Cogent Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaed20

Exploring identity construction in team teaching:

The case of Iranian student-teachers

Mohammad Aliakbari & Peyman Valizadeh

To cite this article: Mohammad Aliakbari & Peyman Valizadeh (2023) Exploring identity
construction in team teaching: The case of Iranian student-teachers, Cogent Education, 10:1,
2168934, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

© 2023 The Author(s). This open access

article is distributed under a Creative
Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Published online: 03 Feb 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934
Received: 15 June 2022
Accepted: 08 January 2023
*Corresponding author: Peyman
Valizadeh, Applied Linguistics,
Department of English, Ilam
University, 67681-15149,Ilam, Iran
E-mail: peyman.valizadeh.1993@g­
mail.com
Reviewing editor:
Lawrence Jun Zhang, Curriculum
and Pedagogy, University of
Auckland Faculty of Education and
Social Work, New Zealand
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Peyman Valizadeh
TEACHER EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT | RESEARCH ARTICLE
Exploring identity construction in team teaching:
The case of Iranian student-teachers
Mohammad Aliakbari1 and Peyman Valizadeh1*
Abstract: The present study examined the professional identity development of five
student-teachers in the context of team-teaching. Data were collected from sti­
mulated recall sessions, semi-structured interviews, and reflective reports, which
were analyzed through thematic analysis. Findings indicate that the student-
teachers’ professional identity was shaped by meaningful cooperation with their
mentor and peers. The student-teachers progressed from team-focused to self-
focused professional identity, indicating professional development, self-regulation,
and substantial gains in their satisfaction. The study provides implications for
teacher educators to use team-teaching in their teacher professional development
programs.
Subjects: Primary Education - Teacher Education & Training; Teachers & Teacher
Education; Language & Education
Keywords: team-teaching; teacher identity reconstruction; teacher professional
development; teacher learning; sociocultural theories
1. Introduction
In every attempt for the success of education, the working practitioners as well as student-
teachers deserve due attention. For developing a professional teacher, it is required to develop
some identities in a student-teacher to move toward more self-regulation (Sachs, 2001). According
to Burns and Richards (2009), identity construction involves how individuals catch sight of them­
selves and how they represent their roles in different contexts. In this vein, Richards (2011) defined
identity as “the differing social and cultural roles teacher-learners enact through their interactions
with lecturers and other students during the process of learning” (p. 14).
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Mohammad Aliakbari is Professor of Applied Linguistics at Ilam University, Iran. His areas of interest
embrace SLA, teacher education, educational psychology, and sociolinguistics. He has published exten­
sively in scholarly journals, including Journal of Pragmatics, Educational Psychology, System, and
International Journal of Applied Linguistics.
Peyman Valizadeh graduated in Master of Applied Linguistics from University of Zabol. He is interested
in teacher education, teacher identity, digital agency, and language assessment.
© 2023 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
Page 1 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

As a contextual element, team-teaching is argued to provide a venue for novice teachers to

develop professionally (Gardiner & Robinson, 2011). Team-teaching refers to the engagement of
two or more teachers at the same time in the same class (Carpenter et al., 2007; Crow & Smith,
2005; Murata, 2002). This engagement results in teachers’ professional and personal growth
(Tsybulsky & Muchnik-Rozanov, 2019; Jang, 2006). However, despite the benefits associated with
team-teaching for developing teachers’ professional identity, there are few studies addressing
teacher identity construction in the context of team-teaching, which is the focus of the current
study. Accordingly, the present study is an attempt to specify various usage in conducting team-
teaching in different teacher training courses and teacher professional development programs.

2. Literature review

2.1. Team-teaching
Team-teaching can be defined as the practice of “two or more teachers in some level of collabora­
tion in the planning, delivery, and/or evaluation of a course” (Baeten & Simons, 2014, p. 95). The
main focus of team-teaching process depends on the collaboration, engagement, and participa­
tion of teachers (Mandal et al., 2019). According to Wassell and LaVan (2009), both sharing social
interaction and field experiences enable student-teachers to critically review their own practices as
they learn to teach.

Many studies focused on the advantages of team-teaching in different aspects (e.g., Baeten &
Simons, 2014; Simons & Baeten, 2016), such as presenting a high-quality teaching performance
(e.g., Walsh & Elmslie, 2005), collaborating which causes mutual and emotional support (e.g., Dee,
2012; Gardiner & Robinson, 2010), reflecting on assumptions and practices (e.g., Wassell & LaVan,
2009).It also increases professional learning (e.g., pedagogical skills) and personal development
(e.g., gains in self-confidence; Birrell & Bullough, 2005; King, 2006).

As far as teacher professional development is concerned, they learn how to function as better
teachers (Birrell & Bullough, 2005) collaborators (Dee, 2012; Gardiner & Robinson, 2009; Jang,
2008), and reflective thinkers (Shin et al., 2007). Team-teaching “can help create a dynamic and
interactive learning environment . . . and also inspire . . . intellectual partnerships among faculty”
(Leavitt, 2006, p. 1).

In the team-teaching process, mentors play an important role. With the help of mentors,
student-teachers can learn better as compared to working by themselves (Gardiner & Robinson,
2011). Student-teachers with mentors can achieve higher levels of performance and they receive
help and support from team members (Gardiner & Robinson, 2009). The key element in mentorship
in team-teaching is to develop good professional relationships in team-teaching through the
mentor’s feedback on a group and individual levels of team-teaching) Mandal et al., 2019). Team-
teaching (i.e., collaboration with other student-teachers and a mentor) is advised to be a valuable
strategy for teacher education programs (Richards & Farrell, 2005).

