Navigating Shared Dilemmas: Teacher Educator Reasoning Around Approximations

• In Event: Instructional Decision Making for Responsive Teaching Across Contexts

Abstract

Objectives
The COVID-19 pandemic moved many in-person education programs online. Some research has illustrated how university-based teacher educators (TEs) adapted their instruction (Gonsalves et al., 2021; Hopwood et al., 2021), but does not investigate TEs' thinking behind why those particular decisions were made. This study illustrates and offers a framework for thinking about TEs' pedagogical reasoning, asking:
What are the goals and strategies of TEs when they enact approximations of text-based-discussions with teacher candidates (TCs) in English language arts (ELA) methods classes?
How do TEs engage in pedagogical reasoning when they encounter the dilemma of shifting their use of approximations from in-person to online teaching?

Theoretical Framework
Teaching can be conceptualized as dilemma management (Lampert, 1985). In response to dilemmas, teachers enact instructional strategies to reach particular instructional goals (Janssen et al., 2014). Teachers may find previously used strategies successful at meeting their goals and solving the dilemma (a gestalt response), or they may experience ‘pedagogical disequilibrium’ (Mansfield & Loughran, 2018) (See Figure 1). In a state of disequilibrium, teachers may experience frustration or engage in pedagogical reasoning to identify new instructional strategies that achieve their goals (Author, 2022).
TEs, like teachers, encounter pedagogical dilemmas and engage in pedagogical reasoning during instruction (Author & Colleague, 2020), but little research that explores TE pedagogical reasoning. This analysis studies the pedagogical reasoning of TEs as they responded to the shared dilemma of moving practice-based ELA methods courses online.

Methods and Data
This analysis sits within a larger project of seven TEs and two doctoral students across six universities studying how to support ELA TCs in online coursework. Participants include four of the TEs from four universities across the U.S. The primary data sources included pre and post interviews with each TE (n=8), videos of classes (n=27), and TE post-class reflections (n=27). Data sources were inductively coded to identify 1) TEs' goals and strategies for approximations, 2) TEs' experiences of disequilibrium in using approximations online in fall 2020, and 3) changes to approximations that TEs made online.

Results and Significance
We identified four goals that all the TEs described pursuing with approximations. Additionally, we identified different strategies TEs used to pursue these goals (See Table 2). The four goals included: 1) Building supportive relationships with TCs and creating a supportive community; 2) Providing opportunities to see and connect examples of discussion to their own practice; 3) Creating connections between methods courses and practicums; and 4) Providing TCs with feedback and reflection opportunities. As TEs shifted online, they kept these goals, but their experiences of disequilibrium and their subsequent pedagogical reasoning varied. In the full paper, we present cases of different TEs using a gestalt response, experiencing frustration, and engaging in pedagogical reasoning in response to the dilemma of adapting to online instruction. This work contributes to an emerging literature on TE pedagogical reasoning and how TEs can respond to dilemmas by maintaining, abandoning, or revising instructional strategies based on their own knowledge, context, and instructional goals.

Authors

• Katie Danielson, University of Portland
  Presenting Author

• Elizabeth Gotwalt, University of Maryland
  Presenting Author

• Amy Guillotte, University of Pennsylvania
  Presenting Author