher emphasize "social and affective variables such as caring and concern for children, ability to relate to students, and enthusiasm while minimizing the academic aspects ofteaching" (Weinstein, 1989, p. 58). Book, Byers, and Freeman (1983) found student teachers were not concerned about student achievement and concluded that student teachers perceived teaching as "an extended form of parenting, about which there is little to learn other than through instincts and own experiences as a child in the network" (p, 10). The trainees in this study described the importance ofcaring, patience, and creativity (professionalism category) as characteristics of a good teacher and good teaching, but they emphasized the technical aspects of teaching (instructional and managerial skills) rather than the social and affective variables. Ineffective Teaching. In describing characteristics of unsuccessful teaching, 59% of the subjects' responses related to teaching strategies, 34% to organization, and 6% to personal characteristics (see Table 4). The undergraduates described specific characteristics ofin effective teaching related to lesson planning (17%), quality of instruction (17%), and student control (13%). Comments such as "the students got out of control," "bad demonstrations and explanations," and "skills too difficult for students' level" were reasons cited for ineffective teaching. The trainees' responses indicated instructional and managerial strategies were central in accomplishing student learning. This suggests these trainees realized that management strategies should be implemented for instruction to occur and instruction should be sufficiently
3B9
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
well constructed to provide student learning. Effective teaching for these subjects had student learning as a primary goal. This suggests that quality early field experience can help prospective teachers integrate theory and practice and encourage an awareness of and reflection on their own teaching philosophy. Such development does not occur automatically. Rather, appropriate assignments and experiences can stimulate prospective teachers' intellectual curiosity about the teaching/learning process.
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Conclqsions and Observations Two major conclusions are drawn from this study. The first is that teacher education programs can train teachers to have student learning as a primary goal. This is not something that happens in one course or with one faculty member. Such training takes time and needs to be repeated at severaljunctures in the program. Ross (1990, p. 97) suggested that Enabling preservice teachers to be reflective requires the development ofa clearlyarticulated program of study. Therefore, helping students develop this ability must be viewed as the task of a teacher education program, not of individual faculty members. While most efforts at developing the reflective abilities of teachers have occurred within specific courses or program components, faculty at a few institutions have attempted to evolve a programmatic commitment to the development of reflection. The findings of this study provide evidence that the goals of a teacher education program that espouses a shared vision, reflective inquiry, and sequenced programmatic efforts to study teaching in the naturalistic setting can produce prospective physical education teachers who show concern about pupil learning and their teaching effectiveness in learning settings. Effective teaching and thoughtful reflection can be developed with thoughtful practice and supervision under appropriate conditions. Prospective teachers who participated in this investigation were conscious of their ability and responsibility to influence students' learning. This was very much a reflection of the philosophical perspective of their program. A second conclusion from the study is that wellconstructed early field experiences can provide opportunities for preservice teachers to explore their understandings of teaching, schooling, and the role of the professional teacher in the education of children and youth. The teacher preparation program these prospective teachers attended did nothing magical to them.
390
Rather, it provided them with a knowledge base about good teaching as well as appropriate conditions and supervision, which enabled them to practice and reflect on this knowledge. A dimension of the teacher education program that appeared to positivelyaffect the developmentofpreservice students' perspectives (Graham, 1991) was the collaborative efforts and shared vision about the purposes and goals of this experience by the university and schoolbased personnel. This study suggests that teacher educators can be more optimistic that future teachers can provide meaningful education to children when future teachers are exposed to a meaningful and cohesive professional preparation program. Two additional observations are warranted. First, what was consistently absent from responses to the critical incidents and the open-ended questionnaireswas any attention or concern for skill knowledge or content knowledge as a significant component ofeffective teaching. Recentworkon teacher reflection by Sparks-Langer, Colton, Pasch, and Starko (1991) suggests this lack of attention to the subject matter is not unique to physical education. They found that much more time was spent considering "how to make content interesting than how to make it clear, or whether it was worthwhile" (SparksLangeretal., 1991,p. 13). Why did the students attend so little to knowledge of content? Sparks-Langer and her colleagues suggested undergraduates lack familiarity with content beyond the introductory level and believe that content is so predetermined that reflection is of little value. Given growing trends in teacher education programs to deemphasize the subject matter content of physical education, and devote less and less time to physical activities (Corbin & Eckert, 1990), we should be increasingly alarmed about the basis on which prospective teachers will choose curricular offerings at the secondary level and how these choices will reflect on the pedagogical content knowledge to teach that activity. Second, the writings of the students reflected a dominant message of the course and the teacher education program in which they participated. The course provided preservice teachers a theoretical knowledge base about effective managerial and instructional practices, and this was reflected in the nature of their responses. Their reflection, however, was entirely technical in nature. It involved little of what Liston and Zeichner (1991) and others have described as reflection on the social, ethical, and moral dimensions of teaching, although these were also shared goals of the faculty. Even though some readings, discussions, and lectures were provided on the social and moral dimensions of teaching, none of their writings about teaching questioned or considered the political, social, or ethical dimensions of their work with students in particular or schooling in general. As these were trainees' first experiences teaching youth in schools, their tendency to reflect almost
RDES: December 1992
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
O'Sullivan andTsangsridou
exclusively on technical teaching skills is understandable given what we know about preservice teachers' concern for survival and focus on selfrather than students (Fuller & Bown, 1975). These preservice teachers showed great concern for students' involvement in activity and success in achieving goals of their lessons than earlier work in physical education (Arrighi & Young, 1987; Placek, 1983; Schempp, 1985) or general education has indicated (Book et al., 1983; Calderhead, 1989; Weinstein, 1989). The dichotomy among the technical, academic, and social!ethical concerns of teaching does not exist in the real work of teaching and learning, so it behooves us to find ways to encourage trainees to reflect more critically on all aspects of their J teaching, even from their first experiences in learning to teach. Additional research is needed to examine appropriate programmatic efforts that can help preservice teachers reflect not only on the teaching, learning, and schooling process as a technical and academic enterprise, but also as a moral and ethical enterprise.