In the light of various studies in team-teaching in different context adequate empirical team-
teaching projects in Iran offers a fruitful opportunity to examine the feasibility of team teaching to
address the pending needs of learners. In the context of Iran, different studies were carried out in
team-teaching. Different studies in Iran explored the efficacy of team-teaching on students’
proficiency (Aliakbari & Bazyar, 2012), on public school students’ performance (Aliakbari &
Mansouri Nejad, 2010), and on students’ reading comprehension (Aliakbari & Jaber Khales
Haghighi, 2013). Even though the literature of these studies showed the significant effectiveness
of team-teaching in different contexts, the results of these studies showed no significant changes
in the students’ proficiency, performance, and reading comprehension. However, in other studies,
more significant changes and efficacy were recorded through using team-teaching in different
classes. In term of reading comprehension proficiency, Haghighi and Abdollahi (2014), Mohammad
Hassani Soudmand and Ahour (2020), and Moradian Fard and AghaBabaie (2013) found out team-

Page 2 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

teaching enhances the reading comprehension of the students. More recently, Khoshnodifar et al.
(2020) and Narmashiri et al. (2021) investigated the effect of team-teaching on the students’
academic performance and motivation. They found that team-teaching has a significant efficacy
on students’ performance and motivation. Although acceptable number of studies conducted in
Iran, few, if any, studies explored team-teaching efficiency among Iranian English teachers,
especially in term of their identity construction during team-teaching programs.

2.2. Teachers’ identity construction

Defining identity in general, as well as professional identity specifically, has always been
a problematic issue. Hence, cognitivists claim that identity is constructed, not ready-formed.
Moreover, the socio-constructivist theory views identity as constructed in light of contextual
idiosyncrasies since teacher identity is a social phenomenon that can be constructed, recon­
structed or developed in a social environment. It is also argued that teacher identity is dynamic
and multifaceted and it can be affected by different factors such as context, experience, beliefs,
and personal attributes (Richards, 2021; Richardson & Watt, 2018). Moreover, in a relatively more
comprehensive interpretation, teacher identity is defined as “teachers’ dynamic self-conception
and imagination of themselves as teachers, which shifts as they participate in varying commu­
nities, interact with other individuals . . . in social contexts” (Yazan, 2018, p. 21).

Developing and evolving in a professional context, a teacher’s identity is shaped and reshaped in
interaction with others and “negotiated through experience” (Sachs, 2005, p. 15). Hence, it can be
argued that identity is socially constructed, as it is usually defined considering a person’s social
relations and participation within the community. Hence, teacher identity construction and team-
teaching are theoretically supported by Vygotsky’s (1978) and other sociocultural theories of
human learning which adequately “recognize the inherent interconnectedness of the cognitive
and the social” processes of learning” (Johnson, 2009, p. 13) processes of learning. In sociocultural
theories, human learning is defined “as a dynamic social activity that is situated in physical and
social contexts, and distributed across persons, tools, and activities” (Johnson, 2006, p. 237). On
the other side, Lave and Wenger’s (1991) Community of Practice (CoP), along with other socio­
cultural theories such as situated learning theory and action theory, supports teachers’ profes­
sional identity construction within team-teaching contexts. According to Wenger (1998),
“engagement in social practice is the fundamental process by which” individuals learn and
socialize into their desired communities (p. 1). In the process of becoming a member of
a community, the teacher can take on many sub-identities based on context and relationships.

Some studies have focused on the effects of a teacher training course on teachers’ professional
identity. As an example, by gathering data via reflection and interviews, Abednia (2012) showed
that even a short teacher training course can influence the professional identity of teachers. This
finding indicates that changes in teacher identity can be triggered by interaction with tutors and
peers in the immediate environment. In another study, Cattley (2007) showed that reflection
writing in a teacher training program has significant effects on the student-teachers’ identity. On
the other side, Maclean and White (2007) used video reflection for investigating identity construc­
tion of pre-service and experienced teachers. This study claimed that reflection increases con­
fidence, enthusiasm and professional learning in teachers’ identity. Moreover, Mirzaee and
Aliakbari (2018) explored an Iranian EFL teacher’s identity formation from a social ecology per­
spective through the critical events in the teacher’s life history. The study showed the construction
of the teacher’s sense of identity and agency within the given sociocultural milieu.

Despite abundant research conducted on teacher identity construction, few studies have
focused on changes in the identity of student-teachers during team-teaching in the field of
English Language Teaching (ELT) as the focus on this study is specifically ELT teachers. In the
recent study of Tsybulsky and Muchnik-Rozanov (2019), a team-teaching framework was con­
ducted in science classes by using a project-based learning (PBL) approach. Their research findings
showed how using PBL team-teaching in science classes helped shaping student-teachers’

Page 3 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

professional identity and how professional growth, empowerment, and gains in student-teachers’
self-confidence increased.

Recent research works (e.g., Eslamdoost et al., 2020; Karimi & Mofidi, 2019; Mansouri et al., 2021)
indicated that Iranian English teachers are likely to face challenges that negatively influence their
identity due to multiplex of sociocultural factors. Despite these robust studies, further research is
needed to show how English language student-teachers’ identity is constructed in team-teaching
classes. To shed light on this issue, the present study was intended to investigate how student-
teachers’ identity buffeted and shaped as a team teacher through their engagement in a team-
teaching course in Iranian EFL context. Stated otherwise, this study aimed at investigating how
team-teaching can help student-teachers construct the identity of an autonomous and self-
regulated teacher. Accordingly, the following research questions were formulated:

1. How is teacher identity reconstructed as a result of engagement in team-teaching?

2. to what extend can engagement in team-teaching promote teacher identity reconstruction as

an autonomous and self-regulated teacher?

3. Methodology

3.1. Context and participants

The study was carried out in the summer of 2019. An English teaching institution that followed
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method for learner was selected for this research. . The
institution followed team-teaching policy for its teacher education programs and different teacher
training courses based on team-teaching were held for their advanced language learners in recent
years. As many classes in different ages and levels were being held in the institution for English
learners, a class which included 30 elementary students with the age range of 6–10 was selected.
According to the institution policy, the new series of Tiny Talk books were implemented and the
teaching procedure were based on CLT. The course was held in two months. In addition to the
team-teaching course (10 sessions), five other sessions were allocated per each teacher to teach in
individual classes (two sessions per week).

