Pre-service Teachers’ Preparedness to Teach during Teaching Practice in Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teachers are vital to the success of any education system. However, concern continues to be raised about the quality of teachers’ preparation in the teachers’ colleges and about the quality of teachers in schools in Tanzania (Global Partnership for Educational Support in Tanzania Mainland, 2013; Mgaiwa, 2018; Makoro, 2020). In line with such concerns, this study explored Tanzania’s pre-service teachers’ demonstration of knowledge and skills of teaching during teaching practice. The study was conducted in three secondary schools located in Moshi rural District in Kilimanjaro region in Tanzania. It involved five pre-service teachers from one of the Diploma Teachers Colleges, five supervisors from the same Teachers’ College and mentor teachers from the three home schools where pre-service teachers were placed for teaching practice. The study is descriptive, employing qualitative methods of data collection. Interviews, focus group discussions and observations were used to collect data. Drawing on Shulman’s (1986) categories of knowledge, data were analyzed thematically. The findings revealed that the pre-service teachers had limited skill in lesson preparation and classroom management, which negatively impacted their learning during teaching practice. Based on these findings, the study recommends that teacher education colleges should take steps to better prepare pre-service teachers to effectively handle lesson planning, teaching, and classroom management.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".