Preparing Teachers in Tennessee: The Landscape of Student Teaching Experiences

• In Event: 61.036 - Using Statewide Data to Improve Teacher Education Through a Research-Policy Partnership

Abstract

The state of Tennessee requires that teacher candidates complete at least 15 weeks of student teaching in two placements (Educator Preparation Policy 5.504, p. 11), but beyond this, individual EPPs are free to structure their culminating clinical experience however they feel best meets the needs of their students. As such, the take up of these requirements varies tremendously across EPPs. From assessment of classroom performance to number of weeks spent lead teaching, no two student teaching experiences are exactly alike. This study seeks to understand student teaching / residency experiences from the point of view of EPP leaders, a voice that is noticeably absent in the literature on student teaching. We are particularly interested in uncovering how EPPs select cooperating teachers to pair with their candidates, the key similarities and differences in program expectations clinical experiences, and how EPPs partner with local school districts to solve problems collaboratively. The purpose of this study is not to analyze strengths and weaknesses of EPPs, nor to make claims about what kinds of programs are effective; it is instead to describe the variation in student teaching in Tennessee. A deeper understanding of the current context of clinical preparation is a necessary foundation for new research and policy efforts.

Using a purposeful sample of small, medium, and large EPPs that represent urban, suburban, and rural parts of the state, we conducted 9 semi-structured interviews with deans of schools of education, program coordinators, and field placement coordinators. After transcribing these interviews verbatim, we open-coded interviews to identify themes within responses.

Initial findings of the study suggest that teacher candidates enrolled at different EPPs have very different student teaching / residency experiences. Some may be required to lead teach for a total of 4 weeks out of their 15 weeks in the field, while others complete 2 semesters of full-time residency at a local school. For some EPPs, school district leaders vet cooperating teachers, while for others, EPP leaders require that teacher candidates recruit their own mentors. Beyond identifying structural differences and similarities between programs, we also find variation in the qualities and personality traits of cooperating teachers that programs target; in particular, EPP leaders differ in their perspectives about whether ability to mentor and instructional effectiveness are (a) discrete skills and (b) equally important for teacher candidates’ development. Many of the EPP leaders also reported a desire to facilitate training for their cooperating teachers, though struggle to conceive of how best to make this happen. This portrait of the student teaching / residency landscape has numerous policy implications for the TDOE. A deeper understanding of how programs operate and where they feel they need help can help inform the department as they develop and enact new policy. Additionally, as researchers continue to study teacher education and the role of cooperating teachers, knowing more about how EPPs make programmatic decisions will provide useful context for this element of preparation.

Authors

• Hannah Mullman, University of Michigan

• Matthew Ronfeldt, University of Michigan