As some advanced language learners in the same institution were volunteer to teach English
as their part-time job or their future career, the institution decided to hold a teacher professional
development program to train the participants as student-teachers, among them. Five student-
teachers were recruited as the subjects of this study. They were selected through a maximum
variation strategy of purposeful sampling (Patton,) in order to have as various and much
information as possible whose names are pseudonym in the research. The touchstone for
choosing the teacher participants was their general language proficiency. According to
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) level, their general English
was decided to be at least B2 (according to the Oxford Placement Test) in order to participate in
this study. Participants had no or not enough experience in EFL teaching (see, Table 1). To
observe the ethical principle, especially about the videos which they did not like to be shown
anywhere, a consent was signed. In addition, a professional mentor was invited to manage the

Table 1. The participants’ Demographic Information

Fake names Gender Age Degree CEFR level
Darya Female 20 Senior Year B2
Shahin Male 19 Senior Year C1
Yekta Female 18 Junior Year C1
Yegane Female 19 Senior Year B2
Nima Male 18 Junior Year C1

Page 4 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

student-teachers in the team-teaching class. She was an English teacher for 15 years and
a teacher educator for 5 years. She had hold different Teacher Training Courses (TTC) in different
institution.

3.2. Design and data collection

To have as various and much information as possible, case study design (Yin, 2013) was selected.
Moreover, an in-depth description of what happened in these five student-teachers’ experience in
team-teaching classes for identity reconstruction to be autonomous teachers were addressed. To
collect the data, semi-interviews, video recordings, stimulated recalls, and teacher reflective
journals were used.

3.3. Semi-structured interviews

Before the team-teaching program, the student-teachers were interviewed to explore their iden­
tities. This interview took more than one hour for each student teacher. In addition, after each 15
sessions, a short semi-structured interview was conducted with the participants to describe their
feeling, their new experiences in the class, the challenges of the class, and the changes in their
cognition, attitude, and identity (see Appendix A for the items). Overall, 15 interviews were
conducted which lasted 15 to 20 minutes were recorded for data analysis. The interviews were
both in English and Persian in order to be as informative as possible. .

3.4. Stimulated recall sessions

As an introspective research methodology, stimulated recall sessions were used to examine what
the participants thought about their teaching practice (Ryan & Gass, 2012). 15 sessions (10 for
team-teaching and 5 for individual teaching sessions) were recorded in order to be used in the
stimulated recall sessions. 24 hours after each class, the student-teachers were invited for the
stimulated recall sessions. They started watching the videos to recall what happened in the class
and to elicit their reflections and they paused the video wherever they find it interesting and
controversial. They were asked to talk about their feelings, performances, and the reasons of their
action. The items are given in Appendix B. These sessions were useful to find out the process of
their identity development.

3.5. Teacher reflective journals

Reflection journal is a decent instrument to help the student-teachers to reflect their identity
reconstruction (Cattley, 2007; Tsybulsky & Muchnik-Rozanov, 2019). After each stimulated recall
session, the participating teachers were asked to write 3 to 5 pages of reflective journals (McKay,
2009) in which they were to describe their experiences during class sessions and their reflections
on their performances. Some questions were prepared (see Appendix C) to guide them about the
content and entries of journals, and to encourage them to answer some questions about experi­
ence, performance, and development in the team-teaching classes.

3.6. Data analysis

The data featured in this study were analyzed inductively to examine the meanings people
assigned to their expressions (Spradley, 1979), and to adequately record the themes grounded
in the data (Flick, 2014). To suit this purpose, the videos and the audio recordings (made during
interviews, teaching sessions, and stimulated recall sessions), were transcribed verbatim and
translated into English (Temple & Young, 2005). After reading and analyzing data cyclically, the
Constant Comparative Method outside of grounded theory was used (Fram, 2013) as this method
“combines systematic data collection, coding, and analysis with theoretical sampling in order to
generate theory that is integrated, close to the data, and expressed in a form clear enough for
further testing” (Conrad, Neumann, Haworth, & Scott, 1993, p. 280). Initial/open coding and
focused coding (Charmaz, 2006) were used in the first and second cycles of coding respectively.
During coding, the researchers wrote analytic memos to note their thoughts and interpretations
(Saldaňa, 2009). The transcript of the study was codified in 54 excerpts which 17 of them are
retrieved from stimulate recall sessions, 13 of the from interviews, and 24 of them from reflection

Page 5 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

journals. To ensure the trustworthiness of the study (Saldaňa, 2009), two measures were taken;
member checking was utilized by asking the participants to review the transcripts of their inter­
views and, the researchers worked as a team to analyze and interpret the data.

4. Findings
The purpose of this study was examining the identity reconstruction of student-teachers engaged
in team-teaching and how team-teaching helped student-teachers teach individually. For this
purpose, the researchers categorized identity construction of the student-teachers based on the
two factors: teacher identity construction as a result of engagement in team-teaching, and
exploring how team-teaching may help student-teachers to be autonomous and self-regulated
teachers.

4.1. Teacher identity as a result of engagement in team-teaching

To address the first question, the identity of the student-teachers was explored before the team-
teaching through structured interview. In this interview, the student-teachers elaborated on their
interests and difficulties, and their cognitions about teaching. This initial interview helped the
researchers to find out the pre-identity of the student-teachers before starting the course in
order to understand what they are thinking and feeling about teaching English. On the other
side, this initial interview was useful to compare any changes in the teacher-students’ identity
during the team-teaching course.

