1. Did you interview the 2 supervising teachers to gain their perspective on the student teaching experience?
2 Do you think the ages of the cooperating teachers played a factor in the comfort level of Annie as well as her perception of "power"?
3. Did you get the perspective of the students in each classroom to find out how each teaching style helped them with their understanding of the content? Did they have a feeling of a power struggle?
4. It's obvious how the author and Annie feel about the Sheila;
"Annie adopted multiple selves in Sheila’s classroom and was able to slip back and forth in response to Sheila’s dominating presence, which determined—even translated—Annie’s way of being a teacher."
but could part of the structure Sheila was providing be a way for her to share her craft knowledge with Annie in a controlled environment so that when Annie was in her own classroom she could draw from many perspectives of teaching? It seems that one cooperating teacher believed in providing little guidance and letting the student teacher find themself, while the other mentor felt that structure and guidance play a vital role in developing the art of teaching.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
David,
All question you mention also came to my mind, especially #1. If all parties are not given a voice, how can one be seen as breaking down power domination of the researcher. I want to hear the other stories. As far as #4 is concerned, why are we forced to see Sheila as a bad/poor or defective mentor? Since when does a teaching style or method of instruction de facto equate with poor instruction. It is just as possible that Annie was unfamiliar with Sheila's teaching style and was unwilling to embrace diversity in teaching styles, being somewhat stuck in her (Annie's) own little world and unwilling to come out and play with the rest of the kids.
des
Post a Comment