332 Postgraduate Teacher

Education (Art and Design):

‘Wising-up’ or
‘Dumbing-down’?
Tom Davies

Abstract

This research is part of an on-going investigation
into student teachers’ perceptions of theory
and practice within Initial Teacher Training [ITT]
and beyond. Respondents were drawn from a
number of specialist ITT providers, and supple-
mented from other sources. [1] The enquiry grew
out of earlier research into examination courses
in Key Stage 4 and teachers’ dependency on
‘orthodox’ approaches and content. [2] The
likelihood of challenging or breaking down this
dependency seemed to rely on student teachers’
ability to critique current practices and speculate
as to alternatives, which is made more problem-
atic because of the drastic reduction of time allo-
cation in ITT. [3] This report in part is predicated on
the belief that the enforced, crude division of time
spent in, and out, of schools polarises theory and
practice in the minds of students. This, in turn,
tends to undermine the opportunities to explore
and experiment with teaching and learning styles,
and the degree to which students value and
employ theory and make use of, and extend, their
subject knowledge. [4]

JADE 19.3 ©NSEAD 2000

Theory and practice
Despite the proliferation of learning theories, we
have no equivalent store of theories of teaching,
and indeed, although various schools of thought
have fairly well agreed definitions of learning,
there is no such common definition of teaching.
Except that it is one of the activities that may bring
about learning.
It would be naive to assume that any one
theory could account for all kinds of human learn-
ing, but it would seem logical to suppose that our
knowledge of how human beings learn should
provide much of the basis for our suggestions of
how teachers should teach. In general, early
researchers disagreed with this point of view.
James, writing in 1899, claimed that although
educational practice must agree with psychology,
psychology itself could never dictate pedagogy
[5], and, some half-century later, Smith [1960]
noted that ‘understanding a phenomenon does
not necessarily lead to helping one deal with that
phenomenon in practical situations’ and stated ‘it
is not the case that we can derive teaching strate-
gies and tactics from learning theory’. [6] Oliver’s
paper of 1953 investigated the relationship
between teachers’ educational beliefs and their
classroom practices, and suggested that there
was a very low correlation between the two. [7]
Rousseau [1968] claimed, with even more force,
that ‘theory is all too often inert knowledge, never
used and soon forgotten, or else mouthed with-
out meaning’. [8] More specifically in debates
relevant to art and design education, there has
been enormous pressure to secure a theoretical
basis for the teaching of the subject, yet most
theories appear to be unsustainable over time. If
the issue of ‘theory’ and the apparent lack of it is
seen as a problem for teachers of art and design
[9] then it appears to be a persistent problem
shared with the rest of the teaching profession.
David Hargreaves, almost 30 years later, appears
to agree with Rousseau acknowledging that
unlike the legal or the medical profession teach-
ing has ‘no agreed knowledge-base’ and that
after qualification teachers ‘largely abandon these
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
academic influences and the use of social scien- 333
tific terms within their professional discourse’. Tom Davies
[10]
Over the last thirty-year period, however, the
dominant views have changed somewhat, and
researchers are more prone to concede that a
relationship between theory and practice is
potentially possible. [11] The problem, in the
context of this research is that the relationship
between the two is not always sufficiently clear
for student teachers. For current trainees the
perception of teaching is largely concerned with
the mechanics of classroom and behaviour
management. Prescribed content is located in
the realities of classrooms, and theory is
perceived to be predominantly abstract and acad-
emic. This said, there is a professional require-
ment in most ITT courses to reflect on the values
implicit in the activities/content of lessons and
relate these to explicit rationales and pre-speci-
fied intentions/learning objectives, which implies
a conscious awareness of how this can be
effected. The effectiveness of the teaching is
directly related to the learning opportunities
created in the classroom and this behaviour has
to be investigated in the classroom context –
using observation, teaching files, ideas books,
resource boards, evaluations, etc.
The approach owes something to Peters who
emphasised the practical aspects of teacher
education and provided a slightly different view
of the functions of theory. He saw teaching as a
complicated skill, in which interpersonal relation-
ships assumed the greatest importance, which
cannot be learned without plenty of practice and
which cannot be reduced to a collection of tech-
niques. Theory he saw as having a long-term
effect revealed in the ‘gradual transformation of a
person’s view of children, of himself (herself), and
of the situation in which he (she) is acting’. [12]
This transformation is just what many ITT
providers seek to achieve, but is this through a
process of professional socialisation or through
the teaching of educational theories, rationales or
principles?
334 The research questions, methods and
Tom Davies summary of field notes
Teacher trainees [PGCE] were asked a number of
questions related to the research and data was
collected through questionnaires and aural report-
ing. Additionally a much closer study was made of
particular students over a one-year period. Given
that teaching was the issue, the obvious starting
point was to look at the action itself – i.e. the teach-
ing behaviour of the student teachers – and to