4.2. Interests and difficulties of teaching

The student-teachers stated that they had little experience in teaching. They were only advanced
level students who had no or a little experience in teaching English. Because of their little
experience in teaching, it was required to examine their identity about teaching before starting
the team-teaching course to help researchers understand how their identity constructs during the
study. Shahin said “sometimes I teach English to my younger brother though I am not sure about
my teaching” (Shahin; The Initial Interview; Before Team-Teaching). Moreover, some of them
desired to be an English teacher: “I really like teaching any subjects especially English” (Yekta;
The Initial Interview; Before Team-Teaching).

Although they liked teaching, they considered it as a difficult task: “I like to teach any subject,
but when I am thinking about it, I feel it is not an easy job” (Nima; The Initial Interview; Before
Team-Teaching). The difficulty was also viewed in light of their little knowledge about teaching. As
Darya said “I know what the subject is about, but I don’t know how to deliver it to others” (Darya;
The Initial Interview; Before Team-Teaching).

4.3. Student-teachers’ cognitions about teaching

The initial interview showed that the student-teachers’ cognition was shaped traditionally about
teaching and the roles of the teacher at class. In this interview, they stated that they were taught
based on traditional methods such as Grammar-Translation and Audio-Lingual methods. They,
mostly, had more emphasis on translation and repetition in their beliefs about teaching. For
example, Shahin believed, “I think repeating is the best way to teach kids. Because when I was
a language learner, the teachers just repeated over and over (Shahin; The Initial Interview; Before
Team-Teaching). Darya, also believed in over repetition of the chunks: “I believe students need to
repeat a chunk over and over after their teachers to learn the language fluently (Darya; The Initial
Interview; Before Team-Teaching). When the researchers asked how they wanted to teach a word,
most of them said “by translating”. This piece of evidence illustrated their cognition had been
traditionally shaped.

On the other side, when they were asked about the role of teacher in class, the majority had the
same idea that teacher is the high authority of the class. They believed the teacher is the most
knowledgeable individual in the class and students need to trust him/her. Yegane’s, for example,
believed in the high authority of the teacher and said: “I believe every student must do whatever

Page 6 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

the teacher says . . . . . . she knows what to do is better” (Yegane; The Initial Interview; Before Team-
Teaching).

The initiation of the course was accompanied by confusion, anxiety, and low mutual support
between the student-teachers. These challenges gradually turned into learning new strategies and
approaches from their peers and the mentor, as well as, more collaboration between them. It,
finally, resulted in creating two significant identities of teacher as a supporter and teacher as
a collaborator.

4.4. Confusion, anxiety, and low mutual support

The initial sessions started with anxiety and confusion among the student-teachers and the
learners. Many things were new to them. They did not have enough formal teaching experience
in public classes. Moreover, they had rarely seen two or more teachers teach at the same time and
in the same class. They did not know how to initiate the class. This transition is natural as teachers
both students and teachers are confused in the first sessions (Valizadeh, 2019). This confusion was
also found among students in Aliakbari and Bazyar’s (2012). As well as the previous studies, this
study showed the confusion was dominant for both teachers and students, as the extracts 5–8
show: “At first, I didn’t know how to start” (Shahin; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; First
Session); “I was ok before entering the class. As I entered, I was confused and I didn’t know
what to do” (Yekta, Stimulated Recall; Team-Teaching; First Session); “I think students were
confused too. They haven’t seen several teachers in the same class. They have been a little
shocked, I think (Nima, Stimulated Recall; Team-Teaching; First session); “Today, in the first session
of teaching, I felt confused and embarrassed (Yegane, Interview; Team-Teaching; First Session).

Gender pressure was an important factor for the student-teachers’ anxiety. As the teachers were
18 to 20 years old, they did not use to be in the same class with different genders, so they faced
difficulty regarding gender pressure. It was a little difficult for them to work with each other
simultaneously. Even though team-teaching requires preparing, teaching, and evaluating coopera­
tively, this factor of anxiety caused difficulty, as extracts 9–10 show: “I didn’t feel well when I saw
two of my peers are boys” (Yegane; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; First Session); “It was really
difficult. I wasn’t very relaxed with my peers because most of them were female” (Nima; Reflection
Journal; Team-Teaching; First Session).

In the initial sessions, the participants could not support each other properly and there was the
least collaboration among them. The classes looked like chaos and disorder. The analyses of the
extracts 10–13 showed that the student-teachers faced this problem: “we are not balanced as
a team. We walked a lot in the class . . . everything was chaos . . . and it affected our teaching”
(Shahin; Stimulated Recall; Team-Teaching; Second Session); “One important thing about this
session is that teachers must be more coordinated. That was a problem that everyone suffered
from. (Darya; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; Second Session); “We didn’t follow a path. No one
supported each other. I got a little tired” (Yekta; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; First Session);
and “It was a rich experience but we were not ready. I think it is because of not having a strong
lesson plan” (Yegane; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; First Session).

4.5. Familiarity with some strategies and approaches

The confusion, anxiety and low mutual support among the student-teachers gradually decreased.
Through communication with the mentor and peers, the student-teachers obtained a deal of
valuable knowledge about new approaches of individual factors like individual differences, age
and anxiety, as well as technical factors like communication strategies and learning strategies,
and environmental factors like social context and educational context. For instances, Yegane
learned from Yekta how to teach physically a word, a phrase, or a chunk “I saw Yekta teaching
‘sit down’ and ‘stand-up’ by acting physically and she asked learners to do the same. I found out it
as a good technique to teach words and phrases” (Yegane; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching;
Fifth Session). In addition, Shahin learned from Yegane how to teach colors by real objects like the

Page 7 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

students’ clothes. “I noticed that relating the lesson to real-life would make the lesson funnier and
more interesting. For example, I saw that Yegane pointed to her dress and asked about the color.
I did the same and I thought it might be interesting” (Shahin; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching;
Fourth Session), and also Nima had no idea about how to teach alphabets in English. He learned it
from his peers. The thing which was interesting for him was the example they used in teaching
alphabets. Exemplification was the technique he was interested in “My peers used some examples
to teach Alphabet. I found it useful and I did the same” (Nima; Interview; Team-teaching; fourth
session). Despite the expected changes in the student-teachers’ identity in the first sessions, no
significant alterations were seen. However, the findings showed that their identity would gradually
construct by continuing the team-teaching program in further sessions.

