Examining images of teacher students

ABSTRACT

This study examined kindergarten teacher students’ images of teacher, of children, and kindergarten at the beginning of kindergarten teacher education in 1992, 2008, 2013, and 2017. Theoretical examination of images and studies of teachers’ images formed the basis of this study. 156 students participated in the study voluntarily. Data was collected through drawings and open-ended questions. The analysis was performed by content analysis. The coding tool developed for this purpose was used as an aid. The teacher students’ images of themselves as teachers and of children were mainly similar and emphasized teachers’ and children’s social and emotional qualities. Students had traditional and stereotypical images of the qualities of teachers, children, and kindergarten. Differences between groups emerged in the children students wanted to work with, in pedagogy and the physical environment. The teacher educators should encourage students to critically examine their traditional and stereotypical images in different phases of their studies.

KEYWORDS:

• Stereotypical images
• student selection
• kindergarten teacher student
• qualitative content analysis
• coding tool

Introduction

Becoming a teacher is a complex and challenging process that starts long before students enter teacher education. Students are ‘insiders’ who have observed teaching action for at least 12 years and have developed their own understanding of what makes a teacher professional (Pajares 1992). Students have also deeply rooted images of teaching, of being a student and of the school (Murphy, Delli, and Edwards 2004). Students bring to teacher education their previous experiences, expectations and cultural views, which have an impact on what kind of teachers they want to become, how they want to work with children and how they act in practice (Ķestere and Kaļķe 2011).

When students think about the idea of a teacher, they look at themselves and their expectations. Students have images of the teaching profession and what they believe the teaching job requires (Schneider 2004). The aim of this study is to investigate kindergarten teacher students’ images of the teacher, children and a kindergarten, which are key factors in the teacher’s pedagogy. The study was conducted at the beginning of teacher education at a Finnish university in 1992, 2008, 2013 and 2017. This research is future-oriented and offers participants the opportunity to generate insights from their own perspective. The study allows the researcher to identify images that seem to guide students’ thinking and expectations at the start of their studies.

The research broadens the field of kindergarten teacher research through analysis of drawings and writings. Examining the images students have about their future as teachers can reveal images that are realistic, unexpected, but inadequate as well. The findings provide a roadmap to develop the skills, knowledge and competency that students must acquire in order to become teachers. The results will be important for teacher educators in planning and developing study programmes. The educators should be aware of students’ previous experiences in order to encourage students in identifying obstacles as well as opportunities (Calderhead and Shorrock 2005). Some researchers (Kagan 1992; Mellgren and Margrain 2015) point out that students begin to focus on learning and professional development only once their previously-acquired images are revealed.

Theoretical approach

The image is a part of an individual, professional and collective identity (Beltman et al. 2015). The personal identity asks what kind of image a student has of him or herself, whereas professional identity asks what kind of image a student has of him or herself as a teacher. Professional identity is not something that a teacher has but something that he or she creates in teaching and social interaction (Fischer and Kiefer 2001). Collective identity asks what kind of image the teacher has of him or herself as a member of the work community (Beijaard, Meijer, and Verloop 2004). Personal and professional identity includes characteristics such as empathic, caring, etc. The image of personal identity is constructed in the course of life and the image of professional identity is built as a career-long task. The collective identity image is related to the values, norms, rituals and cultural factors of the work community (Heikkinen 1999).

The image is a central construction in understanding a teacher’s practical, tacit and implicit knowledge (Clandinin 2013). Johnston (1992) used image in an attempt to describe the practical knowledge of students and found that each student had own unique images related to their personal experiences. The image as tacit knowledge manifests only in action, whereas implicit knowledge appears in action and is expressed linguistically, and shared with others (Ståhle and Grönroos 2002).

Images and their meanings are created in perceptions and based on the person’s former experiences and interactions with their environment (Kestere and Kalke 2015; Nóvoa 2000). Images involve memory fragments, symbols and interpretations of feelings, ideas and phenomena (Emmison and Smith 2000). Experiences, taking the form of images and being in long term memory, are central in a thinking process that is individual (Eraut 1985; Lazo 2012). For example, if a student thinks of earlier teachers or school environments, she/he has in mind the representations of things and situations as memory-based images (Calderhead and Shorrock 2005).