record it in a way that would make close exami-
nation possible. Video recordings seemed the
best choice, but one of the first things that needed
to be tested was whether students would find
such recordings adequate (and, more importantly,
accurate) ‘memory-triggers’ through which they
could recapture the reasoning which lay behind
their choices of action in classrooms. Qualitative
evaluation was a dimension of the information-
gathering process and required a range of informal
methods of recording what was happening and
why. The methods adopted derived from Jofili’s
work on critical thinking [13] and Johnson’s study
of quality in teaching. [14]
In the autumn of 1996 an initial analysis of a
number of video recorded lessons took place in
a tutorial group setting. [15] Some 12 students
(approximately half of a tutorial group) had been
recorded teaching in their first school experience
– a one week placement at a Primary School.
While only in the fourth week of the course a
degree of confidence existed in their knowledge
of statutory requirements. [16] Teaching in peer
group duos, each took it in turn to ‘lead’/teach the
class or groups of pupils. The intention was to get
the students to talk about what they thought each
videoed student was doing and why – eliciting
reports from the actual student video-taped where
possible – and working from what appeared, intu-
itively, to be ‘key episodes’ of decision making in
the lesson. The exercise was successful in that it
confirmed that both students and staff could sepa-
rate these out from a lesson. The issue was
whether this could be done without distortion,
and could students reliably discuss such events
in terms of motives and reasoning. [17]
Having established that the method could
work we needed to refine the two points above.
If we were going to concentrate on the students’
decision-making (on-the-spot, immediate deci-
sions, or more considered pre-lesson decisions),
could all agree on what constituted ‘a decision’
and when it occurred? Secondly, would the
student teachers be reliable informants in report-
ing the reasons behind their actions?
To test the validity of the students’ decision
making video recordings were made of a range of
‘typical’ art and design lessons from the secondary
school placement in the mid October induction
programme. [18] Each of the six students was inter-
viewed shortly afterwards, during and after viewing
the playback of their lesson. The researcher was
relying on the students themselves to point out
the moments in the lesson at which they remem-
bered making decisions. [19] To safeguard a
researcher or other observer imposing or inter-
preting a decision-making point in an alien
manner, the students’ views were validated by a
group of eight teacher-mentors. The mentors
were presented with a half-hour video of one of
the lessons, and asked to note all the decisions
they thought the student made. Subsequent
analysis revealed a very high consensus on where
and what decisions occurred, and the previously
recorded students’ own judgements. [20]
The second question concerned the reliability
of using students as informants on their own
teaching. How could we be sure that they would
not simply state what they thought we wanted to
hear? [21] The decision was made not to tell the
students that the research related to their
personal theories, principles, or the rationales in
their teaching files until after the bulk of the
research data was collected.
Identifying connections –
‘theory’ and classroom actions
Influences on performance
All volunteer students were drawn from the same
tutorial group to ensure a broadly similar experi-
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
ence of lectures, course-work, and pre-school
tutorial advice, and so they felt comfortable with
each other. To account for the type and complex-
ity of subject matter of the students’ lessons
influencing the type of decisions, each student
taught an agreed, common age group – Year 7.
The gathering of visual data was made as
‘natural’ and least threatening as possible. The
lessons were filmed unobtrusively using discreet
hand-held, digital recorders. Other PGCE students
or familiar members of the teaching staff
(mentors) were encouraged to use the equip-
ment. This approach reassured them that their
performance was not being assessed, except for
the purpose of critical reflection, and we had
promised them anonymity. [22]
The pressure on the volunteers was reduced
further by limiting the choice to those confident
enough not to object to the cameras and who, on
their past record, were most likely to meet the
standards for ‘Qualified Teachers Status’. [23]
Given the timing of the recorded classroom
activity (October and again in February/March) we
anticipated that the students’ reference for action
was not only based on the ‘theory’ elements of the
college programme, but more likely the specific
guidance and requirements of the respective
school departments.
Comparative variables
By comparing the behaviour, attitudes and recorded
experiences of the early phases of the course and
comparing them with observations towards the
end of the summer term we could partially isolate
the effects of the training course on their teaching
behaviour. However, any matching would, by the
nature of the students themselves, be of a very
crude order. Even if we identified and recorded
students of the same age it was likely that their
pre-course experience was very different. The vari-
ation in maturity would contribute to other variables
such as subject knowledge and specialist areas
within the discipline of Art and Design. [24] Every
effort was made to record the students at broadly
the same stage – i.e. late February to mid March.
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
Dominant influences on teachers in training 335
We were quite prepared to find that the student Tom Davies
teachers were not drawing directly on the