4.6. Teacher as a supporter and a collaborator

Although the course started with some difficulties, challenges, and confusion, and also, no
significant changes were observed in their identity, gradually the student-teachers’ identity started
constructing by more cooperation with the mentor and peers. In this sense, the student-teachers
progressed remarkably through communication with their peers and mentor and two significant
identities were developed in the student-teachers, which are teacher as a supporter and teacher as
a collaborator.

Through interaction with peers, the student-teachers’ confidence increased because of their
peer support. Gradually, the identity of “teacher as a supporter” was shaped in them. They could
cover each peers’ weaknesses by asking questions and observing each other’s performance in
class. The analyses show how this collaboration influenced identity reconstruction, and how the
first mentioned chaos reduced (Excerpt 16–18): “I thank God that we could teach better and
students could learn better. We, teachers, supported each other perfectly” (Yekta; Stimulated
Recall; Team-Teaching; Seventh Session); “One advantage of team-teaching is that teachers can
help you and cover your week points with the peers’ and the mentor’s support” (Darya; Reflection
Journal; Team-Teaching; Ninth Session); and “We didn’t have the previous chaos. We could teach
well” (Yeganeh; Stimulated Recall; Team-Teaching; Ninth Session).

The final element of the student-teachers’ identity reconstruction by the peers was the enhance­
ment of the sense of collaboration among the peers which can be called “teacher as
a collaborator”. They learned different technics and strategies by their collaborations with the
mentor and peers. Beside their view about teaching and learning, they had been a collaborator
teacher who was able to work in a team. The sense of teamwork is an important requirement for
teachers in team teaming classes. As the excerpt 19–21 show: “In this session, teachers had more
collaboration with their peers. I think I am having a collaboration sense as well” (Yekta; Reflection
Journal; Team-teaching; fifth session); “In contrast to the previous session, we had a better
collaboration” (Yegane; Reflection Journal; Team-Teaching; Seventh Session). The results showed
that student-teachers’ identity changed to have more collaboration with their peers.

4.7. To what extend team-teaching can help student-teachers to be autonomous and

self-regulated teachers
In order to find answer to the second question of the study, the student-teachers were invited to
individual teaching classes to find out how team-teaching helped them to be autonomous and
self-regulated teachers. In other words, the researchers were kin to find out if the student-
teachers progressed from team-focused to self-focused professional identity, indicating profes­
sional development, self-regulation, and substantial gains in their satisfaction.

After ten sessions of team-teaching, the student-teachers expressed their readiness for teaching
individually. As they were getting more professional in teaching, they were more satisfied and
more eager to teach individually. According to excerpt 22–24, they believed they were more
professionally developed to take such a risk: “Each session I’m getting better. I feel I can manage
the class by myself and communicate with the students easily” (Yegane; Reflection Journal; Team-

Page 8 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

Teaching; Eighth Session); “I feel, I was getting more independent each session. I like to teach
independently in class” (Yekta; Interview; Team-teaching; Eighth Session); and “I think I’m well
enough to teach alone. I wish I were alone in the class” (Shahin; Reflection Journal; Team-
Teaching; Seventh Session).

Anxiety was almost a natural phenomenon among teachers, especially when they wanted to
start their career. The student-teachers had relatively higher levels of stress at the beginning of the
class: “At first, I had a little stress but after a while, I got better” (Yegane; Stimulate Recall;
Individual Teaching). As they started teaching and used their team-teaching experiences, they
felt at ease and relaxed. They could have good control in managing the class and teaching. They
claimed that being in team-teaching classes had the highest influence on their anxiety and class
management: “I was so relaxed and I had no stress because I have done it before a lot. During the
team-teaching course, I have been 10 times in class and my anxiety reduced a lot. I felt no
pressure” (Darya; Interview; Individual Teaching). Moreover, the identity reconstruction of student-
teachers led to becoming more autonomous and self-regulated to teach individually. As Darya
mentioned in excerpt 25, she could not imagine how team-teaching helped her to teach individu­
ally: “Team-teaching made a revolution in my attitude toward teaching English. If I wanted to start
teaching individually, I would have an incredible stress and I couldn’t handle it” (Darya; Reflection
Journal; Individual Teaching). On the other side, Yegane claimed that if she were not in the team-
teaching course she could not teach individually, and if she taught, she would have a large number
of difficulties and she would teach traditionally: “I loved teaching, but I didn’t have a true under­
standing of teaching. If I taught without participating in the team-teaching course, I might blow it
up and teach traditionally as the way I had been taught” (Yegane; Stimulate Recall; Individual
Teaching).

Other evidence from other student-teachers showed a consistent claim about teaching indivi­
dually. Shahin, Yekta, and Nima directly showed their satisfaction and claimed that they are ready
to teach individually without assistance from others: “Finally, I can say, yes I can teach individu­
ally” (Interview; Individual Teaching), “I’m happy that I’m able to teach individually now” (Yekta;
Interview; Individual Teaching), and “In this session, I could do whatever I wanted. I mean I was
able to teach individually and manage the class” (Nima; Interview; Individual Teaching).

5. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to figure out the identity reconstruction of five novice teachers as
a result of their engagement in a team-teaching practicum in an EFL context, and also, how team-
teaching helped them to be autonomous and self-regulated teachers. To meet this aim, data were
collected before, during, and after the team-teaching engagement. Before team-teaching, the
student-teachers had little experience in teaching and also their cognitions were traditionally
shaped. The first sessions of team-teaching started with challenges such as anxiety, confusion,
and low mutual supports. The literature shows that these challenges are common in the first
sessions of each team-teaching (Gardiner & Robinson, 2011; Leavitt, 2006)

After three to four sessions, student-teachers gradually overcame these difficulties, and their
anxiety and confusion reduced remarkably when they entered a new phase of team-teaching and
they had got used to the class context better. This is in line with Dee (2012) as he noticed that,
student-teachers obtained a great deal of valuable knowledge about how to teach (). The findings
along with other studies showed that collaboration with peers has a significant effect on the
teachers’ professional identity reconstruction (Gee, 2011a, 2011b; Tsybulsky & Muchnik-Rozanov,
2019). Likewise, Mirzaee and Aliakbari’s (2018) findings are in same line with those of the present
study since they also showed that teachers’ identities were shaped through engagement in various
professional communities and activities.

To answer the first question, the student-teachers’ identity construction was investigated.
During team-teaching, new changes were initiated in student-teachers’ behavior, identity,

Page 9 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

development, and attitudes. These changes resulted in familiarity of the student-teachers with
some strategies and approaches and reconstructed two identities in them. Student-teachers
learned some strategies from their peers such as using real objects in teaching colors, teaching
chunks by games, and using different examples out of the book for teaching alphabets. This finding
not only shows the significance of team-teaching in learning some strategies and approaches of
teaching, but also it indicates how it reconstructs identity among the student-teachers. The main
reason for this identity reconstruction might be the interaction between the peers and the mentor.
In this sense, the student-teachers may develop novel identities through interaction with peers
which are “teacher as a supporter” and “teacher as a collaborator”. The great support can be done
by the team-teaching partner, a peer, at the same level (Shin et al., 2007). They had this
opportunity to make it easier to share their knowledge to solve the challenges during their
teaching (Kamens, 2007). Since the student-teachers achieved the identity of a supporter, the
teaching experience became less stressful (Dee, 2012). Moreover, team-teaching enhanced friend­
ship and deepened the relationship among student-teachers to have better collaboration (Dee,
2012; Jang, 2008). Generally, by experiencing team-teaching, the student-teachers found the
identity of “teacher as a supporter” and “teacher as a collaborator” which are the result of the
peers’ interaction.

To address the second question which asked whether team-teaching helps the student-teachers
teach individually or if they can be autonomous and self-regulated teachers. Some studies claimed
that team-teaching would not help student-teachers to teach individually (Gardiner & Robinson,
2009), as it makes them dependent on their peers and mentor, and there is always someone to
support them (Gardiner & Robinson, 2011). However, this study showed that the student-teachers
are identically and cognitively ready to teach individually. To examine their autonomy and self-
regulation, the researchers requested each individual student-teacher to teach individually. This
action was performed to understand if their identity reconstruction is stable or not. The result
showed that the student-teachers not only did not have anxiety, but they were also ready to teach
individually. It can be supported that if the team-teaching course is conducted professionally for
student-teachers, we may witness their progress to teach individually. Team-teaching both makes
the novice teachers capable to teach individually, and teaches them enough professional strate­
gies and new approaches of teaching. This examination not only proved their ability to teach
individually, but it also clarified that the teachers’ autonomy and regulation identity were recon­
structed enough to teach individually. Contrary to the other studies (Gardiner & Robinson, 2009,
2011) which claimed that team-teaching makes the novice teachers dependent on others, and
that it cannot well professionally develop the student-teachers, the present study indicated that
the student-teachers were not dependent on their peers and mentor, and that their identity was
efficiently and professionally developed to teach individually.

6. Conclusion
This study investigated how identity construction of five student-teachers were buffeted and
shaped their engagement with their peers in a team-teaching course. Additionally, the study
examined how team-teaching helped student-teachers construct the identity as an autonomous
and self-regulated teacher.

The findings showed the student-teachers had a little knowledge about teaching and their
cognition was traditionally shaped when the study was conducted. During the team-teaching,
they had some challenges in collaboration and supporting each other, gradually they learned
a number of new strategies and approaches about teaching, and also their identity of teachers as
supporters and teachers as collaborators were shaped. After team-teaching, their performances
were examined in individual teaching classes, the evidence of which supported the autonomous
teacher identity in them.

The findings promise some practical implications for different groups of stakeholders in general
education and L2 education in particular. Policymakers, for example, can make use of the findings

Page 10 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

to develop the educational policy and consider the merits of team-teaching. In addition, teacher
educators may use this study to professionally contribute to novice teachers’ development in
team-teaching courses. School leaders can implement team-teaching courses to enhance the
collaborations between their English teachers. Teachers will be more familiar with new strategies
through cooperation with other teachers and mentors. Finally, teaching and learning would be
more convenient for both teachers and learners.

To care for the limitations of the current study, further research is required to document the
teachers’ performance with more rigorous research methods. Considering the fact that, the level of
the language learners in the present work was pre-elementary and the age range was 6–10, the
result and the situation might be different from the higher levels and older students. We believe
that team-teaching should be assimilated within teacher professional development programs, as it
is one of the steps toward preparing autonomous teachers with high professional identities.