Current images are layered with images of the past by gathering up experiential threads and connecting them to the present. Images guide students in making sense of present and future things and situations. Images also connect to a person’s visual, auditory, smell, taste and movement senses (Kestere and Kalke 2015; Weber and Mitchell 1996). Images emerge in verbal, nonverbal and visual communication, and are interpreted through experience and culture (Emmison and Smith 2000; Weber and Mitchell 1996).

Simplified images are often described as stereotypes, which are deep in the culture of society.

Britzman (2003) raises the connection between professional identity and stereotypes, arguing that stereotypes create the impression that a professional identity is a static, pre-existing idea. For example, in a stereotypical conception, teachers are defined by the qualities that for them seen as typical such as responsible, committed, caring, nice etc. Respectively, the image of a teacher as a respected member of society has determined a teacher’s professional behavior.

Studies on teachers’ images

Existing research on images of teachers is mainly qualitative; data has been acquired through interviews, open questionnaires and diaries. According to researchers, images of teachers can be investigated through pictures as well (Rose 2016; Weber and Mitchell 1996).

Weber and Mitchell (1995) used drawings to examine students’, preservice teachers’ and experienced teachers’ images of a teacher in different countries. The results showed that the qualities most associated with female teachers were kindness, caring, nurturing and smiling.

A common feature for female teachers was a smile. A significant number of the teachers wore long skirts and their hair pinned back in a bun, evoking the stereotype of an ‘old maid’. The researchers refer to Trousdale (1994) to suggest that the female teacher’s smile indicates good will and lack of threat. Smiles are not associated with male teachers. The teacher’s clothing in the participants’ drawings referred to a stereotype based on experience of the school world. The drawings created the image of a teacher as a transferor of knowledge and a traditional authority that evokes respect.

In another study, Weber and Mitchell (1996) investigated the effect of image on teacher identity. The study included preservice teachers and teachers from elementary education programmes. Data was collected through drawings, writings and discussions. Most participants drew teachers with their hair tied up in buns, wearing skirts, pearls and glasses. Participants said the skills teachers most appreciated were reading, counting and writing. There were also female teachers who emphasized the teacher’s empathy, warmth and caring. The researchers concluded that the participants’ drawings were influenced by their past experiences and their remembered stereotypical images of the teacher as a distant authority figure.

Kestere and Kalke (2015), with their research colleagues investigated students’ visual images of a typical teacher in ten countries. The data consisted primarily of drawings and writings. The common results from the different countries showed positive features in both male and female teachers. They were smiling and kind and did not use their voice for shouting. The teachers’ clothes were comfortable and sporty. Beltman et al. (2015) also used drawings and written texts to research beginning and preservice teachers’ images of themselves becoming teachers. This research indicated that preservice teachers mainly portrayed the teacher as smiling, caring, nurturing and joyful. Such words as supportive, friendly and easy to approach were used as well. According to the researchers, participants did not question being a teacher, nor did they point to potential identity conflicts, and made little reference to the wider education community. The researchers concluded that emotions play a complex role in the formation of teacher identity.

Murphy, Delli, and Edwards (2004) asked second-grade students, preservice and in-service teachers to draw a picture of good teacher. The results indicated that a good teacher is caring, patient and polite. Teaching was characterized by student-centered instruction and happy students. The good teacher emphasizes cooperative learning and small group instruction. There were participants who drew an indoor space, but some drew an outdoor space. Notably, preservice teachers identified themselves as teachers who would have positive relationships with their students and would offer enjoyable learning experiences. There was little evidence of the potential complexities or challenges of teaching. Arnon and Reichel (2007), in turn, examined teacher students’ and beginning teachers’ images of themselves as a teacher and images of an ideal teacher. They asked participants to list three positive qualities of an ideal teacher and three qualities that would characterize them as a teacher. The ideal teacher is empathetic, loves children and listens to children. Teacher students described themselves as future teachers in the same way they described an ideal teacher. The groups differed in that the beginning teachers emphasized knowledge as an important feature of the ideal teacher, whereas the teacher students stressed personal components more.