elements of ‘theory’ from their university
programme (course-work) in their classroom
decision-making. However, it seemed important
to find out what other influences might be at
work. In any model of decision-making, one
needs to take account of the decision-maker’s
beliefs, attitudes and prejudices, and one might
well suppose that the college-based components
of the course would influence these aspects of
student teachers’ judgements. Accordingly, an
interview schedule was drawn up with questions
dealing with the function or role of teachers in
society, together with ‘loaded’ questions of an
apparently factual nature. These we hoped would
prompt the student teachers into revealing their
attitudes towards teaching. Some of these ques-
tions, together with questions on the student
teachers’ preparation for teaching practice in
general, and the recorded lessons in particular,
we also planned to put to their mentors. First, to
see if there was any great difference among the
groups, and secondly, to see if the students’
responses tended to agree more with those of
the college tutor or the mentors. [25]
Summary of the findings
Lesson plans
All students in the sample had comprehensive
lesson plans, linked to schemes of work. The four
female students tended to prepare more detailed
lesson plans and all plans constructed for the
autumn term appeared to be more ‘pupil-centred’
than those for the main placement in the follow-
ing spring term. The latter is based on school
department syllabuses and often over-prescrip-
tive interpretations of the National Curriculum.
Lesson plans generally followed the recom-
mended half-termly schemes, each having the
potential to be radically changed/developed, if
necessary. Different planning models were
encouraged by the course (college-based advice)
and while each student compiled detailed
336 requirements, there was a tendency to record, as
Tom Davies the practice progressed, what the pupils would
do rather than what they would learn. The scope
for evaluation and assessment was a feature of
every lesson plan, but the emphasis was largely
a process of formative information exchanges and
coursework review. Summative assessment,
where required, followed the school system of
recording effort and attainment. The effectiveness
of their teaching and the degree to which learning
objectives had been realised was recorded in the
evaluation section for each lesson. This process,
however, was extremely variable, especially for
lower school pupils. Aims and objectives were
stated in the schemes of work only, and students
used a combination of learning and teaching
objectives for lesson planning only.
Written evaluations of the lessons
Pupils’ behaviour was mentioned most often by
all students, with varying degrees of planned use
of the strategies disseminated in autumn term
lectures. Referral procedures within the depart-
ment and school were used with success, with
recorded ‘bullet points’ for future action working
much better than extended description. Within
the sample there appeared to be little analysis of
the effectiveness of the critical and contextual
references being used or notes on related class-
room discussion. Overarchingly, there was a
tendency to record coping strategies, these being
strongly related to the observable ‘key episodes’
in the lesson. Many evaluations recorded general
themes, avoiding reference to the individual levels
of support offered to pupils, clearly observable in
the recordings. Achievement, in terms of pupils’
success or details of effective teaching strategies
was not always reported.
Observation of lessons:
students’ and mentors’ views
The ‘pace and sequence’ of the lessons were
often problematic. All trainees were reported to
adopt very tight discipline in the early phase of the
main placement. In many cases this eased to
accommodate personal teaching styles, or else
reflected the tradition or authority of the individ-
ual department. Poor judgement was seen to
relate to inexperience in classroom management
rather than inappropriate planning. The pressure
to secure specific outcomes for each project
resulted in an intensification of requirements and
instructions for pupils. Feedback from pupils indi-
cated surprisingly little difference between the
teaching behaviour of the student teacher and
their normal classroom teacher. A noticeable
emphasis was placed on discipline and control in
the later lessons [February/March], and this
contrasted markedly with the classroom interac-
tion in the first term.
Towards the end of the main teaching practice
there appeared to be some deterioration in the
students’ ability to relate classroom decisions and
content to their rationales and theoretical position
detailed in the teaching files. Students in the
autumn term were more prepared to accept a
theoretical basis for teaching than in the main
teaching practice. While the summer term saw a
brief return to personal beliefs and priorities – in
the service of ideas for teaching – subsequent,
unsystematic research involving feedback from
past students indicates a universally held low
interest in educational theory.
Interviews
Students found that the greatest value of the
course-work at college was that it gave them
ideas for lesson content, approaches to teaching
and an understanding of assessment and record-
ing systems. The greatest contribution to this
process was the ‘curriculum workshop’ experi-
ences in the autumn term and the emphasis
placed on critical and contextual studies. The only
consistent criticism of the college programme
was that some aspects of educational psychol-
ogy and sociology were difficult to understand
and translate into school experience. The
elements of the course that they found most
useful were the professional and methods
lectures, conducted by staff and invited teachers
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
 337
Tom Davies

JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000

338
Tom Davies
(Headteachers, Senior Mentors, and Newly
Qualified Teachers), curriculum design, planning
and evaluation. They regarded the function of
teaching practices as mainly to teach them ‘how
to teach’ which they interpreted as standing in
front of a class, controlling it, organising it, and
reacting to it, and only rarely as ‘putting over
ideas’. In almost every case, the students claimed
that their teaching practice schools influenced
them more than college. This reversed the
students’ views of the institutions relative impor-
tance in the induction phase before Christmas.
Most students saw the teacher mainly as an
agent of socialisation and a provider of informa-
tion/experiences. The academic or intellectual
qualities of teachers were rated as less important
as the training advanced from Qualified Teachers
Status to Newly Qualified Teacher.
In preparing for the main teaching practice, the
principal concerns of the students were related
to the school location, its rules and discipline, and
the accepted levels/standards of work, and less
with the pupils’ abilities and attitudes. As the
teaching practice progressed, there appeared to
be an increased concern over organisational
features of their work, and an increasing reluc-
tance to try out new ideas. Most students said
that the pupils’ personal circumstances (homes
and their relationships with others) had the great-
est influence on their learning.
There was strong evidence that the supervis-
ing teachers (mentors) had considerable influence
on the attitudes and beliefs held by the students,
and on the teaching techniques that the students
used in classes. The mentors did not generally see
any one aspect of the teachers’ role as being any
more or less important than any other. The major-
ity of the mentors saw the function of the college
course in terms of increasing students’ knowl-
edge and understanding, rather than providing
ideas for lessons. In terms of the students’ rela-
tionship with a class, the mentors’ view of their
own relationship with that class, had a noticeable
effect on the students’ views. Far fewer mentors
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
 339
Tom Davies

than students mentioned school influences (the

work, the teacher, etc.) as contributing to learning
difficulties among the children. Students reported
that the greatest single influence on pupils’ learn-
ing was their relationship with their teacher.

