Student teacher supervision, with few exceptions, remains a teacher-centered enterprise. Typical supervision policies, procedures, and forms focus on teachers’ observable behaviors. They grant authority to the perceptions of the supervisor/teacher. The concerns, questions, professional knowledge, and deliberative processes of the student teacher/learner are secondary, if they are considered at all. In this self-study, the authors explore alternatives to teacher-centered supervision by first supervising each other in their own learner-centered college classrooms, then extrapolating what was learned to their student teaching supervision. Data analysis yielded themes of responsibility, power, and purpose; challenges to the lesson as the unit of analysis and standard sources of data on student teachers’ work; and the importance of the social construction of roles and meanings. The authors’ intent is not to put forward yet another model of student teacher supervision but to describe a process of coconstructing supervision with student teachers so that the student teacher/learner is at the center.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Apple, M. (1986). Teachers and texts. New York: Routledge & Keegan Paul.
2.
Bateson, M. C. (1989). Composing a life. New York: Penguin.
3.
Ben-Peretz, M. (1995). Learning from experience: Memory and the teacher’s account of teaching. Albany: State University of New York Press.
4.
Cochran-Smith, M. (1989, April). Of questions not answers: The discourse of student teachers and their school and university mentors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
5.
Cochran-Smith, M. , & Lytle, S. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher research. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2-11.
6.
Connelly, E. M. , & Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge and the modes of knowing: Relevance for teaching and learning. In E. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing (pp. 174-198). New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
Cornbleth, C. (1989). Cries of crisis, calls for reform, challenges of change. In L. Weis, P. Altbach, G. Kelly, H. Petrie, & S. Slaughter (Eds.), Crisis in teaching: Perspectives on current reforms. Albany: State University of New York.
8.
Dewey, J. (1904). The relation of theory to practice in education. In C. A. McMurry (Ed.), The relation of theory to practice in the education of teachers (Third Yearbook of the National Society for the Scientific Study of Education) (Part I, pp. 9-30). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
10.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Lexington, MA: Heath.
11.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
12.
Dudley-Marling, C. (1997). Living with uncertainty: The messy reality of classroom practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
13.
Feiman-Nemser, S. , & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student teaching teacher education?Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(4), 255-273.
14.
Friesen, D. (1997). The meaning of collaboration: Redefining pedagogical relationships in student teaching. In H. Christiansen, L. Goulet, C. Krentz, & M. Maeers (Eds.), Recreating relationships: Collaboration and educational reform. Albany: State University of New York Press.
15.
Gespass, S. , & Paris, C. (n.d.). Thinking together about student learning in the peer review process. Manuscript in preparation.
16.
Gitlin, A. , & Smyth, J. (1989). Teacher evaluation: Educative alternatives. New York: Falmer.
17.
Glasser, B. , & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
18.
Glickman, C. (Ed.). (1992). Supervision in transition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
19.
Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
20.
Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
21.
Langer, E. (1989). Mindfulness. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
22.
McDonald, J. P. (1992). Teaching: Making sense of an uncertain craft. New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
Nolan, J. , & Francis, P. (1992). Changing perspectives in curriculum and instruction. In C. Glickman (Ed.), Supervision in transition. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
24.
Olson, M. (1997). Collaboration: An epistemological shift. In H. Christiansen, L. Goulet, C. Krentz, & M. Maeers (Eds.), Recreating relationships: Collaboration and educational reform. Albany: State University of New York Press.
25.
O’Reilly, M. R. (1989). Exterminate... the brutes—and other things that go wrong in student-centered teaching. College English, 51, 14-146.
26.
Paris, C. , & Gespass, S. (n.d.). Power, responsibility, and purpose in student teaching supervision. Manuscript in preparation.
27.
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
29.
Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30.
Showers, B. , & Joyce, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 54(6), 12-16.
31.
Starnes, B. , & Paris, C. (2000). Choosing to learn, learning to choose. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(5), 392-397.
32.
Sui-Runyon, Y. (1995). HOPS: A new paradigm for supervision. Talking Points, 6(3), 10-15.
33.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
34.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.). (1985). Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
Zeichner, K. (1996). Designing educative practicum experiences for prospective teachers. In K. Zeichner, S. Melnick, & M. L. Gomez (Eds.), Currents of reform in preservice teacher education (pp. 215-233). New York: Teachers College Press.