Kindergarten teacher education and student selection

Finnish kindergarten teacher education began in 1892, in connection with the kindergarten. The first kindergarten teacher education seminars were established in the 1940s and continued until the 1960s (Hänninen and Valli 1986). The seminars were nationalized and renamed kindergarten teacher colleges in 1983. Kindergarten teacher education was offered in universities in 1973. Both forms of education were extended to three years in the early 1980s. In the mid-1990s, kindergarten teacher education was established at universities and the colleges were discontinued (Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriö 2007). Reform of the university degree took place in 2005. The bachelor’s degree in education (180 credits) gave the kindergarten teacher a professional qualification and the opportunity to continue to a master’s and doctoral degree.

Finnish universities are independent and select their own students. When the first data for this study was collected in 1992, the entrance exam for kindergarten teacher education at the University where the study was conducted consisted of a book exam, an exam in visual art and music and group and individual interviews. The applicant received extra points for university studies and work experience in childcare and upbringing. Since the beginning of 2006, universities have used the entrance examination developed by the national cooperation network (Räihä 2010). The aim has been to clarify the student selection process and to dismantle barriers to selection. In 2008 and 2013, student selection included a written test and an aptitude test. The written test was based on material provided during the application process. The aptitude test included a group situation and an interview to evaluate the applicant’s suitability as a kindergarten teacher. In 2017, student selection involved a written test to assess the applicant’s learning skills and an aptitude to test assess her or his ability to work as a kindergarten teacher. The findings show that the selection procedures for student groups differ. It may have some impact on students’ images of the kindergarten teacher, children, activities, and kindergarten.

Method

The study was carried out at a Finnish university. The aim was to investigate the images of students at the beginning of kindergarten teacher education, before starting university teaching in 1992, 2008, 2013, and 2017. The study questions are:

1. What kind of images do groups have of the teacher and the children?

2. What kind of images do groups have of activity?

3. What kind of images do groups have of the kindergarten?

4. What are the similarities and differences between the groups?

The research years were chosen to obtain information over time and because of the researcher’s employment at the university. The time frame also provided an opportunity to examine similarities and differences between groups of students from different years.

A total of 156 students participated in the study voluntarily: 32 students (30 women, two men) in 1992, 38 students (37 women, one man) in 2008, 38 students (36 women, two men) in 2013, and 48 students (47 women, one man) in 2017. It is worth noting that the number of men has been and still is very small in university-level early childhood education. The majority of the participants were under 22 years of age, and the oldest was over 35 years old. The students’ work experience with children varied from a few months to a few years. Some students did not have any work experience.

The researcher obtained separate permissions for data collection from the university. Students took part in the study voluntarily. Ethical principles of the research and information regarding anonymized publication of results were provided to students at the beginning of data collection.

Data collection and analysis

Data was obtained from students through drawings and open-ended questions. Data were collected at the beginning of the study programme in 1992, 2008, 2013, and 2017. All participants received the same instructions, 45 minutes response time, the same size of paper, and similar crayons. Students were asked to draw a picture of themselves as a kindergarten teacher, children who they wanted to interact with and a kindergarten where they wanted to act. The instructions emphasized personal vision, not artistic performance. After the drawing, students were asked to write who was/were in the picture, what was happening and what the environment was.

Collecting data through both drawings and writings provided more information about students’ inner world than if the data had been analyzed with either drawings or writings (Kaufman and Wohl 1992). Data analysis showed that all data could not be analyzed. In some drawings, the faces or sizes of the teacher and the children were could not be distinguished or the drawings were symbolic and there were few writings. A total of 12 drawings were removed. The final number of participants were 144: 32 students (30 women, two men) in 1992, 36 students (35 women, one man) in 2008, 32 students (31 women, one men) in 2013, and 44 students (42 women, two men) in 2017.

Qualitative content analysis is a common method for analyzing drawings and writings (Rose 2016).