The ‘video’ review interviews

The majority of the students’ decisions in their
lessons seemed to be concerned with maintain-
ing the status quo and relating to immediate
rather than more long-term considerations. Most

JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000

340 students talked about their actions without giving
Tom Davies reasons for them, or gave reasons for their
actions in terms of alternatives; what would have
happened if they had not acted, or had acted
differently. Where students evaluated their
actions in the teaching file, they were more often
expressed in negative rather than positive terms.
Towards the end of the main teaching practice
a change of emphasis among many students
appeared. Generally, this was a movement from
asking questions to giving information, and an
increase in attempts to link the work with past or
future lessons. Among the trial recordings in Term
1 there was only one instance of a student report-
ing a ‘non-action’ or decision not to do something,
suggesting that at this stage they do not perceive
such decisions as worth reporting.
The findings are consistent with the impact of
changes reported in a longitudinal study conducted
at Leeds University in 1993/94 and 1994/95, [26] and
recent historical patterns reported by Wilkin. [27]
Both are generalist reports with the most recent,
subject specific, national findings being those of and reference to the work of artists, crafts work-
HMI/Ofsted Inspection of ITT provision for Art and ers or designers. While the course had promoted
Design. [28] The latter adopts a not too surprisingly the widest definition of practitioners in the subject
positive view overall, while concerns are being most reference was made to fine art practice. The
channelled through the NSEAD Teacher Education reasons for this were the need to address specific
Board and will be collated as a commissioned movements or periods in history, and the encour-
national survey in late 2000. [29] agement to use existing visual resources in the
school. The tendency to move away from
Summary personal rationales and in some cases conceptu-
Student teachers’ main reference for action ally demanding intentions to more pragmatic
Student teachers’ teaching files, schemes of work approaches was apparent across the sample.
and lesson evaluation give a very clear idea of the
underlying function of their teaching. With few The elements of ‘theory’ which student
exceptions individual trainees related short-term teachers appear to use
strategies (coping with immediate situations) to The students’ reactions to the value of theoretical
more long-term planning (often compliance to aspects of their course tended to apply to two
departmental syllabus schemes or external distinct though related aspects. First, the theory
examination criteria). The existence of ‘General that relates to subject knowledge – visual literacy,
Rationales’ [30] drafted before visiting the teach- critical/contextual reference, curriculum design;
ing practice schools made it possible to compare and secondly, the theory that relates to profes-
initial intentions based on developing concepts of sional practice – professional development/
good practice with subsequent decision making. general educational issues; and teaching method-
All projects were grounded in practical processes ology, educational psychology, and sociology of

JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000


education and philosophy. Theoretical aspects of
the course presented some students with a few
difficulties. It was their opinion that some lectures
were too academic and the relationship to empiri-
cal findings was problematic. [31] Few students
felt that teachers operated from a consistent philo-
sophical position, but more the need to secure
sufficient grasp of appropriate practical knowledge
and understanding. Most students regarded
‘critique, analysis and questioning’ as the most
memorable requirement of the course.
Other influences of training on student
teachers
Contrasting the views of students in the first term
to those in the closing weeks of the course, it
would seem that exposure to the teacher training
course greatly increased confidence in pedagogy
and the complexities of the role. This, in turn,
reduced the students’ belief in the centrality of
personal theories for action in the classroom.
While accepting the need to sustain an informed
authority on educational matters, most students
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
341
Tom Davies
(5 of the 6 from the video sample alone) felt that
decision-making in schools was unrelated to
‘theory’. All students interviewed claimed that the
schools had a large influence on their actions, and
that on balance the direction from school mentors
took precedence over other influences. There was
a noticeable correspondence between the views
of the student teachers and their mentors, as accli-
matisation within the school often required the
adoption of a particular teaching style.
Conclusion
Implication of the findings for teacher training
The findings of the research project show how
generally well prepared for teaching the students
felt, yet they increasingly doubted the require-
ment to develop personal theories and rationales
for their actions. To survive the teaching practice
experience and the assimilation of coping strate-
gies reduced the teaching content to that which
was manageable. For many students, the pres-
sures on their time were too great to permit, or
encourage experimentation, or to reflect on
342 theoretical aspects that might be linked to their
Tom Davies work in schools. Consequently, one could argue
strongly for a more flexible division of time in
placement schools so that the students could
more readily retain their links with the college, its
resources and aspirations for the profession. [32]
The research has provided a small scale, but
significant source of data. It represents further
evidence of the decline in distinctive and different
models of teacher education/preparation com-
bined with more centralist and generic require-
ments for the profession. The narrowness of
definition of what it is to be a teacher will either
stimulate innovative ways of meeting the ‘stan-
dards’ [33] or will depress the experience of
becoming a teacher. Choice and variety would
seem to be worthy principles and ones that we
should attempt to secure in education.
What is the educational significance of what chil-
dren have learned? What are the educational
trade-offs among the pedagogical devices that
the teacher has used and were there alternatives
that could have been selected? [34]
Eisner’s words hint at the problems in UK teacher
training education. There is growing evidence of
students being groomed to teach in schools with
a growing confidence acquired by adopting
an instructional non-theoretical model, and of
reducing the relationship between teaching and
learning to a hollow masquerade of technical
tricks, competencies and their monitoring. There
appears to be a reductive non-theorised view of
learning and concomitantly, a similar view of
teaching. The potential effect of how students
will sustain a rich and lasting teaching career on
such thin theoretical knowledge, and an aversion
to theory, is difficult to imagine.
References
1. Davies, T. [1998] Competence and Creativity:
the Politics of Art Education, Cascade Publications,
BIAD/UCE, Birmingham. Additionally, more
informal information gathering has been made
possible through the researcher’s role as external
examiner for a range of courses and as a training
provider for both NQT courses and InSET
programmes.
2. Davies, T. [1995] Playing the System. Cascade
Publications, BIAD/UCE, Birmingham. Changes
within the curriculum invariably affect newly
qualifying teachers to a greater extent, as their
contribution is generally considered to be
informed by current requirements and trends.
3. Teacher Training Agency [1998] Circular 4/98,
originally TTA [1992] Circular 9/92 Initial Teacher
Training [Secondary Phase], HMSO. While the
pressure to comply with external, national
requirements is as strong in ITT models as it is
in schools, critical reflection and theoretical
understanding is still a dimension of courses in
teacher education, albeit, drastically reduced
in terms of time allocation.
4. Davies, T. [1998] Op. cit
5. James, P. [1899], in Renshaw, P. [1973] A
Flexible Curriculum for Teacher Education.
pp. 219–242 Lomax, D. [Ed.] The Education of