References Armaline, W., & Hoover, R. (1989). Field experience as a vehicle for transfonnation: Ideology, education, and reflective practice. Journal ofTeacherEducation, 40, 42-48. Arrighi, M., & Young J. (1987). Teacher perceptions about effective and successful teaching. Journal of Teaching in Ph~calEducation, 6, 122-1M. Behets, D. (1990). Concerns of preservice physical education teachers. JournalofTeachinginPh~caIEducation,10, 66-75. Bell, R., Barrett, K., & Allison, P. (1985). What preservice physical education teachers see in an unguided, early field experience. Journal ofTeaching in Physical Education, 4,8190. Book, C., Byers,j., &Freeman, D. (1988). Student expectations and teacher education traditions with which we can and cannot live. Journal ofTeacherEducation, 34, 9-18. Calderhead,j. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 5, 4~51. Corbin, C., & Eckert, H. (Eds.). (1990). The evolving undergraduate majuro Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Dodds, P. (1985). Delusions of "worth-it-ness": Field experiences in elemen tary physical education teacher education programs. In H. Hoffman &j. Rink (Eds.), Ph~caleduca tion professional preparation: Insights and furesights (pp. 90109). Reston, VA: AAHPERD. Dodds, P. (1989). Trainees, field experiences, and socialization into teaching. In T.J. Templin & P. G. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ationinto ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 81104).Indianapolis,UN:Benchmar~
Doyle, W. (1985). Learning to teach: An emerging direction in researchon preservice teachereducation.Journal ofTeacher Education, 36, 81-82. Flanagan, j. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 827-M8.
ROES: December 1992
Fuller, F., & Bawn, D. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education: NSSE 74th year IJook (pp. 25-52). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Graber, K. (1989). Teaching tomorrow's teachers. Professional preparation as an agent of socialization. In T. j. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ation into ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 59-80). Indianapolis,UN:Benchmar~
Graham, K. (1991). The influence of teacher education on preservice development: Beyond a custodial orientation. Quest, 43, 1-19. Gusthart, L, & Rink, j. (1988). Teaching behavior through various levels of field experiences. Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 3, 82-46. Housner, L., & Griffey, D. (1985). Teacher cognition: Differences in planning and interactive decision making between experienced and inexperienced teachers. Research Q!J.arterly fur Exercise and Sport, 56, 45-58. Lawson, H. (1988). Toward a model of teacher socialization in physical education: The subjective warrant, recruitment, and teacher education (Part 1). Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 2(8), ~16. Liston, D., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Teachereducationandthesocial conditionsofschooli.ng.NewYork,NY:Routledge,Chapman, and Hall. Locke, L (1984). Research on teaching teachers: Where are we now? Journal ofTeaching in Physical Education, Monograph
2. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Patton, M. (1980). QJ.wlitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage. Pieron, M., & Cheffers,j. (1988). Sportscima studies: &search in sport pedagogy: Empirical anaijtical perspective. Schomdorf, Gennany: Karl Hofmann. Placek, j. (1988). Conceptions of success in teaching: Busy, happy, and good? In T.j. Templin &J. K. Olson (Eds.), Teaching in ph~cal education (pp. 4~56). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Placek, j., & Dodds, P. (1988). A critical incident study of preservice teachers' beliefs about teaching success and nonsuccess. Research QJ.wrterlyfur Exerciseand Sport, 59, 851· 858. Ross, D. (1990) Programmatic structures for the preparation of reflective teachers. In R. Clift, W. R. Houston, & M. D. Pugach (Eds.), Encouraging refkctive practice in education (pp. 97-118). New York: Teachers College Press. Schempp, P. (1985). Becoming a better teacher: An analysis of the student teaching experience. Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 4, 158-166. Schempp, P. (1989). Apprenticeship-of-observation and the development of physical education teachers. In T. j. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ation into ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 1~S8). Indianapolis, UN: Benchmark. Solmon, M., Worthy, T., Lee, A., & Carter,j. (1991). Teacher role identity ofstudent teachers in physical education: An interactiveanalysis.JournalofTeachinginPhysicaIEducation,
10, 188-209. Sparks-Langer, G., Colton, A., Pasch, M., & Starko, A. (1991). Promoting cognitive, critical, and narrative rrfkction. Paper
391
O'Sullivan and Tsangaridou
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL Taggart, A (1988). The systematic development of teaching skills: A sequence of planned pedagogical experiences. Journal ofTlaching in Ph'JSical Education, 8, 7S-86. Templin, T. (1979). Occupational socialization and the physical education student teacher. &starch QJuJrlerly, 50, 482-
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
49l$.
Templin, T. (1981). Student as socializing agent, Journal of Tlachingin PhysicalEducation, 1,71-79. Tinning, R. (1988). Student teaching and the pedagogy of necessit:f.JournalofTlachinginPh'JSicalEducation, 7, 82-89. Weinstein, C. (1989). Teacher education students' preconce}>" tions of teaching. Journal ofTlacher Education, 40, 5~. Zeichner, K. (1986). The practicum as an occasion for learning to teach. SouthPacifi€JournalofTeacherEducalion, 14(2),1127.
Notes 1. Prior to this course the students have had a series of classroom observations in schools, two clinical experiences on campus where they taught one to two 5-7-year-ld children aquatics, gymnastics, and fundamental motor skills, and completed a series ofpeer teaching assignments practicing discrete managerial and instructional skills. 2. The theory course metdaily for a total ofl6 hours a week for 7 weeks. The remaining three weeks were spent completing the field experience in public schools. l$. This refers to part of a critical incident written by Student 8 following their second teaching lesson.
Authors' Notes The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Dr. P. Dodds and two anonymous reviewers for &search QJJ.aTterly fur Exercise and Spurt for their comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.
392
ROES: December '991
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urqe20
What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn during a Field Experience a
Mary O'sullivan & Niki Tsangaridou
a
a
School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation , Ohio State University , Columbus , USA Published online: 26 Feb 2013.
To cite this article: Mary O'sullivan & Niki Tsangaridou (1992) What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn during a Field Experience, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63:4, 381-392, DOI: 10.1080/02701367.1992.10608760 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1992.10608760
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Research Qurt8r1yfor Exercl. . andSport
e 1992 bythe American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Vol. 63,No. 4, pp.381·392
What Undergraduate Physical Education Majors Learn During a Field Experience
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Mary O'Sullivan andNiki Tsangaridou Earlyfield experienas and student teaming have a significant impact on the developmenl ofprospective teachers' perceptions of teaching and themselves as teachers (Dodds, 1989). The purposeof this study was to describe what happened to physicaleducation majuts during a secondary physicaleducation methodology course that included twofield experienas in which the undergraduates taught at least one lesson a day. Thefour research questionsthat guided the study were (a) What issuesdid the majors attend to as significant incidentsfrom their teaching, and did these issueschange during theirfield experiences'(b) What were the characteristics offield experience lessons theyperceived as sucassful7 (c) What were the characteristics offield experience lessons theyperceived as unsuccessful' and (d) What were the physicaleducation majors' conceptions ofteaching' Participants in the study were 39 junior-year physicaleducation teacher education majors. Data were collected using the criticalincident technique(Flanagan, 1954) and an open-ended, written questionnairethat was designed to encourage the majorsto reflect on various aspects oftheir teachingexperience. The questionnaireand criticalincidents were analyzed using an inductive analytical procedure and a series ofcategories developed from several readings ofstudents' writings. The teacher preparationprogram affected how these trainees defined and evaluated their teachingexperiences. In contrast to someofthe earlierUJO'rlc in physical education, the resultsindicated pupil learning, quality lesson planning to ensurepupil learning, and efficient lesson mana~ ment were majOT characteristics of successful lessons fOT these trainees. The trainees presented "theories ofknowledge"that emphasized technicalconcepts ofteaching with little attention to the socialOT ethicaldimensions oftheir worlc OT the content knowledge oftheirfield. Additional research is needed to examine appropriate programmaticeJJarts to help preseroia teachers reflect not only on teaching, learning, and schoolingas a technicalenterprise but also as a moral and ethical enterprise.