Here, content analysis examined students’ ideas, not their mental abilities. The analysis was a multi-step process in which the researcher looked at the drawings and writings as a whole and at the details of each drawing and writing. The meaning unit was a word, a word pair and a phrase that were connected to each other through the contents (Graneheim and Lundman 2003). The researcher recorded the keywords and pairs of words in each drawing, for example, listing participants (female/male teacher; teacher/child); positions (standing/sitting); activities (teaching/guiding/helping/playing); content (art/music/reading); and space (indoor/outdoor) (Beltman et al. 2015; Murphy, Delli, and Edwards 2004). The researcher compiled a list of all recorded words, word pairs and underlined phrases, and combined the contents of the same meaning.

These contents were used to create a coding tool that could be used to evaluate the drawings and writings, as well as to exclude contents that did not belong to certain sets and did not respond to the study questions (Krippendorff 1980; Rose 2016). An experienced kindergarten teacher who was familiar with image analysis coded drawings and writings independently used the coding tool. The coding exercise contained 10% of all drawings and writings, which were randomly selected. The overall reliability was 0.85, exceeding the ‘reasonable minimum’ reliability of 0.80 (Denzin and Lincoln 2000; Patton 1990). After coding, some contents were revised. The researcher coded all the drawings and writings, counting each content only once for each participant. After coding, the researcher formed categories for similar contents. The results are described in percentages by groups to help the researcher and the reader identify similarities and differences between the groups (Appendix A).

In qualitative research, trustworthiness is based on credibility, dependability, transferability and conformability (Lincoln and Guba 1985). In this study, credibility was assessed when selecting context, participants and data collection methods, and when constructing the coding tool and forming categories (Graneheim and Lundman 2003). Dependability was ensured by the same researcher analyzing all data simultaneously (Elo et al. 2014). Confirmability was increased by using an educated professional in evaluating a coding tool. The interpretations of the results received support from previously-mentioned studies, adding confirmability. Presenting the results along with student expressions (e.g. student 46, 2017, Student 13, 1992) improved transferability.

Implementing qualitative research sets challenges for the researcher as well. In this study, the researcher relied on a non-dualistic ontological perspective in which subject and object are inseparable (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2007). In other words, there is only one world where students’ different ways of understanding and experiencing the phenomenon combine (Ashworth and Lucas 2000). Students’ knowledge is thought to be relational and is created through thinking and experience in interaction with the environment and culture in which students have lived before entering teacher education (Marton 2000). Thus, students’ images are formed on the basis of their individual experiences and interpretations, which the researcher describes as such as students have experienced them (Ahlberg 1992; Ashworth and Lucas 2000). The researcher should also be aware of the presuppositions associated with data analysis (Ashworth and Lucas 2000). In this study, the researcher sought to reduce her own presuppositions by reading and examining students’ texts and drawings multiple times during the analysis process. The researcher and the external evaluator also discussed the presuppositions before and after coding the data.

Findings

This study examined the images kindergarten teacher students from different groups had about children, kindergartens and themselves as teachers in 1992, 2008, 2013 and 2017. Data was collected through drawings and writings. Analysis of the data revealed similar images but differences as well.

Images of the teacher and the children

Students in all groups described the characteristics of the teacher and the children, and how they were dressed. In the drawings, students described the teacher as smiling. In the writing, they highlighted the teacher as a safe, empathetic, understanding and trustworthy person who listens to and cares for children and treats them fairly. In particular, the 2017 students stressed the teacher’s qualities more than students in other groups. The result is consistent with other studies that emphasize teachers’ smiling, caring and empathic qualities (Arnon and Reichel 2007; Beltman et al. 2015).

Students also drew children as smiling. In the writing, children were presented as cheerful and active. Students stressed the close and good relationships between teachers and children as well as a safe environment and open atmosphere. It was mentioned often that children could talk about their own affairs to the teacher.

Students depicted the teachers’ and children’s dress and hairstyles only in the drawings. The teachers and the children wore casual clothes, such as long pants and sweaters. None of the students drew a picture showing the teacher wearing high heels, jewellery or makeup (female teacher) or a tie or suit (male teacher). The teachers’ and children’s hairstyles were ordinary and similar. Kestere and Kalke’s (2015) research revealed that respondents emphasized more informal than formal dressing of the teacher. Comparing the groups, a couple of female teachers in the 1992 and 2008 drawings wore dresses and aprons or skirts and shirts, but none of the teachers wore these clothes in the 2013 and 2017 drawings. This observation is similar to some previous studies in which female teachers wore dresses or skirts and blouses (Weber and Mitchell 1995).