Funding Carpenter, D., Crawford, L., & Walden, R. (2007). Testing

The authors received no direct funding for this research.
Author details
Mohammad Aliakbari1
Peyman Valizadeh1
E-mail: peyman.valizadeh.1993@gmail.com
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3759-299X
1
Applied Linguistics, Department of English, Ilam
University, Ilam, Iran.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Citation information
Cite this article as: Exploring identity construction in team
teaching: The case of Iranian student-teachers,
Mohammad Aliakbari & Peyman Valizadeh, Cogent
Education (2023), 10: 2168934.
References
Abednia, A. (2012). Teachers’ professional identity:
Contributions of a critical EFL teacher education course
in Iran. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(5), 706–717.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.02.005
Aliakbari, M., & Bazyar, A. (2012). Exploring the impact of
parallel teaching on general language proficiency of
EFL learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of
Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 55–71. https://files.eric.ed.
gov/fulltext/EJ979922.pdf
Aliakbari, M., & Jaber Khales Haghighi, M. A. (2013). Team-
teaching efficacy in an efl context: Does the age
matter? International Journal of Language Learning
and Applied Linguistics World, 4(1), 150–164. https://
www.academia.edu/download/36966370/
September2013fullissue.pdf#page=151
Aliakbari, M., & Mansouri Nejad, A. (2010). Implementing
a co-teaching model for improving EFL learners’
grammatical proficiency. Proceedings of the
International Conference ICT for Language Learning
3rd Edition, Florence, Italy.
Baeten M and Simons M. (2014). Student teachers' team
teaching: Models, effects, and conditions for imple­
mentation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 41, 92–
110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.03.010
Birrell, J., & Bullough, R. (2005). Teaching with a peer: A
follow-up study of the first year of teaching. Action in
Teacher Education, 27(l), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.
1080/01626620.2005.10463375
Burns, A., & Richards, J. C. (2009) The Cambridge guide
to second language teacher education: America:
Cambridge University Press.
the efficacy of team-teaching. Learning Environments
Research, 10(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10984-007-9019-y
Cattley, G. (2007). Emergence of professional identity for
the pre-service teacher. International Education
Journal, 8(2), 337–347. https://files.eric.ed.gov/full
text/EJ834271.pdf
Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing grounded theory:
A practical guide through qualitative analysis: SAGE
Publications.
Conrad, C., Neumann, A., Haworth, J. G., & Scott, P. (1993).
Qualitative research in higher education: Experiencing
alternative perspectives and approaches. Ginn. Simon
and Schuster.
Crow, J., & Smith, L. (2005). Co-teaching in higher edu­
cation: Reflective conversation on shared experience
as continued professional development for lecturers
and health and social care students. Reflective
Practice, 6(4), 491–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14623940500300582
Dee, A. (2012). Collaborative clinical practice: An alter­
nate field experience. Issues in Teacher Education, 21
(2), 147–163. https://www.itejournal.org/issues/fall-
2012/14dee.pdf
Eslamdoost, S., King, K. A., & Tajeddin, Z. (2020).
Professional identity conflict and (re) construction
among English teachers in Iran. Journal of Language,
Identity & Education, 19(5), 327–341. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15348458.2019.1676157
Flick, U. (2014). The Sage handbook of qualitative data
analysis. SAGE.
Fram, S. M. (2013) The constant comparative analysis
method outside of grounded theory. The Qualitative
Report, pp. 1–25
Gardiner W. (2010). Mentoring two student teachers:
mentors’ perceptions of peer placements. Teaching
Education, 21(3), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10476210903342102
Gardiner, W., & Robinson, K. (2009). Paired field placements:
A means for collaboration. The New Educator, 5(1),
81–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/1547688X.2009.
10399565
Gardiner, W., & Robinson, K. (2011). Peer field placements
with preservice teachers: Negotiating the challenges of
professional collaboration. The Professional Educator, 35,
2. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ988203.pdf
Gee, J. P. (2011a). An introduction to discourse analysis:
Theory and method. Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2011b). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit.
Routledge.
Haghighi, J. K., & Abdollahi, K. (2014). On the Efficacy of
team teaching and station teaching in the