Teachers in Britain. Wiley Press, London.
6. Medley, D. M. and Mitzel, H. E. [1959] Some
behavioural correlates of teacher effectiveness.
Journal of Educational Psychology, and
Problems in teacher training, Education for
Teaching. Issue 50, pp. 239–246
7. Oliver, W. A. [1953] Teachers’ educational
beliefs versus their classroom practices. Journal
of Educational Research. Issue 47, pp. 47–55
8. Rousseau, A. J. [1968] The Impact of
Educational Theory on Teachers. British Journal
of Educational Studies. Issue 16 [Feb] pp. 61–71
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
9. Swift, J. & Steers, J [1999] A Manifesto for Art
in Schools, Journal of Art and Design Education,
Vol 18, No. 1, NSEAD.
10. Hargreaves, D. [1996] ‘Teaching as a
Research-Based Profession: Possibilities and
Prospects’ TTA Annual Lecture.
11. Eggleston, J., Galton, M and Jones, M.
[1979] Characteristics of Educational Research:
Mapping the Domain, in British Research
Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1.
12. Peters, R. S. [1968] Theory and Practice in
Teacher Education. Trends in Education. Issue 9
[Jan], pp. 3–14
13. Jofili, J. M. S. [1996] ‘Fostering teachers’
critical thinking: some paths to teacher develop-
ment programme’, PhD Thesis, Surrey 46–12405.
14. Johnson, G. F. [1994] ‘Teaching compe-
tence: a personal construct view’, PhD Thesis,
Brunel, 44–6300.
15. University of Central England, Birmingham
Institute of Art and Design, PGCE Course.
16 .Qualifications and Curriculum Authority,
National Curriculum for Art [1995], HMSO.
17. Many members of the group were
apprehensive of voicing their opinions in front
of twenty or so of their peers, and were certainly
inhibited by the presence of other lecturers
informally contributing to the discussion.
Individual interviews with the students concerned
were obviously a much better way to gain rapport
and information.
18. PGCE Handbook, University of Central
England, Birmingham Institute of Art and
Design, PGCE Course. Induction Programme,
Secondary School Preparation Placement.
19. There were, of course, one set of decisions
whose existence we could only learn of through
the students’ comments, and those were their
decisions not to do or say something.
JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000
20. While such analysis of the video recordings 343
would make the subsequent interviews more Tom Davies
rigorous, the time needed for this aspect was
prohibitive. On balance, it seemed best to
conclude that there was insufficient time to
analyse the video material before interviewing
the students, and to reserve any such analysis
for a later date.
21. There were three obvious ways we could
guard against this – avoid revealing the precise
research topic; allow a degree of ‘open-ended-
ness’ in the responses; and to double-check by
obtaining information from other sources.
22. It was also made clear that the video mater-
ial was only available for the project and that any
subsequent use would require students’ written
permission. The anonymity of the students (and
the schools) would be maintained in any written
or spoken reports on the project.
23. Teacher Training Agency [2000] Supporting
Assessment for the Award of Qualified Teacher
Status – Art and Design, Resource material –
Video/Publication. Learning Matters, Exeter.
24. Teacher Training Agency [1998] Circular
4/98, originally TTA [1992] Circular 9/92 Initial
Teacher Training [Secondary Phase], HMSO.
25. Included in this interview schedule were
questions about the students’ aims and
objectives for the recorded lesson (to provide
opportunity for elaboration of their aims as stated
in their lesson plans). Questions about their
teaching techniques were in part designed to
elicit their methods of dealing with hypothetical
problems such as differentiation and evaluation.
26. Sellick, M. [1998] ‘Effects of Recent Change
in Secondary Initial Teacher Education: A
Longitudinal Comparison’, PhD Thesis, Leeds
University.
27. Wilkin, M. [1994] ‘Ideology and the Initial
Teacher Training Curriculum 1960–1990’, PhD
Thesis, Cambridge, 44–3416.
344 28. Joicey, B. HMI ‘Report on ITT Art and Design’
Tom Davies [1998] The State of Art we are in, Art and Design
in Secondary Teacher Training, a conference for
secondary partnerships, Royal Academy of Arts,
Burlington House, London, 21st October 1998.

29. Survey 2000: ‘Resources for Initial Teacher

Education in Art and Design’, NSEAD [TEB],
AAIAD and the Vivien Duffield Foundation.

30. PGCE Handbook, University of Central

England, op. cit. Assignment 2. Teaching File
Components – General / Contextual Rationales.

31. The philosophy and history of education

have been largely removed from ITT courses to
facilitate greater emphasis on teaching method-
ology and standardised pupils’ performance.

32. Graduate Teacher Training Registry [2000]

GTTR, PGCE Art and Design Statistics –
February, Cheltenham.

33. Teacher Training Agency [1998] Op. cit

34. Eisner, E. [1985] The Art of Educational

Evaluation. The Falmer Press, Philadelphia, USA.
p. 155

JADE 19.3 © NSEAD 2000