Key words: field experience, teaching, preservice teachers
R
esearch on how teachers learn to teach has become a major focus of research in teacher education (Doyle, 1985; Graham, 1991; Liston & Zeichner, 1991; Weinstein, 1989). Research on the role offield experiences in learning to teach has described its influence on the professional development of neophyte teachers as weak, contradictory, and ambiguous (Zeichner, 1986). Some scholars suggest field experiences have a significant impact on teacher learning (Armaline & Hoover, 1989; Ross, 1990). Others have suggested field experiences may not significantly alter the cumulative effects of anticipatory socialization during childhood because many teachers continue to teach as they were taught (Lawson, 1983; Lortie, 1975; Zeichner, 1986). It may even have a negative impact because during field experience student teachers become more negative, custodial, and authoritarian (Templin, 1979).
Submitted: July24, 1991 Revision accepted: May 7, 1992 Mary O'Sullivan is anassociate professor andNiki Tsangaridou is a doctoral candidate inthe School of Health, Physical Education andRecreation at the Ohio StateUniversity, Columbus.
ROES: December 7992
In recent years, several states have mandated additional field experiences in teacher education programs. Extended field experiences have been added to physical education teacher education programs to provide student teachers with more opportunities to develop effective teaching skills (Pieron & Cheffers, 1988; Taggart, 1988; Tinning, 1988). A few studies have explored the impact of field experiences and studen t teaching on preservice physical education teachers (Behets, 1990; Gusthart & Rink, 1983; Locke, 1984; Placek & Dodds, 1988; Templin, 1979, 1981). Templin (1979) suggested student teaching introduces the neophyte to the realities of education and serves as a miniapprenticeship in which a metamorphosis of the student teacher's teaching self may occur. In the same study Templin (1981) found thatstudentteachers become significantly more custodial and authoritarian following field experiencesand student teaching. Gusthart and Rink (1983) found that, although their undergraduate majors demonstrated an unusually high level of performance on teaching behaviors measured, some discrete teaching behaviors deteriorated when the trainees were confronted with more complex and demanding field experiences. Findings from studies that examined physical education student teachers' perceptions of effective teaching
387
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
during their field experience indicated physical education trainees focused attention on student control instead ofstudentlearning. Placek (1983) found trainees' perceptions of successful teaching revolved around pupils' participation, enjoyment, and learning. Student learning was viewed by both preservice and in service teachers "as relatively unimportant to their perceptions of success in teaching" (p. 49), as only one-third of the respondents viewed lack of learning as a reason for an unsuccessful lesson. Unsuccessful teaching incidents related almost exclusively to student misbehavior, and preservice teachers perceived they had no control over these circumstances. Arrighi and Young (1987) found preservice teachers' perceptions of effective teaching related I more to administrative or discipline-oriented issues rather than subject matter content, instructional method, or studentachievement. Success in teaching was related to positive pupil feedback and attitudes, and less attention was paid to improved skill performance. Schempp (1985) suggested physical education student teachers defined competence in teaching as the ability to control student behavior and incompetent teaching as the lack of such control. Competence had little to do with facilitating and cultivating learning. Studies of preservice and in service physical education teachers' decision-making processes (Bell, Barrett, & Allison, 1985; Housner & Griffey, 1985) support the notion that preservice teachers attend more to classroom management and focus their attention on ensuring children are busy, happy, and well behaved. There is little understanding ofhow preservice teachers' attitudes are formed and what happens to particular dispositions during time spent in field experiences and student teaching (Dodds, 1989). Several physical education researchers have argued that more attention be given to studying the nature of and the processes involved in developing personal conceptions of teaching. Many believe these factors strongly influence both teaching and learning activities (Dodds, 1985; Graber, 1989; Lawson, 1983; Solmon, Worthy, Lee, & Carter, 1991). While there is evidence that current undergraduate programs can change trainees' teaching behaviors with relative efficiency (Dodds, 1989), there is little knowledge ofhow other components oftheir teaching perspectives contradict or complement their training programs. Two premises guided the theoretical framework of this study. First, we believe that a shared vision of the ideal teacher must guide each teacher education program (Dodds, 1989; Graham, 1991). Second, understanding how field experiences and student teaching have an impact on the beliefs, values, and attitudes ofprospective teachers is crucial ifwe are to provide appropriate conditions to socialize trainees toward desired programmatic perspectives. The purpose of this study was to determine physical education majors' conceptions of the teaching-learning
382
process and their role as a teacher in that process. The specific subquestions addressed were (a) What issues did the majors attend to as significant incidents from their teaching, and did these issues change during their field experiences? (b) What were the characteristics of their lessons they perceived as successful? (c) What were the characteristics oftheir lessons they perceived as unsuccessful? and (d) What were their conceptions of teaching?
Method Subjects andSetting The 39 subjects in this study were junior physical education majors in a teacher education program at a major research university. They were enrolled in a secondary methods course, the second of three pedagogy courses before student teaching. The course included their first off-campus teaching field experience (Note 1). The methods course had two components, a theoretical, on-eampus component and two field experiences. The first field experience was during the first 5 weeks, when students practiced instructional and managerial skills by teaching a short instructional unit to groups of6 to 10 middle school students for four lessons over a 4-week period (each ofwhich was supervised). The second field experience was 15 days (3-4 hours each morning) in a secondary school during the last 3weeks of the term (7 of the 14 days were supervised by the instructor or a doctoral student). Both field experiences were integrated with a theory course that provided students opportunities to design instructional units for each setting. A separate grade for the field experience was based on demonstrated instructional and managerial skills developed from the knowledge base ofeffective teaching in physical education. The theory course (Note 2) included topics on American high schools, classroom management, safety, curriculum development, and instructional design as they related to physical education in secondary schools. Trainees completed critical incident (CI) reports and reflective assignments to evaluate what happened in the lesson. Two limitations of the study need to be highlighted. First, the written responses of the undergraduates to the critical incidents and the open-ended questionnaire reflect their beliefs and values about teaching at that time. The extent to which these viewswould change on completion of student teaching or on reentry to schools as certified teachers is unclear. Second, the degree to which the responses of the undergraduates were influenced by the fact that one of the researchers was also the course instructor is unclear. Students may have felt pressured to respond in ways that supported the philosophical perspectives of the instructor and/or the program. Efforts
ROES: December 1992
O·SullivBn Bnd TSBngBridou
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
were made to minimize this concern. Students were held accountable for completion of these assignments but given complete freedom as to the content of their comments and reflections. At the time theywrote the CIs, the subjects were unaware that they would be requested to volunteer their data. The students were not coerced (the percentage of their grade for CIs was less than 2%), and the researchers do not believe studentship was a significant factor in the content of responses to either the critical incident reports or the open-ended questionnaire. Students volunteered these data on completion of the course for the purposes ofthe study, and the studywas conducted in compliance with human subjects' policy at the institution.
