Vol. 35 No. 2 (2020)
Research Brief

Leading the Pandemic Practicum: One Teacher Education Response to the COVID-19 Crisis

Amy Burns
University of Calgary
Bio
Patricia Danyluk
University of Calgary
Bio
Theodora Kapoyannis
University of Calgary
Bio
Astrid Kendrick
University of Calgary
Bio
Published December 18, 2020

Abstract

Abstract: This article will outline one Canadian teacher education response to the closure of kindergarten to grade twelve schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant online teacher education practicum that was subsequently developed, termed the pandemic practicum. In the month of March 2020, teacher educators across Canada were prompted to move to online delivery of content for preservice teachers and, in many cases, this pivot was, while not simple, at least imaginable. More difficult was the integration of an online solution for the teaching practicum, a cornerstone of teacher education. The following article outlines the steps taken to ensure a credible and engaging online experiential offering. Themes were generated through the self-reflections of the design and leadership team, as well as through a survey completed by postsecondary students undertaking the online practicum. Findings included the initial challenges as noted by the design team including program and licensing requirements, as well as philosophical differences among stakeholders as to the role of practicum in teacher education. In addition, a number of important opportunities were presented by this shift to an online practicum, including the importance of the pedagogy of online learning and the need to re-vision and question the practicum.

Keywords: online pedagogy; practicum; teacher education; online practicum

Mettre en œuvre un stage pendant la pandémie : une réponse de formation des enseignants à la crise COVID-19

Résumé: Cet article présente une réponse de la formation des enseignants canadiens à la fermeture des écoles de la maternelle à la douzième année en raison de la pandémie de la COVID-19 et le stage de formation des enseignants en ligne qui en a résulté et qui a ensuite été développé, appelé stage pandémique. Au mois de mars 2020, les formateurs d'enseignants de tout le Canada ont été invités à passer à la diffusion en ligne de contenus destinés aux enseignants en formation initiale et, dans de nombreux cas, ce changement, bien que loin d'être simple, était au moins imaginable. Plus difficile était l'intégration d'une solution en ligne pour le stage d'enseignement, pierre angulaire de la formation des enseignants. L'article suivant décrit les mesures prises pour garantir une expérience en ligne cohérente et attrayante. Les thèmes ont été générés par les réflexions de l'équipe de conception et de direction, ainsi que par une enquête réalisée auprès des étudiants de l'enseignement supérieur qui ont effectué le stage en ligne. Les conclusions ont porté sur les défis initiaux relevés par l'équipe de conception, notamment en ce qui concerne les exigences en matière de programme et de certification, ainsi que sur les différentes conceptions des parties prenantes quant au rôle du stage dans la formation des enseignants. En outre, ce passage à un stage en ligne a présenté un certain nombre de possibilités importantes, concernant notamment l'importance de la pédagogie de l'apprentissage en ligne et la nécessité de revoir et de remettre en question le stage.

Mots clés: pédagogie en ligne ; stage pratique ; formation des enseignants ; stage en ligne

