Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Article On Eliciting Beliefs PDF
Article On Eliciting Beliefs PDF
ICLON, Graduate School of Education, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9555, 2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands
b
Department of Educational Development and Research, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
Received 13 July 2000; received in revised form 9 February 2001; accepted 6 March 2001
Abstract
Student teachers have at their disposal various information sources concerning teaching: their own beliefs, their
mentors practical knowledge, and theory. Because practical knowledge often remains implicit, the aim of the present
study was to explore the appropriateness of two techniques for its articulation: concept mapping and completing
sentences. The criterion used was that these should not only elicit descriptions of how to teach, but also the cognitions
underlying teaching, i.e., practical knowledge. Thirty-ve student teachers and their mentors at a postgraduate teachertraining institute in the Netherlands used both techniques, concerning the subject of order. Subsequently, the students
summarized their own beliefs, their mentors practical knowledge, and theory and compared these to each other. The
student teachers reports showed that they, in general, had been able to elicit partially their mentors practical
knowledge. It was concluded that the use of the techniques involved seemed valuable for student teachers learning
processes. r 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Student teachers; Beliefs; Practical knowledge; Concept mapping; Sentence completion
1. Introduction
Student teachers attending a teacher-training
course come into contact with various information
sources. At the teacher-training institute, they are
informed about educational theories and teaching
methods. At the practice schools, mentors supervise them. These mentors have developed their
own teaching knowledge and beliefs, derived from
or accommodated by teaching practice. This is
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +31-71-527-71-74/70; fax:
+31-71-527-71-81.
E-mail address: zanting@iclon.leidenuniv.nl (A. Zanting).
726
727
728
2. Method
2.1. Context
The study was conducted at the postgraduate
teacher training institute of Leiden University in
the Netherlands. The 1-year course comprised,
alternately, 50% classes in teaching methods,
educational theory, and professional development,
and 50% practical training at schools. The student
teachers were being trained to teach at the high
school level (pupils age 1518) in one specic
language (Dutch, English, German, French, or
Classics), science (mathematics, biology, physics,
and chemistry), or social science (history, art
history, and social studies).
2.2. Participants
The whole 19981999 cohort, 35 student teachers, participated in this study: 16 (46%) were
men and 19 (54%) were women. Sixteen of them
were social science teachers, 13 were language
teachers, and six were science teachers. One subject
teacher, their mentor, supervised every student
teacher. The teaching experience of the mentors,
25 men and 10 women, ranged from ve to 31
years. Their experience with mentoring was also
very diverse, ranging from zero to 25 years.
2.3. The student teacher assignment
The assignment included obtaining information
from three information sources: the student
teacher him/herself, the mentor, and theory. This
was done by the student teachers by: (1) explicating their own beliefs about order by concept
mapping and completing sentences, (2) eliciting the
mentors practical knowledge about order in the
same way, (3) studying literature about order,
and (4) comparing their own beliefs, the mentors
practical knowledge, and theory.
The assignment was incorporated in the teachertraining program to test whether it really could be
applied in an educational setting. Therefore, the
criterion for selecting instruments were that (1) an
instrument could be used easily by large numbers
of student teachers, for example, tens or hundreds,
and (2) an instrument could be used by student
teachers without the need for extensive training.
The criteria implied that some instruments that
seem suitable for the elicitation of practical
knowledge were not used, for example, stimulated
recall which is rather complex, time-consuming
and requires technical supplies (see Calderhead,
1981; Meijer, 1999).
A pilot study with 20 student teachers of the
19971998 cohort had proved that, without training, the interview skills of the student teachers
were not always sucient. For example, student
teachers rarely prompted or they formulated only
a few, supercial questions. Despite this, the
interview proved to be suitable for eliciting a part
of a teachers practical knowledge (e.g., Meijer,
1999). Because in a regular natural teacher training
program there is no sucient time to practice
interview skills, the interview was transformed into
a sentence completion task. This task has
similarities with an interview but is more structured and is written.
The sentence completion task comprised eight
written sentences on the subject of order in the
classroom to be completed by both mentor and
student teacher. They had, for example, to
complete the sentences: Order in the classroom
means to me y or A precondition for establishing order in the classroom is y Furthermore,
four problems concerning order in the classroom
were briey described, for example, All the pupils
are working except one. This pupil does not
disturb others but is not active at all. The mentor
or student teacher had to describe a solution for
this situation.