Data Collection Figure 1 shows when and what data were collected. The critical incident technique (Flanagan, 1954) was used to determine the nature of incidents the trainees perceived significant in their teaching and to examine their conceptions ofsuccessful and nonsuccessful teaching. During the first field experience the trainees were directed "to describe anything that happened during your experience today that you found particularly significant....When you have described the incidentfinish with the statement: This was significant because...." Following four lessons during this field experience, each student teacher wrote a CI describing what he or she perceived as a significant incident in that lesson. The second field experience occurred in a middle or high school, and the trainees solo taught one class each day and either solo taught or team taught a second class. During a halfdaydebriefing session on campus at the end of the experience, they wrote two CIs, describing a successful and unsuccessful incident from their teaching during the previous 14 days. A content analysis of the subjects' written responses from each ofthe six critical incidents was completed, and seven categories emerged from this process (Patton, 1980). The process of analysis began by reading and rereading the data until some common themes became evident. The inductively derived categories were (a) quality of instruction, (b) teacher's planning, (c) management and organization of the lesson, (d) general demeanor of the students toward the teacher or the lesson content, (e) success or failure of the students in achieving the goal of the lesson, (f) safety issues in the lesson, and (g) influence of peer observation on their teaching. All critical incidents were then coded separately by the researchers into one of the seven categories. Five discrepant cases were found. Following discussion between the researchers, each discrepant incident was categorized. To gather information on the trainees' conceptions of teaching, they were asked to complete an open-ended
ROES: December 1992
questionnaire on their views of effective teaching, teachers, and programming for secondary physical education during the debriefing session (see Figure 2). A series of categories similar to those developed by Arrighi and Young (1987) emerged from a content analysis of the questionnaires. Additional categories included professional support, general organization, and skill progression. The subcategory teacher professionalism included many elements in Arrighi and Young's personal characteristics category. Completion of the questionnaire was part of an in-elass assignment and did not have to be submitted to the instructor. Students were asked to volunteer both their CI forms and their questionnaires to the instructor at the end ofthe course. All questionnaires were anonymous, and all but one student made their completed forms available to the researchers. The subjects were not aware a request to volunteer their data would be made ofthem at the time they completed the CI forms and the questionnaire.
Results and Discussion Results and discussion are presented by research questions. The first research question dealtwith trainees' conceptions of significant incidents in their teaching across two field experiences. The second and third ques-
Figure 1. Procedures fordata collection. Week 1
Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week2
1lesson Critical Incidents Written
Week3
1lesson Critical Incidents Written
Week4
1lesson Critical Incidents Written Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
WeekS
1lesson Critical Incidents Written Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week6
Interviews ofPupils To Be Taught
Week7 Week8
5-10lessons
Week9
5-10 lessons
Week 10
4-8 lessons
Critical Incidents Written Open-ended Questionnaire
3B3
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
tions dealt with the physical education majors' conceptions of successful and unsuccessful incidents in their teaching. The fourth question dealt with students' conceptions of effective teaching, programming, and teachers of secondary physical education. Focus of Trainees' WritingDuring Field Experience
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Thirty-nine trainees wrote 41 CIs for Lesson 1; 51 for Lesson 2; 50 for Lesson 3; 53 for Lesson 4; and 47 for the final debriefing session after the second field experience (some students wrote more than one incident). Of the 242 critical incidents written up, 23% (56) dealt with instructional aspects oftheir teaching (see Table 1). The students wrote about the significance ofchoosing apprc:r Figure 2. Open-ended questionnaire and directions for critical incident reportsfrom secondfield experience. Questionnaire Reflections on Your Field Experience Pleasetake sometime to complete thisform outlining yourthoughts onteachinginthe public schools.Respond to these questions using the experiences yougainedat yourschoolthese last 3 weeks. 1.
Whatare the elements that are mostimportant foran effective physical education program atthe secondaryschool?
2.
Describe the characteristics of an effective lesson you had. Whatwas itthat made it effective?
3.
Describe the characteristicsof a lessonyou had that did not go well (if you had such a lesson). Why do you think it was unsuccessful?
4.
Whatdoes it require to bean effective professional ina secondaryschool?
5.
Whatwas itthat mostsurprised you aboutschoolsduring this experience? (This refers to schools, teachers, students, or programs.)
6.
What advice would you give to a peer who was to begin the three week experience youhave justfinished?
priate critical cues to assist pupil learning, pace and variety in lesson presentation as an indicator of quality instruction, and the importance of progressions and corrective feedback in student learning. Examples of their writings follow: I thought a critical point was the fact that the amount ofinformation given to the students was minimal on how to perform the skills. (Sf #8, L2) (Note 3) When they [students] were instructed to design their own routines incorporating inversion, flight, rhythm, and height, they got a little confused. Although verbal definitions were given of what should be included, thatwas notsufficient....This was significant because it showed how vitally important visual demonstrations are to comprehension of material. (ST #27, L3) Aspects of teaching related to organizing and managing the lesson accounted for 21 % (50) of the critical incidents. These incidents had to do with timing a lesson to ensure adequate content coverage in allotted time, a difficult issue for these novices as the following example shows: Time management, I still have a big problem with it. I flew through the final ~ of my lesson and still had 20 minutes left in the lesson. (ST#26, L3) Coordinating efforts to team teach a group of children effectively was something these undergraduates underestimated as a significant component of wellorganized lessons. They expected it would be easier, as noted in the quote: The most critical incident of our lesson was our lack of ability to coordinate our teaching intentions with each other. At times we found ourselves cutting each other off when we were not finished with our part of the lesson. (ST#2, Ll)
Critics/Incidents Think back over the 3 weeks to a specific incident when you felt especially successful.'Describe the incident as best you can using the following categories: Describe what happened.