Images of pedagogical activity

All students emphasized the teacher’s work in a mixed group, which consisted mainly of girls and boys under the age of five. There were students in each group who wanted to work with children with multicultural backgrounds. The 2017 students emphasized working with special needs children more than the other groups.

Analysis of the activities showed that students highlighted teacher-led activities like teaching and control. For example, the teacher stood in front of the children or next to the blackboard, teaching children letters, plants, animals or music, or leading the children in singing or gymnastics. Children stood or sat and listened to the teacher’s teaching, and answered questions. One student wrote: I teach letters to children and motivate them to learn (Student 16, 2008). Another student visualized: When children know a letter that I show, they raise their hand (Student 46, 2017). Students in 2008, 2013 and 2017 emphasized more teacher-led activities than students in 1992. Teacher-led activities highlight the transfer of knowledge to children rather than children’s own activities, and interaction flows from teacher to children (Beltman et al. 2015; Nóvoa 2000).

Numerous students emphasized the joint participation of the teacher and the children in the activities. For example, the teacher and the children sat at a desk and painted together. One student explained: We have a painting moment and children and I are painting together (Student 05, 1992). In some cases, the teacher and children sat on the couch or floor and discussed, viewed pictures or read a storybook. One student pointed: I and 3–5 years children are sitting on a couch and we are reading a story book and talking about pictures (Student 13, 1992). Further, the teacher and children played and sung together. One student wrote: The children and I are sitting on the floor and we play and sing songs together (Student 28, 2017). Outdoors, the teacher and children explored nature or gathered nature materials together. One student depicted: The children and I enjoy being together in nature (Student 31, 2008). Murphy, Delli, and Edwards (2004) suggest that in situations like this, the interaction between the teacher and the children is reciprocal and the activity is cooperative and emotional.

Students emphasized the teacher as a guide of children’s activities. The teacher is close, making suggestions and helping when needed. Children are allowed to decide whether they want to work alone or with other children. One student expressed: Children can choose activities and I will help them if needed (Student 2017, 57). Another student illustrated: Children do a project and I guide groups to find the materials (Student 11, 1992). The 1992, 2008, and 2017 groups stressed the teacher’s guiding activities more than the 2013 students. Weber and Mitchell (1996) mention that the initiation of guidance on children’s needs is related to child-centered activities and interactions.

Some students emphasized the observation of children’s activities. In this case, the teacher stands or sits on the chair a little further away follows their play or activity. One student described: I observe children playing with other children or alone (Student 30, 2008). In this situation, the children’s own activity and their interaction with other peers are at the center. The groups in 1992, 2008, and 2013 highlighted teacher observation more than the 2017 students.

Images of the implementation of the action

Analysis of the teaching and working methods revealed that students emphasized small group and collaborative methods in interacting with children. Small groups were used in project work, storytelling, reading books and making art. Students utilized collaboration when they participated in games and plays with children, explored nature or cleaned the yard with children. The whole group was used in morning circuits, music moments, and gymnastics. Individual methods were used when the teacher guided and helped a child in an activity. Also, in Murphy et al.’s (2004) study, most teachers emphasized small group work. The 1992 and 2008 students stressed individual methods more than students in 2013 and 2017.

Analysis of content areas, materials and tools showed that students highlighted nature and environment, storytelling and art (drawing and painting, songs and music). Students placed little emphasis or none at all on writing, math and exercise and gymnastics. In comparing results over time, the 1992 and 2017 students stressed nature and environment topics more than the 2008 and 2013 students. Further, students described indoor materials and tools such as books, pencils and paper and toys. Some students drew a chalkboard, pointer, abacus or clock. Outdoor materials and play tools, such as shovels and buckets, sandboxes, footballs, skipping ropes, swings and slides, were common in student drawings. The students rarely or never depicted musical instruments and TVs, radios and computer. The 1992 students placed more emphasis on materials, tools and play equipment than the other groups. The 2017 students stressed teaching equipment more than the other groups.

