Feedback, Conversation and Power in the Field Experience of Preservice Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article utilized information collected through a questionnaire distributed to preservice teachers in a Faculty of Education in Canada and in Scotland. purpose of the questionnaire was to gather data about the field experience of preservice teachers. Preservice teachers in both countries articulated the need for positive, helpful feedback from the supervising teachers. issue of whether the field experience should ideally be an apprenticeship, a time to innovate or a combination of both was also explored. article underscores the importance of the supervising teacher in ensuring that the field experience: provides an experience based on the students' readiness and willingness to innovate or follow a set pattern; develop a positive relationship with the preservice teacher; and provide the type of helpful feedback that will enable preservice teachers to become effective classroom teachers. field experience of preservice teachers or the time that preservice teachers spend in classrooms has been found to be a significant factor in the education of most teachers (Griffin, 1989). The importance of observing exemplary practice has long been recognized as a critical component in educating teachers. Student teaching has traditionally been the capstone experience, and for many candidates, student teaching represented their first exposure to the classroom setting during their professional training (Arends & Winitzky, 1996, p. 542). Central to this experience is the role that the supervising teacher plays. supervising teacher totally controls the life of the preservice teacher during the field experience. supervising teacher is responsible for assigning teaching tasks, providing resources and evaluating the preservice teacher. amount and type of feedback provided by the supervising teacher plays a very important role in the development of the preservice teacher. many reasons related to contexts and persons, the quality of field experiences varies. For some preservice teachers, all the time spent in field experiences will be meaningful and educative; for others, that may be true only some of the time; still others may have several difficult or frustrating field experiences. There are no guarantees. There is no magic formula for a successful field experience even if the best of planning and preparation take place. Like all human endeavors involving relationships, the cooperating teacher-preservice teacher relationship is fraught with complexity and idiosyncrasies. For example, there may be differences in how you and your cooperating teacher perceive your roles; you may have different expectations for the time you are together; you may differ in teaching styles, philosophies, and approaches to education; and there are personality factors and contexts in which you may find yourselves at odds. (Knowles & Cole, 1994, p. 157, 8) supervising teacher and the feedback provided by this teacher are significant factors in determining the value of the field experience. preservice teacher relies on the feedback from the supervising teacher for constructive criticism and guidance. Preservice teachers often experience frustration as a result of receiving inadequate feedback (Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1987; Griffin et al., 1983; Richardson-Koehler, 1988). degree to which the supervising teacher is willing to encourage the preservice teacher to be innovative also impacts on the experience. following study addresses supervising teacher feedback and evaluation, and the issue of innovation versus apprenticeship. Problem Statement This study examined the field experience (time spent in classrooms) of preservice teachers and specifically probed the impact of the supervising teacher on the preservice teacher. Preservice teachers were asked the following three questions related to the field experience. 1. Check off one of the categories listed below to describe the impact of the placement teacher (supervising teacher) on the quality of the school experience and then write your thoughts to further describe that impact. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".