Rearranging groups when fewer children came to class and controlling the class were also causes for concern. Inability to adapt on their feet may be the main reason trainees highlighted management as a significant incident in their teaching. Several preservice teachers made comments similar to the following:
Why was it such a successful incident? Whatdoyouthink you learned mostfrom the incident? 'The same directions were provided to describe an unsuccessful incident
384
The biggest thing that I found most significant was the control problem. The students seemed to be extra hyper and not willing to listen to any rules. (ST #23, L3)
RDES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andrsangaridou
For these trainees, successful management related to successful implementation of gymnasium rules and routines to which students responded well and that allowed for easier time management. Issues related to planning accounted for 18% of the critical incidents written up by the undergraduates. The following quote described the impact of planning on their teaching. This lesson was fun. Everything went exactly as planned. This was significant because I learned how valuable a well written lesson can be. (ST #11, L1)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
I
Some differences in the focus of the undergraduates' attention emerged when the critical incidents were analyzed by lesson (see Table 1). Issues about pupil demeanor and quality of planning and instruction, prevalen t in the first lesson, were replaced by incidents describing teacher planning, management and organization, and student skill learning or lack of it in the fourth lesson of the first field experience. Thirty-two percent (13) of the incidents in Lesson 1 related to how students responded to them as teachers, whereas only 7% (3) were concerned that students learn as a consequence of this instruction. Those who wrote about students after the first two lessons did so from two distinct viewpoints. First, they were surprised at the students' low skill level despite interviewing the pupils prior to teaching.
Students were very well behaved and eager to participate. This surprised me because I was expecting the students to be much less receptive. (ST#27, Ll) By the end of the first experience, the focus of their writing shifted to their success in providing opportunity for skill learning. By the end of the second field experience, students focused their writing more on their planning (30%).
Characteristics of Lessons Perceived Successful Students were asked to describe successful incidents from their teaching (see Table 2). Quality ofinstruction was the most frequent indicator of successful lessons (28%). As an example one student teacher wrote of his partner's teaching: The lesson went well because B__ broke down the steps into parts thatwere manageable for the students. He spent the time necessary to get the students to understand and perform the steps correctly. Also the use of modem music really motivated the students to learn and perform. (ST#29, L2) Studentteachers' managementand organization skills (24%) were the second highest indicator of successful lessons. An example of this is seen in the following quote: I felt very good about teaching this lesson...one reason was I knew how much time I spent in getting ready for it. I made sure that I got there early in order to make all my measurements, to get the target made on the wall, as well as the taped lines on the floor....The drills worked out real well and the students enjoyed the modified games competing against the clock as well as each other. (ST #36, L4)
We were both highly surprised and unprepared by the low skill acquisition of3 of the 4 students. (ST#8, L2) Second, they underestimated the willingness and eagerness of these middle school students to participate in instructional tasks they had planned. They expected them to resist their efforts to teach and were surprised by the students' enthusiasm.
Tablet Frequency and percentage of critical incidents by category and by lesson Final
Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
F
0/0
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Instruction Planning Management andOrganization Student Demeanor Skill Development Safety/Space Observe Peer
8 10 6 13 3 1 0
19 24 15 32 7 2 0
19 6 13 7 3 1 2
37 12 25 14 6 2 4
15 7 8 3 13 2 2
30 14 16 6 26 4 4
8 8 10 9 13 5 0
15 15 18 17 24 9 0
6 14 13 5 8 1 0
13 30 28 11 17 2 0
56 45 50 37 40 10 4
23 18 21 15 16 4 2
Total"
41
100
51
100
50
100
53
100
47
100
242
100
Categories
Total
"There are more than39 critical incidents per lesson, as some of the 39trainees included more than 1 critical incidentfor a lesson.
RaES: December 1992
385
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
Planning was the third most frequent indicator of a successful lesson (21 %), as this teacher noted: The lesson was well organized and well planned. The students were greatly enthused and wanted to participate ....Demonstrations were well provided and critical elements shown correctly. (ST#19,1.3)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Examples presented below show the undergraduates' concern for student skill learning was more prominentat the end ofan instructional unit than at any other time during their teaching. Th'e first of the significant factors today was the post-test, Injust4 meetings thatwe have had Ifelt that the improvementwas outstanding....Having seen the improvement through the post-test I felt much more confident that when we got to games the skills would be used effectively and under control. (ST #14, L4)
lesson planning was associated with student organization and class operation. According to Schempp (1989) the undergraduates considered that "planning was necessary so that students were kept active (not necessarily learning anything) and classroom time was not wasted" (p. 25). It should be noted that Schempp's subjects were student teachers and may have been more removed from the teacher preparation program.
Trainees'lndicators of Unsuccessful Teaching Experience We categorized 123 incidents describing aspects of unsuccessful lessons (see Table 3). Trainees' failure to achieve the instructional goal for the lesson (23%) was the most frequently cited reason for an unsuccessful lesson. They pointed out that Today we worked on the forearm pass. The students demonstrated the task adequately but only one girl met our instructional goal. (ST #1, L2)
I felt successful when the students performed the skills I was teaching. (ST #33, 1.5) These results do not support Placek's (1983) and Schempp's (1989) work on what preservice teachers and student teachers perceived as successful teaching in physical education. Placek (1983) found teachers defined success according to student enjoyment, student participation, and student misbehavior. In her study of preservice teachers, they equated success with student enjoyment and participation as much as with student learning. She concluded that "our goals as teacher educators to produce teachers who are concerned not only with student enjoyment, but also student learning, may be fantasy" (Placek, 1983, P: 55). Schempp (1989) found pupils' participation and enjoyment were the most important measures of teaching success. For the students in Schempp's study,
One of the less positive incidents was the lack of specific feedback. The students could have progressed through the steps more quickly if more feedback had been given. (ST #29, L2) The second indicator of unsuccessful lessons was student demeanor (22%). The following comment was an example from this category: T was off task the whole time this morning. He did not want to participate in the drill. (ST #6, L3) Inappropriate or inadequate planning (17%) and weak management and organizational strategies (17%) were other major reasons attributed to their unsuccessful lessons (see Table 3). Students wrote:
Table2. Trainees' indicators of successful lessons Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
Final"
Total
Categories
F
o/a
F
0/0
F
o/a
F
o/a
F
o/a
F
o/a
Instruction Planning Management andOrganization Student Demeanor Instructional Goal Safety/Space Observe Peers
7 8 1 5 0 1 0
32 36 4 23 0 4 0
14 2 11 2 0 1 0
47 7 37 7 0 3 0
10 3 6 3 3 1 0
38 11 4 11 11 4 0
2 7 7 1 4 4 0
8 28 28 4 16 16 0
2 6 5 2 8 0 0
9 26 9 35 0 0
35 26 30 13 15 7 0
28 21 24 10 12 5 0
22
100
30
100
26
100
25
100
23
100
126
100
Total
22
"These critical incidents were written following completion of the 14-day field experience. Students were asked to describe a successful and unsuccessful incident
386
ROES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
I thought that I could have been more organized and enthused about my teaching. I could have placed more time into planning. (ST #19, L2)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
There was lot of time spent on management to set up the different equipment. This cut down on activity time. The students were standing around not doing anything. This was significant because it shows that it's important to get things set up quickly so you can have the kids more active. (ST #16, L3) A separate analysis ofthe end ofunit responses shows a different pattern. In the first field experience (class sizes of ~10 pupils), failure to have pupils demonstrate the goal of the lesson was cited frequently as an indicator of unsuccessful lessons. However, in teaching classes ranging in size from 20 to M pupils in the second field experience, no student teacher cited failure to achieve the goal of the lesson as a reason their lessons were unsuccessful. The data suggest the trainees were more concerned about their managerial and instructional skills than how students were responding to that instruction. Kids were out ofcontrol because I had explained too much and the drills were very boring. (ST#21,1.5) Unlike students in Placek's (1983) study, 73% of these trainees attributed unsuccessful lessons to their lack of instructional and managerial skills, whereas only 22% indicated the student was the source of their unsuccessfullessons. Once the students were divided into two teams for group routine practice, activity time almost ceased for one group. The reason I believe this last point is significant is due to the fact that S and I did not give a demonstration of
what was expected of them. I feel that we were totally at fault for the somewhat inactive group's lack of participation and understanding. (ST #28, L3) In con trast with these results, Placek (1983) found that 65% of the teachers attributed unsuccessful teaching to problems of student behavior over which they believed they had no control, whereas 35% attributed an unsuccessful lesson to something over which they had control, such as management, instruction, and planning. The findings from this study suggest that undergraduates expected and focused on student learning during their field experience. Their undergraduate curriculum articulated such a philosophical position, and university and school-based educators with whom they worked shared this view. The trainees defined and evaluated successful and unsuccessful teaching experiences using criteria similar to qualities espoused in their teacher preparation program. It could be suggested that their writings were evidence of studentship (Graber, 1989). Given our knowledge of the students involved, the efforts made to create a "safe" environment in which to communicate their ideas and beliefs and the fact that the con ten t of their writings was not related to their grades, we believe the critical incidents are examples of the undergraduates' values and beliefs and not studentship behavior.
