Developing the conceptual framework

Whilst the individual participants’ pedagogical practice can be seen to incorporate similar elements, their perceptions and iterations of, and different emphases they place upon, each component part of the meta-pedagogy, and how this is reflected in their habitus, reveal marked differences. These could be viewed as a collection of continua, as detailed in Table 2 (below), along which the participants have been placed as approximations translated from the research findings regarding the themes identified above.

The most similarities were discernible in the final section of 4.6 (the impact of former school teacher identity), which reflected their values and beliefs. Where they did differ here was in the relative ‘distance’ they appeared to feel from their former identity, which seemed closely linked to the amount of time they had spent as teacher educators. It is for this reason that this section has been subsumed under the continuum of ‘professional identity’.

Steve towards the left. Rachel can also be seen to be positioned towards the right. However, in the case of the impact of constraints, the degree of compliance, and whether there was a particular focus on subject knowledge or PCK, it can be seen that the positions are reversed, with Bill and Rachel occupying positions to the left. They each appear to be drawing on a particular ‘set’ of habitus with the accompanying cultural capital, with two of the participants (Julie and Steve) firmly rooted in their first order practice, and persisting in identifying themselves in terms of their skills in the school field rather than that of HE.

---Length of experience as teacher educator---

4 years 9 years 25 years

Steve Julie Rachel Bill ---Professional identity---

Teacher Reconstructing identity Teacher educator

Julie Steve Rachel Bill ---Professional development--- Through community of practice Through reflection on action Seeking out theoretical base Julie Steve Rachel Bill

---Relationships with student teachers--- Expert to novice Participants in learning process Student as teacher and learner Steve Julie Rachel Bill

---Constraints--- Maintaining focus on ‘quality’ Freedom compared to school Restricting pedagogical choices

Bill Rachel Julie Steve

---Compliance--- Questioning authority Wanting the ‘right’ answers Lack of criticality

Bill Rachel Julie Steve

---Modelling--- Implicit, do as I do ‘Stepping out’ Explicit, linked to theory Julie Steve (Rachel Bill) Rachel Bill

---Transmission--- Do as I say Reflect on what I say Only when ‘a time for telling’ Steve Julie Rachel Bill

---Constructivism--- Discussion based, interactive Experiential and active ‘Construct their own meanings’ Steve Julie Rachel Bill

---Focus on enhancing subject knowledge/PCK--- No obvious focus on either Application of subject knowledge Talked of particular focus Bill Rachel Julie(SK) Steve(PCK)

---The role of theory--- Rejection of theory Acknowledgement of theory Impact of (T)heory evident Julie Steve Rachel Bill

---Integrating theory and practice in ITE--- Practicum as most important Theory into practice ‘Reach, reflect, recode, retain’ Steve Julie Rachel Bill ---Recognition of distinctions between pedagogy and meta-pedagogy--- ‘Teaching is teaching’ Building upon school practice Meta-pedagogy distinct

Julie Steve Rachel Bill ---Theoretical underpinnings of meta-pedagogical practice--- ‘What works’ Knowledge base acknowledged Articulated and embedded Julie Steve Rachel Bill Table 2. Identifying continua in the participants’ practice

So, whilst it is not intended that the continua represent ‘bad’ to ‘good’ practice, it could be argued that the extremes of each denote development and a deepening of understanding of the process of learning to teach, from left to right (and the reverse might be said to be true of the three continua identified above), as each become accustomed to the new field. Whilst broadly corresponding with the length of experience in the role, theorising practice appears to be key here. This has the potential to distinguish university-based teacher education from the current government’s view of the school-led model. For these reasons, the decision was made to analyse the case studies through the lens of the discourse of theory in ITE.

4.8 Chapter conclusion

In analysing the data, this chapter has highlighted the similarities and differences in meta-pedagogical approach of the four participants. By applying Bourdieusian principles as a lens, it has been possible to explore these approaches in terms of developing habitus in the new field, leading to expanding cultural capital. This revealed what appear to be distinct drivers for their respective practices, which impacted upon the extent of development of first to second order habitus.

It has been argued that a continued focus on (curriculum) subject knowledge or on passing on the craft knowledge of (school) teaching as drivers of practice can both be located in first order practice,

suggesting a lack of development in the new field of ITE. However, practice driven by a focus on developing meta-pedagogical understandings allows for an expanding habitus to fit the new field, potentially leading to increased cultural capital. A sense of teacher professional identity spanning the two (sub-)fields appears to create a bridge allowing for a developing habitus, although, in the absence of theoretical underpinning, it would appear that this lacks sufficient scaffolding to expand cultural capital.

This would go some way to explaining the marked differences in perceptions and emphases placed upon each component part of the meta-pedagogy enacted by the individual participants. Displayed as a set of continua, it has been demonstrated that the development of a distinct habitus of second order practice is linked to what is driving practice, which in turn impacts upon cultural capital. The role of theory and theorising practice appears here to be key.