Page 11 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934
enhancement of students’ reading comprehension in
an EAP situation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 98, 882–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2014.03.496
Jang S. (2006). Research on the effects of team teaching
upon two secondary school teachers. Educational
Research, 48(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00131880600732272
Jang, S. (2008). Innovations in science teacher education:
Effects of integrating technology and team-teaching
strategies. Computers & Education, 51(2), 646–659.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.07.001
Johnson, K. E. (2009). Second language teacher education:
A sociocultural perspective. Routledge.
Kamens, M. W. (2007). Learning about co-teaching:
A collaborative student teaching experience for pre­
service teachers. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 30(3), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/
088840640703000304
Karimi, M. N., & Mofidi, M. (2019). L2 teacher identity
development: An activity theoretic perspective.
System, 81, 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sys
tem.2019.02.006
Khoshnodifar, Z., Abbasi, E., Farhadian, H., Sadighi, H., &
Pouratashi, M. (2020). Comparative comparison of lec­
ture and team member teaching design methods in
agricultural higher education system of Iran. Journal of
Agricultural Science and Technology, 22(4), 891–904.
King S. (2006). Promoting Paired Placements in Initial
Teacher Education. International Research in
Geographical and Environmental Education, 15(4),
370–386. https://doi.org/10.2167/irg201.0
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate
peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Leavitt, M. C. (2006). Team-teaching: Benefits and
Challenges. Speaking of Teaching Newsletter Archive,
16(1), 1–4. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=
j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=
2ahUKEwjOpLWe4978AhXVhv0HHTZBDqoQFnoECA8
QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aup.edu%2Fsites%
2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fdownload%2FAcademics%
2Facademic-resources%2Fteaching-learning-center
%2FStanford%2520Speaking%2520of%
2520Teaching%2520newsletter%2520%25281%
2529.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2uZ90GawX81i-15Fch4wIS
Maclean, R., & White, S. (2007). Video reflection and the
formation of teacher identity in a team of preservice
and experienced teachers. Reflective Practice, 8(1),
47–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940601138949
Mandal, N. K., Rasul, M. G., & Azad, A. K. (2019) Team-
teaching approaches: How to manage student learn­
ing in multi-campus settings. In: 30th annual confer­
ence for the Australasian Association for Engineering
Education (AAEE 2019): Educators becoming agents
of change: Innovate, integrate, Motivate, pp. 411.
Engineers Australia.
Mansouri, B., Molana, K., & Nazari, M. (2021). The intercon­
nection between second language teachers’ language
assessment literacy and professional agency: The
mediating role of institutional policies. System, 103,
102674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102674
McKay, S. L. (2009). Introspective techniques. In
J. Heigham & R. A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative re-search
in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp.
220–241). Palgrave Macmillan.
Mirzaee, A., & Aliakbari, M. (2018). “They now respect me
and send me to the best schools!”: identity con­
struction of an Iranian EFL teacher. Critical Inquiry in
Language Studies, 15(1), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.
1080/15427587.2017.1327794
Mohammad Hassani Soudmand, F., & Ahour, T. (2020).
The effect of one teach-one assist model of co-
teaching on Iranian EFL learners’ reading compre­
hension. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and
Practice, 13(26), 24–48. https://doi.org/10.30495/jal.
2020.676716
Moradian Fard, F., & AghaBabaie, E. (2013). The effect of
co-teaching on improving EFL learner’s reading
comprehension. International Journal of Advanced
Studies in Humanities and Social Science, 2(2), 97–107
http://www.ijashssjournal.com/article_83453_
21aa83deaeab5b033957ae15dd9fc126.pdf.
Murata, R. (2002). What does team-teaching mean?
A case study of interdisciplinary teaming. The Journal
of Educational Research, 96(2), 67–77. https://doi.org/
10.1080/00220670209598794
Narmashiri, F., Tajadini, M., & Fatehi Rad, N. (2021).
Impact of team teaching on the academic perfor­
mance, motivation, and collaboration of Iranian EFL
learners: oral skills and counseling procedures in
focus DOR: 20.1001. 1.23223898. 2021.9. 37.9. 7.
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching
and Research, 9(37), 151–159. https://doi.org/10.
52547/JFL.9.37.151
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation
methods. Sage.
Richards J C. (2008). Second Language Teacher Education
Today. RELC Journal, 39(2), 158–177. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0033688208092182
Richards, J. C. (2021). Teacher, learner and
student-teacher identity in TESOL. RELC Journal.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688221991308
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional
development for language teachers: Strategies for
teacher learning. Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2018). Teacher pro­
fessional identity and career motivation: A lifespan
perspective. In Research on teacher identity (pp.
37–48). Springer.https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.
1007/978-3-319-93836-3_4
Ryan, J., & Gass, S. (2012). Stimulated recall. In R. Barnard
& A. Burns (Eds.), Teacher cognition and practice:
International case studies to illuminate methodologi­
cal issues (pp. 144–161). Multilingual Matters.
Sachs, J. (2001). Teacher professional identity: Competing
discourses, competing outcomes. Journal of
Education Policy, 16(2), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.
1080/02680930116819
Sachs, J. (2005). Teacher education and the development
of professional identity: Learning to be a teacher. In
P. Denicolo & M. Kompf (Eds.), Connecting policy and
practice: Challenges for teaching and learning in
schools and universities (pp. 5–21). Routledge.
Saldaňa, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative
researchers. SAGE.
Shin, E., Wilkins, E., & Ainsworth, J. (2007). The nature and
effectiveness of peer feedback during an early clin­
ical experience in an elementary education program.
Action in Teacher Education, 28(4), 40–52. https://doi.
org/10.1080/01626620.2007.10463428
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Holt
Rinehart & Winston.
Temple, B., & Young, A. (2005). Qualitative research and
translation dilemmas. Qualitative Research, 4(2),
161–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1468794104044430
Tsybulsky, D., & Muchnik-Rozanov, Y. (2019). The devel­
opment of student-teachers’ professional identity
while team-teaching science classes using a project-
based learning approach: A multi-level analysis.
Page 12 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934
Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 48–59. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.006
Valizadeh, P. (2019). A sociocultural analysis of team
teaching and individual teaching in Iranian
E. F. L. Context. University of Zabol.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University
Press.
Walkington, J. (2005). Becoming a teacher: Encouraging
development of teacher identity through reflective
practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1),
53–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866052000341124
Walsh, K., & Elmslie, L. (2005). Practicum pairs: An alter­
native for first field experience in early childhood
teacher education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 33(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1359866052000341098
Wassell B and LaVan S Kate. (2009). Revisiting the dialo­
gue on the transition from coteaching to inservice
teaching: new frameworks, additional benefits and
emergent issues. Cult Stud of Sci Educ, 4(2), 477–484.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9152-7
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning,
meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
Yazan, B. (2018). A conceptual framework to understand
language teacher identities. Journal of Second
Language Teacher Education, 1(1), 21–48. https://
www.academia.edu/download/65097178/Yazan_
2018_A_conceptual_framework_to_understand_lan
guage_teacher_identities.pdf
Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case
study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321–332.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013497081
Page 13 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

Appendix A
Semi-interview questions:

(1) How is your feeling?

(2) What did you experience?

(3) What did you learn?

(4) What challenges did you have?

(5) What changes do you feel in yourself?

Appendix B
Stimulated recall session questions:

(1) How was your feeling this time?

(2) Why did you do this?

(3) What did you learn that time?

(4) What is your idea about the mentor’s/peer’s action?

(5) What could you do to get a better result?

(6) What was your feeling among your peers?

Appendix C
Reflective Journal questions:

(1) What did you learn from team teaching?

(2) What did you learn from the mentor and the peers?

(3) How do you reflect your performance in the class?

(4) How do you reflect your learning?

(5) What are you going to do for a better performance in the next session?

(6) What changes do you feel in yourself?

Page 14 of 15
Aliakbari & Valizadeh, Cogent Education (2023), 10: 2168934
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2168934

© 2023 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Education (ISSN: 2331-186X) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 15 of 15