Conceptions of Teaching by Undergraduate Majors Physical education undergraduates were asked to respond in writing to six open-ended questions during the debriefing session following their 14-dayfield experience to determine their ideas, beliefs, and values about teaching physical education (see Figure 2). They were asked to describe elements of an effective secondary school physical education program and an effective sec-
Tabl. 3. Trainees' indicators of unsuccessful lessons Lesson 1
Lesson 2
Lesson 3
Lesson 4
Final"
Total
F
0/0
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Instruction Planning Management and Organization Student Demeanor Instructional Goal Safety/Space Observe Peers
1 4 5 10 5 0 0
4 16 20 40 20 0 0
4 4 3 5 3 0 2
19 19 14 23 14 0 9
5 4 2 0 11 0 2
21 16 8 0 46 0 8
6 1 3 9 9 1 0
21 3 10 31 31 3 0
4 8 8 3 0 1 0
17 33 33 12 0 4 0
20 21 21 27 28 2 4
16 17 17 22 23 2 3
Total
25
100
21
100
24
100
29
100
24
100
123
100
Categories
"These critical incidents were writtenfollowing completion of the 14-day field experience. Students were asked to describe a successful andunsuccessful incident.
ROES: December 1992
387
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
ondary school physical education teacher and characteristics of effective and ineffective teaching in physical education. We gathered from ~9 undergraduates 100 descriptors on effective programs, 77 descriptors on effective professionals, 70 descriptors ofeffective teaching, and 47 descriptors of ineffective teaching (see Table 4). Program. A third of the descriptors of effective physical education programs described components of the instructional system (see the total for all ofthe subcatego-
ries ofTeaching Strategies in Table 4), a third related to managementand organizational issues, and a third to the combined categories of professional support factors (17%), personal characteristics (1~%), and knowledge of content (4%). The subcategory of the Organization/Management section, general organization, received the greatestnumber of responses (20%). Undergraduates described the establishment and maintenance ofrules and routines as a critical element of effective programs stating:
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Table 4.Characteristics of effectivesecondary physicaleducation programs,teachers, and effectiveand ineffective teaching as perceived by undergraduate majors
Categories TeachingStrategies Planning Feedback Student learning/activity time Evaluation Individualization Observation Skills Flexibility ClearGoaVDemonstratiorVlnstruction Skill progression
Subtotal Management/Organization Generalorganization Student control Record keeping Communication Student motivation Safety Equipment
Subtotal Content Sport knowledge Skill knowledge
Subtotal Personal Characteristics Fitness Professionalism
Subtotal Support Administration Faculty Parents Equipment/Facilities
Subtotal Total
388
Program F %
Teacher F 0/0
Effective Teaching Characteristics F %
Ineffective Teaching Characteristics F %
11 2 8 2 2 0 2 5 1 33
11 2 8 2 2 0 2 5 1
9 2 4 0 3 0 7 0 0
12 3 5 0 4 0 9 0 0
16 1 14 0 1 1 2 B 4
23 1 20 0 1 1 3 8 6
8 0 5 1 1 0 3 8 2
17 0 11 2 2 0 B 18 4
33
25
32
45
64
28
59
20 8 0 3 2 0 0
20 8 0 3 2 0 0
9 14 0 7 0 0 0
12 18 0 9 0 0 0
14 7 3 0 7 0 0
5 B 0 1 4 0 0
11 13 0 2 8 0 0
33
33
30
39
10 5 2 0 5 0 0 22
32
76
34
4 0
4 0
4 3
5 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4
4
7
9
0
0
0
0
1 12
1 12
0 15
0 19
0 3
0 4
0 3
0 6
73
73
75
79
3
4
3
6
5 4 2 B
5 4 2 B
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
77
77
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
77
100
70
100
47
100
RDES: December 1992
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Having an effective management strategy, including the development of rules, routines, and expectations which creates an environment conducive for learning, is the most vital aspect towards building upon an effective PE program. (ST#12, Ql) Other trainees described good management skills, such as getting students to transition quickly into activity and minimizing management time, as specific ways a physical education program demonstrated its effectiveness. Professionalism of teachers in a program was the second most frequently cited characteristic of effective programs (12%). They defined professional teachers as those who maximize student participation, have high clear expectations for students, and incorporate fun into activities while still emphasizing skill development (ST #39, Ql) Planning (11%), in terms of statements such as "thoughtful lesson planning, " "proper planning for various situations," and "well-prepared lesson plans," was cited by undergraduates as important to an effective program. However, planning for individual lessons and not program or unit planning was the focus of their comments. Teacher. Characteristics of an effective secondary school physical educator cited were organization and management skills, teaching skills, personal characteristics, and content knowledge (see Table 4). To these undergraduates, professional physical educators were described as "enthusiastic," "spent time with students in extracurricular activities," "gave studen ts the feeling they wanted to be there, " "showed patience, " "motivated students," "had good rapport with students," and "showed caring and a willingness to improve." Control of student behavior was cited by 35% of the majors as a characteristic of an effective physical educator. Control of students was operationalized as "being a good disciplinarian," "having control over student behavior, " and "knowing how to deal with discipline." The establishment and enforcement of rules for behavior were skills perceived necessary to establish and maintain "control. " Twelve percent of the undergraduates cited planning and general organization as significant characteristics of an effective physical educator. Planning meant a teacher had "good planning skills," "was thoroughly prepared," and "had good lesson plans." No description of the purpose or substance of these plans was provided in their responses. Effective Teaching. The third question addressed characteristics of effective teaching. In describing character-
RQES: December 1992
istics ofsuccessful teaching in physical education, almost 65% of the undergraduate responses addressed aspects ofinstruction, whereas 32% addressed management and organization variables (see Table 4). The undergraduates described specific characteristics of effective teaching as lesson planning (23%), student learning as observed through high-activity time (20%), and general organization. The following statements include characteristics ofeffective teaching described by most trainees:
