Teacher continuous professional learning

Top-performing systems agree that teacher education should be a continuous process throughout a teacher’s professional career. In Scotland, following the Donaldson review of teacher education, it is now Government policy to develop a systematic and coherent approach to career-long professional learning for teachers, in which universities will play a prominent role. A similar emphasis on

integrated and embedded teacher professional learning is evident in the Netherlands, where there has been a shift over recent decades, away from traditional university-based programmes towards more integrated programmes based on “realistic” or “authentic” approaches to teacher education (Burn and Mutton, 2015). In line with developments elsewhere, these Dutch reforms have been driven by a need to provide more adequate preparation to meet classroom realities following widespread recognition of the problem of “reality shock” experienced by new teachers (BERA, 2014, p. 23). In the Netherlands, practicum is undertaken in special training schools that are linked to universities, and have additional resources to prepare teachers, as well as a commitment to providing appropriately graduated learning opportunities. Teacher educators employ a range of tools and techniques, including video clips, roleplay and relevant research findings, to foster and facilitate student learning, and support early professional development. Overall, the programme is designed to create a more integrated set of learning experiences through the delivery of professional learning opportunities. Thus, while there is no single or universally Dutch approach to teacher education, there is, nevertheless, “a common framework and shared vision of teaching and learning”, informed and inspired by extensive research into effective professional and student learning (Hammerness et al., 2012, p.52 in Jackson & Burch 2019).

2.3.2 Practicum

The role of practicum has always been regarded as important within the ITE context (McMahon, Forde and Dickson, 2015; La Paro et al. 2018; St. John et al. 2018; Canrinus et al. 2019). For example, a very early report on the practicum experience, known as the “Flowers Report” (Flowers, 1948 cited in Clarke et al. 2014, p.4), from the Committee of the American Association of Teachers Colleges, recommended that completing a practicum should be considered an integral part of the professional curriculum. Zeichner (1990) claimed that the ground-breaking Flowers Report set the focus on schools responsibility for ITE in the modern era, emphasising the importance of CTs/mentors during practicum, which has become a common theme in teacher education literature since this time (Zeichner, 1990

part of the practicum. It is important to note that the previous statement concurs with the focus of this study; i.e. the role of CTs in supporting the professional learning of STs during their practicum in the Saudi ITE context. As this aspect of the practicum has yet to be completely understood from the Saudi ITE stakeholders’ perspectives, it is especially important to investigate and develop greater understanding of the potential role of mentors in the Saudi context. As mentioned earlier, international literature on ITE provides many studies that have identified field experience/practicum as an influential component of ITE. It is also frequently mentioned as one of the policies determining the effectiveness of ITE programmes (Lampert, 2001; Menter et al., 2010; Burn and Mutton, 2015; Rothman and Darling-Hammond, 2015, Canrinus et al. 2019).

Moreover, there has been a recent “practicum turn” in ITE (Mattsson et al., 2011, p 17), placing a much greater emphasis on the role of practicum or field experience in the process of learning to teach in ITE programmes (Ayad, 2013; Conroy, Hulme and Menter, 2013; Klieger and Oster-Levinz, 2015). This move has been advocated both by external critics, frustrated by the perceived shortcomings of overly theoretical or academic programmes (BERA, 2014), and internal critics from within the university sector, who have been critical about the fragmented, uninspiring or superficial nature of traditional approaches (Czerniawski et al. 2017). This frustration with traditional approaches to ITE is also shared with researchers from developing countries (Akhter, 2013; Ibrahim, 2013; Al-Rabai, 2014; Al-Seghayer, 2014a; Tahir et al., 2015; AL Ahbabi, 2016). They have also reported that the time STs spend in the University during practicum is longer than that spent in schools, as they constantly go back and forth for exams and projects, resulting in a lack of focus and underachievement.

Moreover, the role of ITE programmes in selecting and supervising appropriate schools/places of training is a persistent issue in the literature (Ronfeldt et al. 2018; St John et al. 2018). However, the principles upon which that choice should be based, and the supervision methods to be deployed are matters that require more thorough investigation in order to consider the latest findings in the field in

relation to individual ITE programme’s unique setting, goals and resources, and their restrictions.

In the Netherlands, longitudinal studies focussed on ITE programmes have generated evidence regarding the effectiveness of specific features of the practicum to support STs’ conceptual development and classroom competence (Murray, 2008b; BERA, 2014; van Ginkel, Verloop and Denessen, 2015; van Ginkel

et al., 2016). These features notably include the alternation between STs’ school

teaching and college coursework, the close cooperation of school and university- based teacher educators and careful consideration of the growing complexity of teaching demands used to facilitate learning, including simulations and case studies, and data from different sources (La Paro et al. 2018). Howe (2006) reviewed ITE programmes in Australia, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand and the United States (Howe 2006 in Dunst et al.2019), concluding that the best approaches for clinical placement/practicum were based on:

• Individualised induction plans and funding for mentor training. This is vital as a mechanism to develop the CT’s role in the Saudi ITE system. • Development of partner schools for more extended periods of induction,

shifting between HEI and schools in the first year followed by more intensive school-based elements in the second. Establishing partner schools worthy of considering for Saudi ITE practicum, as many schools are not prepared or are too understaffed to host and supervise STs’ practicum. The reason for this is that the current system allows STs to choose their schools, which often results in the selection of schools based on their location.

• Reduction in responsibilities, in addition to a reduction in teaching workload\time for reflection. This is crucial for the Saudi ITE system, as a major challenge faces Saudi CTs if they choose to take on the responsibility of supervising STs on top of their teaching load.

• The development of an organisational culture in which there is a collaborative exchange involving a range of professionals aimed at supporting newly qualified teachers. This relates directly to the hierarchical educational system in Saudi Arabia, and the challenges it poses to the ST-CT relationship. Greater collaboration between Saudi ITE stakeholders would help develop both ST and CT professional learning. • The separation of support and assessment functions. In the Saudi ITE

system, STs are assessed by their CT, which adds greater formality to what is already a hierarchical relationship, leaving little scope for support. As STs are also assessed by their university supervisors (USs), it is worth considering relieving CTs of their responsibility for assessing STs, to enable them to focus exclusively on providing support and guidance. Student-teachers’ practicum, or practical training (as it is called in the Saudi ITE context) is a common component of ITE programmes and has been documented as of great benefit to student’s development from the teacher’s perspective. Thus far, the majority of ITE programmes in both developed and developing countries include practicum. However, how different countries conduct and evaluate their practicum very differently. Thus, it is essential for countries aiming to develop their ITE programmes to learn the lessons from other countries by evaluating the practicum, and then addressing the challenges that arise as a result.