Images of the physical environment

Students’ drawings of the kindergarten depicted indoor space more often than outdoor space. This finding is in line with Murphy et al.’s (2004) study, in which action occurred in an indoor space. The majority of the students drew one classroom with furniture, drawings of children on the wall, curtains in the windows and a carpet on the floor. Moreover, the 1992 students decorated the classroom with flowers and green plants. The main furniture depicted were children’s tables and chairs or benches arranged in a row, a circle or a semicircle. The teacher desk and chair was often depicted in front of the children’s desks. Some students depicted activities in a kindergarten yard, playground, or nearby forest. The 1992 students stressed indoor space more whereas the other groups highlighted more outdoor space. This result reflects newer curricula that emphasize the use of outdoor space alongside indoor space (Opetushallitus 2016; Stakes 2005).

Discussion

This study examined kindergarten teacher students’ images of themselves as teachers and of children and kindergartens in 1992, 2008, 2013, and 2017. Data were collected through drawings and open-ended questions and analyzed by content analysis. The images of the groups were largely similar but differences emerged in some categories.

The results were surprising in that the groups’ images of the teacher were so similar. They were similar to those found in the previously-mentioned studies as well. It was common to the results that they did not stress the teacher’s collaboration with colleagues and parents or the teacher’s responsibility to develop quality of early childhood education. The images seem to reflect students’ previous experiences as students and ideas about what a teacher should be like. The students have the traditional notion of teacher, which over time has taken root in the culture of education and has built a general image of the teacher that students who want to become teachers should aspire to (Beltman et al. 2015).

Interestingly, the groups described both the teacher and the children as smiling and emphasized their positive characteristics and ignored the negative qualities. They did not express doubts about becoming a teacher. Students seem to describe themselves as the teacher and the children more positively than negatively in order to reduce their own anxiety in relation to children and teaching (Beltman et al. 2015). Weber and Mitchell (1996) point out that it is not easy for students to express negative images though they are aware of challenges in the teacher's work.

Students’ image of the teacher reflects the qualities of a good teacher and the ethical principles of the teaching profession. Empathy and care, safety and protection are considered desirable characteristics of the good teacher (Arnon and Reichel 2007). A good teacher is expected to be understanding, warm and kind (Weber and Mitchell 1995). The characteristics of a good teacher emphasize the value of interpersonal relationships in teaching rather than the academic goals (Murphy, Delli, and Edwards 2004). Students’ images of the characteristics of the teacher can be also interpreted as an indication of good will and a desire to please and to provide a positive image of their suitability for the teaching profession (Trousdale 1994). Britzman (2003) remarks, that images that portray a teacher as a good teacher refer to the stereotypes that mainly associated with female teachers. The fact that a female teacher is considered as a good teacher can prevent a debate about the contradictions between teacher characteristics and the requirements of the teaching profession.

Students depicted the dress of the teacher and the children as casual and their hairstyles as simple.

This result reflects the fact that teachers wear casual clothing for practical reasons when working with young children. In the study Kestere and Kalke (2015), participants emphasized the comfort and sportiness of teachers’ clothing. The result may reflect a new kind of dress culture. For example, Vick (2000) points out that at the end of the twentieth century, the image of teachers’ clothing changed in textbooks and teachers were portrayed in more casual wear.

Students had a versatile picture of teaching activities and working methods. However, they highlighted only a few content areas, ignoring writing and mathematics, which have been traditionally considered more as scholastic content areas. It is worth noting that students paid no attention to technological tools. There was only one drawing in the data depicting newer technology (e.g. computer). Likewise, in Lehikoinen and Salonen’s (2016) results, the use of technology was not found in teacher students’ drawings. It seems that teacher students appreciate based on their own previous experiences the traditional kindergarten learning environment and tools, despite the strong digitalization of Finnish society.