An effective lesson for me consisted of routines which had been followed in previous lessons. For example, beginning class with the same warm-up every day, learning the new stroke according to a method used in a past lesson, and performing the drills which had been performed in the past and were known by name created quick transition and high activity. For me, the highly structured class was the most effective. (ST #12,Q2) Much of the literature on conceptions of a good teacher indicates that teacher education students "conceive of teaching primarily in terms of positive interpersonal relationships" (Weinstein, 1989, P: 58) and their descriptions of a good teacher emphasize "social and affective variables such as caring and concern for children, ability to relate to students, and enthusiasm while minimizing the academic aspects ofteaching" (Weinstein, 1989, p. 58). Book, Byers, and Freeman (1983) found student teachers were not concerned about student achievement and concluded that student teachers perceived teaching as "an extended form of parenting, about which there is little to learn other than through instincts and own experiences as a child in the network" (p, 10). The trainees in this study described the importance ofcaring, patience, and creativity (professionalism category) as characteristics of a good teacher and good teaching, but they emphasized the technical aspects of teaching (instructional and managerial skills) rather than the social and affective variables. Ineffective Teaching. In describing characteristics of unsuccessful teaching, 59% of the subjects' responses related to teaching strategies, 34% to organization, and 6% to personal characteristics (see Table 4). The undergraduates described specific characteristics ofin effective teaching related to lesson planning (17%), quality of instruction (17%), and student control (13%). Comments such as "the students got out of control," "bad demonstrations and explanations," and "skills too difficult for students' level" were reasons cited for ineffective teaching. The trainees' responses indicated instructional and managerial strategies were central in accomplishing student learning. This suggests these trainees realized that management strategies should be implemented for instruction to occur and instruction should be sufficiently
3B9
O'Sullivan andTsangaridou
well constructed to provide student learning. Effective teaching for these subjects had student learning as a primary goal. This suggests that quality early field experience can help prospective teachers integrate theory and practice and encourage an awareness of and reflection on their own teaching philosophy. Such development does not occur automatically. Rather, appropriate assignments and experiences can stimulate prospective teachers' intellectual curiosity about the teaching/learning process.
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
Conclqsions and Observations Two major conclusions are drawn from this study. The first is that teacher education programs can train teachers to have student learning as a primary goal. This is not something that happens in one course or with one faculty member. Such training takes time and needs to be repeated at severaljunctures in the program. Ross (1990, p. 97) suggested that Enabling preservice teachers to be reflective requires the development ofa clearlyarticulated program of study. Therefore, helping students develop this ability must be viewed as the task of a teacher education program, not of individual faculty members. While most efforts at developing the reflective abilities of teachers have occurred within specific courses or program components, faculty at a few institutions have attempted to evolve a programmatic commitment to the development of reflection. The findings of this study provide evidence that the goals of a teacher education program that espouses a shared vision, reflective inquiry, and sequenced programmatic efforts to study teaching in the naturalistic setting can produce prospective physical education teachers who show concern about pupil learning and their teaching effectiveness in learning settings. Effective teaching and thoughtful reflection can be developed with thoughtful practice and supervision under appropriate conditions. Prospective teachers who participated in this investigation were conscious of their ability and responsibility to influence students' learning. This was very much a reflection of the philosophical perspective of their program. A second conclusion from the study is that wellconstructed early field experiences can provide opportunities for preservice teachers to explore their understandings of teaching, schooling, and the role of the professional teacher in the education of children and youth. The teacher preparation program these prospective teachers attended did nothing magical to them.
390
Rather, it provided them with a knowledge base about good teaching as well as appropriate conditions and supervision, which enabled them to practice and reflect on this knowledge. A dimension of the teacher education program that appeared to positivelyaffect the developmentofpreservice students' perspectives (Graham, 1991) was the collaborative efforts and shared vision about the purposes and goals of this experience by the university and schoolbased personnel. This study suggests that teacher educators can be more optimistic that future teachers can provide meaningful education to children when future teachers are exposed to a meaningful and cohesive professional preparation program. Two additional observations are warranted. First, what was consistently absent from responses to the critical incidents and the open-ended questionnaireswas any attention or concern for skill knowledge or content knowledge as a significant component ofeffective teaching. Recentworkon teacher reflection by Sparks-Langer, Colton, Pasch, and Starko (1991) suggests this lack of attention to the subject matter is not unique to physical education. They found that much more time was spent considering "how to make content interesting than how to make it clear, or whether it was worthwhile" (SparksLangeretal., 1991,p. 13). Why did the students attend so little to knowledge of content? Sparks-Langer and her colleagues suggested undergraduates lack familiarity with content beyond the introductory level and believe that content is so predetermined that reflection is of little value. Given growing trends in teacher education programs to deemphasize the subject matter content of physical education, and devote less and less time to physical activities (Corbin & Eckert, 1990), we should be increasingly alarmed about the basis on which prospective teachers will choose curricular offerings at the secondary level and how these choices will reflect on the pedagogical content knowledge to teach that activity. Second, the writings of the students reflected a dominant message of the course and the teacher education program in which they participated. The course provided preservice teachers a theoretical knowledge base about effective managerial and instructional practices, and this was reflected in the nature of their responses. Their reflection, however, was entirely technical in nature. It involved little of what Liston and Zeichner (1991) and others have described as reflection on the social, ethical, and moral dimensions of teaching, although these were also shared goals of the faculty. Even though some readings, discussions, and lectures were provided on the social and moral dimensions of teaching, none of their writings about teaching questioned or considered the political, social, or ethical dimensions of their work with students in particular or schooling in general. As these were trainees' first experiences teaching youth in schools, their tendency to reflect almost
RDES: December 1992
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
O'Sullivan andTsangsridou
exclusively on technical teaching skills is understandable given what we know about preservice teachers' concern for survival and focus on selfrather than students (Fuller & Bown, 1975). These preservice teachers showed great concern for students' involvement in activity and success in achieving goals of their lessons than earlier work in physical education (Arrighi & Young, 1987; Placek, 1983; Schempp, 1985) or general education has indicated (Book et al., 1983; Calderhead, 1989; Weinstein, 1989). The dichotomy among the technical, academic, and social!ethical concerns of teaching does not exist in the real work of teaching and learning, so it behooves us to find ways to encourage trainees to reflect more critically on all aspects of their J teaching, even from their first experiences in learning to teach. Additional research is needed to examine appropriate programmatic efforts that can help preservice teachers reflect not only on the teaching, learning, and schooling process as a technical and academic enterprise, but also as a moral and ethical enterprise.