References

  1. Alberta Education. (2018). Teaching quality standard. Government of Alberta. https://education.alberta.ca/media/3739620/standardsdoc-tqs-fa-web-2018-01-17.pdf
  2. Allen, J. M., & Wright, S. E. (2014). Integrating theory and practice in the preservice teacher education practicum. Teachers and Teaching, 20(2), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.848568
  3. Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2008). Empowering online learning: 100+ Activities for reading, reflecting, displaying and doing. Jossey Bass.
  4. Brookfield, S. (2009). The concept of critical reflection: Promises and contradictions. European Journal of Social Work, 12(3), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691450902945215
  5. Brown, N., (2008). Assessment in the professional experience context. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 5(1), Article 8. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a12a/2847dac21854491abb0c2b5d74c872d17ed9.pdf
  6. Bullock, S. M., & Russell, T. (2010). Does teacher education expect too much from field experience? In T. Falkenberg & H. Smits (Eds.), Field experiences in the context of reform of Canadian teacher education programs (Vol. 1; pp. 91–101). Faculty of Education of the University of Manitoba.
  7. Farnsworth, V., Kleanthous, I. & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2016) Communities of Practice as a Social Theory of Learning: a Conversation with Etienne Wenger. British Journal of Educational Studies, 64(2), 139-160. DOI: 10.1080/00071005.2015.1133799
  8. Foster, R., Wimmer, R., Snart, F., & Winter, M. (2010). Field experiences in teacher education: What is and what could be. In T. Falkenberg & H. Smits (Eds.), Field experiences in the context of reform of Canadian teacher education programs (Vol. 1, pp. 187–224). Faculty of Education of the University of Manitoba.
  9. Garrison, R. (2006). Online collaboration principles. Online Learning, 10(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v10i1.1768
  10. Haigh, M., & Middleton, S. (1998). Responses to a triadic assessment trial in biology teacher education practicum [Unpublished report]. Centre for Practicum, Auckland College of Education.
  11. Halliday, J. (1998). Technicism, reflective practice and authenticity in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(6), 597–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00010-9
  12. Hewitt, J. (2001). Beyond threaded discourse. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 207–221. http://hdl.handle.net/1807/26522
  13. Hill, S. L., Author, Author, & Crawford, K. (2018). Critical conversations on reflexive inquiry in field experiences. In E. R. Lyle (Ed.), The negotiated self: Employing reflexive inquiry to explore teacher identity (pp. 185–198). Brill Publishers.
  14. Jackson, B. L., & Jones, W. M. (2019). Where the rubber meets the road: Exploring the perceptions of in-service teachers in a virtual field experience. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1530622
  15. Johansson, I., & Sandberg, A. (2012). Learning and knowledge development in preschool teacher education and practicum. Early Child Development and Care, 182(7), 907–920. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.592188
  16. Johnson, C., Hill, L., Lock, J., Altowairiki, N., Ostrowski, C., da Rosa dos Santos, L., & Liu. Y. (2017). Using design-based research to develop meaningful online discussions in undergraduate field experience courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6), 36–53. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.2901
  17. Kennedy, K., & Archambault, L. (2012). Offering preservice teachers field experiences in K-12 online learning: A national survey of teacher education programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(3), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111433651
  18. Kentnor, H. (2015). Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 17(1), 21–34. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=law_facpub
  19. Lawson, T., Çakmak, M., Gündüz, M., & Busher, H. (2015). Research on teaching practicum – a systematic review. European Journal of Teacher Education, 38(3), 392–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2014.994060
  20. Leavy, A. M., McSorley, F. A., & Bote, L. A. (2007). An examination of what metaphor construction reveals about the evolution of preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1217–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.07.016
  21. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47.
  22. Ralph, E., Walker, K., & Wimmer, R. (2009). Deficiencies in the practicum phase of field-based education: Students’ views. Northwest Passage: Journal of Educational Practices, 7(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.15760/nwjte.2009.7.1.8
  23. Schön, D. A. (2009). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
  24. Schulz, R. (2005). The practicum: More than practice. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne De L'éducation, 28(1/2), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602158
  25. Smith, K., & Lev‐Ari, L. (2005). The place of the practicum in pre‐service teacher education: The voice of the students. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(3), 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660500286333
  26. Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership & Management, 32(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2011.614941
  27. Veal, M. L., & Rikard, L. (1998). Cooperating teachers’ perspectives on the student teaching triad. Journal of Teacher Education, 49(2), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487198049002004
  28. Vick, M. (2006). It’s a difficult matter: Historical perspectives on the enduring problem of the practicum in teacher preparation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660600720579
  29. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business School Press.
  30. Wilkens, C., Eckdahl, K., Morone, M., Cook, V., Giblin, T., & Coon, J. (2014). Communication, community, and disconnection: Preservice teachers in virtual school field experiences. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 43(2), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.43.2.c