The differences between the groups were apparent in the depiction of different children, content areas, materials and tools and physical environments. The 1992 students deviated from other groups. More than other groups, they emphasized decoration of the traditional classroom, furniture, different materials and play tools. The result supports the observation that kindergartens were cosy, aesthetic and homey in the 1990s. Since then, less emphasis has been placed on these issues (Kalliala and Tahkokallio 2001). The 1992 students emphasized and depicted the least outdoor space, which was mainly used for children’s free activities and playing. Instead, other groups, more than 1992 students, described outdoor activities. twenty-first century curricula encourage kindergarten teachers to use the unbuilt and built environment in many ways (Opetushallitus 2016; Stakes 2005).

The results show that the images students have of their futures are useful when assessing relevance of the results to teacher education and practice. Students do not begin education as ‘empty vessels’ but bring with them diverse experiences and memories. The challenge in teacher education is how educators can take advantage of students’ similar and different images and identify shortcomings. The results indicate that students mainly emphasize teachers’ social and emotional qualities. Cognition is also part of teacher capital important to supporting the development of young children. Discussing what qualities make teacher students good teachers and what qualities make children good learners can help students understand the importance of different qualities in the work of kindergarten teachers. The results demonstrate that students carry traditional and stereotypical images related to characteristics of teachers and children, pedagogy and the physical environment. Educators should help students to identify their traditional and stereotypical images and provide them with time to share these previously adopted images with other students at different stages of the studying. It is widely acknowledged that students ‘stereotypical and traditional perceptions are a major challenge for teachers in helping students critically examine acquired images and encouraging them to try new ways of doing things.

The results of this study indicate that drawings and writings together provide a forum to bring to light the views of students that otherwise remain hidden. At the same time, the results draw attention to limitations and areas for further research. One of the limitations is the low participation of male students. Greater gender involvement could have increased the opportunity to study images from wider perspectives and increased the reliability of the results. Another limitation of this study was that groups represented different study years when it was not possible to examine changes in the images. The next step could be to examine the change in the images of one or more groups of students within the same study programme and at different stages of the learning process. It would be interesting to explore kindergarten children, teacher students, and teachers’ similar and different images of the teacher, children and kindergarten as well.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The research was supported by the University of Eastern Finland, Faculty of Philosophy.

Appendix A. Percentages of certain details in the student teachers’ drawings in 1992, 2008, 2013 and 2017

Table

Detail	Student 1992/32	Student 2008/36	Student 2013/32	Student 2017/44
Teacher behavior smiling standing seated (chair, sofa, floor, table, stone, ground)	48 52 48	67 50 50	44 56 46	73 74 26
Teacher activity teaching, directing and managing guiding, helping child or children participating in action with child/children observing, following child/children playing	28 38 34 21	47 25 28 31	52 15 33 19	45 25 30 9
Children behavior smiling standing and moving sitting (chair, sofa, floor, table, stone, ground)	53 44 72	72 61 61	50 53 56	80 59 48
Children diversity special needs multicultural (skin color, language, culture, religion) mix group	3 22 100	6 17 100	9 16 100	27 25 100
Content areas nature and environment reading books and telling stories writing mathematics art (drawing, painting, music/singing, theater) exercise, gymnastic	34 16 - 3 28 9	11 22 3 3 17 6	9 31 3 - 9 3	25 16 2 - 16 9
Materials and tools books, papers, pens (colors), bookcase play tools, sandbox, swings, slides musical instruments radio, television, computer, e-pad calendar, clock, abacus, blackboard	81 53 16 6 19	39 28 11 - 14	53 28 3 9 16	34 36 - - 25
Indoor and outdoor indoor space outdoor space Classroom furniture teacher desk and chair children’s desks, chairs or benches in rows -“ - - “ - in circle/semicircle	81 19 9 34 38	64 36 11 9 6	63 37 16 - 13	61 39 9 30 30
Classroom decoration plants pictures on the wall curtains carpet(s) cushion	59 53 53 25 13	22 28 19 22 -	3 9 16 3 3	7 32 12 23 2
Teaching and working methods individual methods small group methods the whole group methods collaborative methods	27 40 19 34	22 35 14 25	9 31 16 25	7 32 18 27

Notes: In looking at the drawings, it appeared that *) the 1992 and **) 2013 drawings lacked descriptions of the teacher’s behavior and teacher activity. These shortcomings were taken into account when establishing the percentages.