References Armaline, W., & Hoover, R. (1989). Field experience as a vehicle for transfonnation: Ideology, education, and reflective practice. Journal ofTeacherEducation, 40, 42-48. Arrighi, M., & Young J. (1987). Teacher perceptions about effective and successful teaching. Journal of Teaching in Ph~calEducation, 6, 122-1M. Behets, D. (1990). Concerns of preservice physical education teachers. JournalofTeachinginPh~caIEducation,10, 66-75. Bell, R., Barrett, K., & Allison, P. (1985). What preservice physical education teachers see in an unguided, early field experience. Journal ofTeaching in Physical Education, 4,8190. Book, C., Byers,j., &Freeman, D. (1988). Student expectations and teacher education traditions with which we can and cannot live. Journal ofTeacherEducation, 34, 9-18. Calderhead,j. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 5, 4~51. Corbin, C., & Eckert, H. (Eds.). (1990). The evolving undergraduate majuro Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Dodds, P. (1985). Delusions of "worth-it-ness": Field experiences in elemen tary physical education teacher education programs. In H. Hoffman &j. Rink (Eds.), Ph~caleduca tion professional preparation: Insights and furesights (pp. 90109). Reston, VA: AAHPERD. Dodds, P. (1989). Trainees, field experiences, and socialization into teaching. In T.J. Templin & P. G. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ationinto ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 81104).Indianapolis,UN:Benchmar~
Doyle, W. (1985). Learning to teach: An emerging direction in researchon preservice teachereducation.Journal ofTeacher Education, 36, 81-82. Flanagan, j. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 827-M8.
ROES: December 1992
Fuller, F., & Bawn, D. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education: NSSE 74th year IJook (pp. 25-52). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Graber, K. (1989). Teaching tomorrow's teachers. Professional preparation as an agent of socialization. In T. j. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ation into ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 59-80). Indianapolis,UN:Benchmar~
Graham, K. (1991). The influence of teacher education on preservice development: Beyond a custodial orientation. Quest, 43, 1-19. Gusthart, L, & Rink, j. (1988). Teaching behavior through various levels of field experiences. Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 3, 82-46. Housner, L., & Griffey, D. (1985). Teacher cognition: Differences in planning and interactive decision making between experienced and inexperienced teachers. Research Q!J.arterly fur Exercise and Sport, 56, 45-58. Lawson, H. (1988). Toward a model of teacher socialization in physical education: The subjective warrant, recruitment, and teacher education (Part 1). Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 2(8), ~16. Liston, D., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Teachereducationandthesocial conditionsofschooli.ng.NewYork,NY:Routledge,Chapman, and Hall. Locke, L (1984). Research on teaching teachers: Where are we now? Journal ofTeaching in Physical Education, Monograph
2. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Patton, M. (1980). QJ.wlitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA:Sage. Pieron, M., & Cheffers,j. (1988). Sportscima studies: &search in sport pedagogy: Empirical anaijtical perspective. Schomdorf, Gennany: Karl Hofmann. Placek, j. (1988). Conceptions of success in teaching: Busy, happy, and good? In T.j. Templin &J. K. Olson (Eds.), Teaching in ph~cal education (pp. 4~56). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Placek, j., & Dodds, P. (1988). A critical incident study of preservice teachers' beliefs about teaching success and nonsuccess. Research QJ.wrterlyfur Exerciseand Sport, 59, 851· 858. Ross, D. (1990) Programmatic structures for the preparation of reflective teachers. In R. Clift, W. R. Houston, & M. D. Pugach (Eds.), Encouraging refkctive practice in education (pp. 97-118). New York: Teachers College Press. Schempp, P. (1985). Becoming a better teacher: An analysis of the student teaching experience. Journal of Teaching in Ph~caIEducation, 4, 158-166. Schempp, P. (1989). Apprenticeship-of-observation and the development of physical education teachers. In T. j. Templin & P. Schempp (Eds.), SocialU.ation into ph~cal education: Learning to teach (pp. 1~S8). Indianapolis, UN: Benchmark. Solmon, M., Worthy, T., Lee, A., & Carter,j. (1991). Teacher role identity ofstudent teachers in physical education: An interactiveanalysis.JournalofTeachinginPhysicaIEducation,
10, 188-209. Sparks-Langer, G., Colton, A., Pasch, M., & Starko, A. (1991). Promoting cognitive, critical, and narrative rrfkction. Paper
391
O'Sullivan and Tsangaridou
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL Taggart, A (1988). The systematic development of teaching skills: A sequence of planned pedagogical experiences. Journal ofTlaching in Ph'JSical Education, 8, 7S-86. Templin, T. (1979). Occupational socialization and the physical education student teacher. &starch QJuJrlerly, 50, 482-
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 11:47 21 March 2015
49l$.
Templin, T. (1981). Student as socializing agent, Journal of Tlachingin PhysicalEducation, 1,71-79. Tinning, R. (1988). Student teaching and the pedagogy of necessit:f.JournalofTlachinginPh'JSicalEducation, 7, 82-89. Weinstein, C. (1989). Teacher education students' preconce}>" tions of teaching. Journal ofTlacher Education, 40, 5~. Zeichner, K. (1986). The practicum as an occasion for learning to teach. SouthPacifi€JournalofTeacherEducalion, 14(2),1127.
Notes 1. Prior to this course the students have had a series of classroom observations in schools, two clinical experiences on campus where they taught one to two 5-7-year-ld children aquatics, gymnastics, and fundamental motor skills, and completed a series ofpeer teaching assignments practicing discrete managerial and instructional skills. 2. The theory course metdaily for a total ofl6 hours a week for 7 weeks. The remaining three weeks were spent completing the field experience in public schools. l$. This refers to part of a critical incident written by Student 8 following their second teaching lesson.
Authors' Notes The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Dr. P. Dodds and two anonymous reviewers for &search QJJ.aTterly fur Exercise and Spurt for their comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.
392
ROES: December '991
