Considering the contexts for appropriating theoretical and practical toolsfor teaching middle and secondary English

Citation
Ge. Newell et al., Considering the contexts for appropriating theoretical and practical toolsfor teaching middle and secondary English, RES TEACH E, 35(3), 2001, pp. 302-343
Citations number
47
Categorie Soggetti
Education
Journal title
RESEARCH IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH
ISSN journal
0034527X → ACNP
Volume
35
Issue
3
Year of publication
2001
Pages
302 - 343
Database
ISI
SICI code
0034-527X(200102)35:3<302:CTCFAT>2.0.ZU;2-Q
Abstract
This study describes some of the tensions and challenges that 9 student tea chers faced as they attempted to apply theoretical tools or principles for teaching middle and secondary school English to the realities of practice. Several contexts or activity settings both shaped and complicated the appro priation process, including undergraduate experiences with and prior belief s about English as a school subject, the preservice methods courses, field work prior to student teaching, and the classroom context for student teach ing To describe the socialization the student teachers experienced that med iated their appropriation of the principles of instructional scaffolding, w e identified three modes of participation in teaching middle and secondary school English. For some, teaching included both the learning of classroom routines as well as reflective practice, that is, a theory-based considerat ion of instructional decisions; for some, teaching was a process of procedu ral display in that they were absorbed primarily in enacting lessons that w orked for themselves and for their students, making it difficult for them t o consider the principles underlying their instructional decisions; and for some, learning to teach was a matter of mastering routines, that is, adopt ing, without adaptation, curricular and instructional practices without con cern for students' understandings or fur instructional principles espoused by the teacher education program. The data suggest that the alignment of va rious activity settings supported the appropriation of leaching tools and a reflective stance toward teaching and learning. On the other hand, when ac tivity settings worked at cross-purposes with one another, they created obs tacles for the appropriation of theoretical and practical tools emphasized at the university This study suggests the importance of understanding the k inds of relationships that student teachers develop within each setting and how social settings get negotiated and identities get constructed as a res ult of personal history.