The task aimed at explicating beliefs regarding
the interpretation of order, the process of establishing and maintaining order, disciplinary measures, and the function of order. The sentences
were formulated in consultation with student
teachers of the 19971998 cohort. They judged
the sentences on being clear, unambiguous, and
729
730
*
731
Table 1
Matrix for analyzing restated practical knowledge based on two distinctions: (1) absolute versus situational, and (2) descriptive
versus analytical
Descriptive
Analytical
Absolute
Example
Situational
Example
dening
teaching
or
order as a state instead of
a process;
dening teaching or
order as a relative
and/or situational state;
describing teaching or
disciplinary measures in
a specic situation;
dening
teaching
or
order as a process including the explication of the
underlying mechanism;
dening teaching or
order as a situationspecic process including the explication of
the underlying mechanism;
explicating situational
relations within and inuences on teaching or
order including the explanation of the functioning.
732
3. Results
3.1. Reported own beliefs, practical knowledge and
theory
The student teachers reports were analyzed
with the categories described in Table 1. Excerpts
of the reports will illustrate the four categories.
733
734
735
736
to the summaries when describing the comparisons. When comparing their own ideas, their
mentors, or the theory, they did not rehearse the
analytical descriptions mentioned earlier.
The reports with relatively high scores (HA)
were compared to those with low scores to check
which parts of the assignment had elicited the most
analytical statements. It appeared that the relatively high analytical scores originated from the
descriptions of the student teachers own beliefs. It
is not clear whether the HA group could handle the
concept mapping and completing sentences better
or were better at reporting on their own reasoning.
Furthermore, the HA group did not dier in the
number of analytical statements when they reported on mentors practical knowledge. Some
questions still remain: was the HA group better at
eliciting their own beliefs in an analytical way,
rather than their mentors practical knowledge? Or
were they better able at reporting on their own
beliefs rather than others practical knowledge?
These questions have to do with the complexity
of the student teacher assignment that appeals to
several skills, especially when exploring a mentors
practical knowledge: conversation, cognitive processing, and writing skills. Conversation skills,
such as listening, continuing to ask questions, and
summarizing, are required when the concept map
is discussed with the mentor. Cognitive processing
skills, such as selecting, relating, structuring, and
critical thinking, are required for elaborating
meaningfully the mentors concept map and
completed sentences (see Vermunt, 1998). Writing
skills are required for reporting on the elicited
practical knowledge. What is more, the mentors
should also possess skills to verbalize their
practical knowledge. Thus, when student teachers
did not report on their mentors practical knowledge, including the reasons underlying teaching, it
is not possible to indicate the immediate cause.
Conversely, when they did, it can be assumed that
they possessed the skills required for this task.
Further research should examine the partial
skills required for eliciting and comparing own
beliefs and mentors practical knowledge. This
means that the capacities and motivation of
mentor teachers for explicating their own practical
knowledge should also be investigated more
737
738
This could be achieved in various ways: assignments like in the present study, teacher stories to
be studied by students under the supervision of an
institute teacher, institutionalized discussions between institute teachers, mentors, and student
teachers, etc.
With regard to the elicitation of practical
knowledge, further research is needed to investigate student teachers who could not deal with the
assignment. It should be determined which of the
required skills, described earlier in this section,
were not sucient. Subsequently, practice and
References
Beijaard, D., Van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (1999). Evaluation of
story-line methodology in research on teachers practical
knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluations, 25, 4762.
Bengtsson, J. (1993). Theory and practice: Two fundamental
categories in the philosophy of teacher education. Educational Review, 45(3), 205211.
Black, A. L., & Halliwell, G. (2000). Accessing practical
knowledge: How? Why? Teaching and Teacher Education,
16(1), 103115.
Brown, S., & McIntyre, D. (1995). Making sense of teaching.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Calderhead, J. (1981). Stimulated recall: A method for research
on teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51,
211217.
Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D.
C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 709725). New York: Macmillan.
Carter, K. (1990). Teachers knowledge and learning to teach.
In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher
education (pp. 291310). New York: Macmillan.
Edwards, A., & Collison, J. (1995). What do teacher mentors
tell student teachers about pupil learning in infant
schools? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1(2),
265279.
Elliott, B., & Calderhead, J. (1994). Mentoring for teacher
development: Possibilities and caveats. In D. McIntyre, H.
Hagger, & M. Wilkin (Eds.), Mentoring: Perspectives on
school-based teacher education (pp. 166189). London:
Kogan Page.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and
competence. London: The Falmer Press.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student
teaching teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(4), 255273.
Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The
nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of
Research on Teaching, 20, 356.
Francis, D. (1995). The reective journal: A window to
preservice teachers practical knowledge. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 11(3), 229241.
Gonzalez, L. E., & Carter, K. (1996). Correspondence in
cooperating teachers and student teachers interpretations of
classroom events. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(1),
3947.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of
epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and
knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88140.
ICLON. (1997). Persoonlijk Functioneren (Personal development as a teacher). Unpublished workbook. Leiden, the
Netherlands: Leiden University.
Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition:
Inferences concerning the Goldilocks principle. Review of
Educational Research, 60(3), 419469.
739
740