The theory–practice nexus in teacher education: new evidence for effective approaches

All but one of the substantive papers in this issue report on novel approaches to that fundamental issue in teacher education: the relationship between educational theory and the practice of teaching and learning. A gap between these essential elements of professionalisation has been described, discussed and debated over the last three decades (e.g. Carr 1980; Korthagen 2007) and in a variety of cultural contexts, in this journal (e.g. Cheng, Cheng, and Tang 2010; McGarr, O’Grady, and Guilfoyle 2017) and elsewhere. However, as Editor, I would like to argue that this relationship should be seen not so much as a divide, but as a nexus. From the Latin verb nectere, this connection (connexion?) combines the notions of ‘bringing together’ and ‘forming a focal point’. Theory, arising from both empirical evidence and original argument based on research, underpins each element of pedagogic practice (la Velle and Flores 2018). Additionally, close-to-practise-research (BERA 2018) can also generate new theory, focussing as it does on issues defined by practitioners as relevant to their practice through collaboration with those whose main expertise is research or practice, or both. Thus, the nexus comprises practice informed by theory and theory informed by practice. It is within this space that research into initial teacher education (ITE) needs urgently to be concentrated. It is timely therefore that this issue of JET presents some significant new knowledge about strategies for the theory–practice nexus in ITE.

School-based ITE has gained much traction in the UK and increasingly internationally. Key to the progress that student teachers can make during school experience is the role of the mentor (Hobson 2002). Ciarán Ó Gallchóir, from the University of Limerick in Ireland, opens this issue with his methodologically innovative paper describing the experiences of the mentoring of Irish student teachers nearing the completion of their ITE. The Teaching Council of Ireland, considering teaching to be the ‘most important profession in society’ (The Teaching Council An Comhairle Múinteoireachta 2015), has introduced a comprehensive induction programme for newly qualified teachers called Droichead, the Irish word for ‘bridge’, implying a nexus between ITE and the early years of a teacher’s career. High-quality university-based ITE is characterised by the appropriate theoretical underpinning of the preparation of teachers (la Velle 2013), but as Gallchóir argues in this article, the opportunity for nexus with the latter stages of ITE has unfortunately been missed in the design of the Droichead programme.

That student teachers are more focussed on practice than theory during their ITE is readily acknowledged by university tutors and school mentors alike (e.g. Bullough 2010), both of whom agree that reflection in and on action (Schön 1987) is basic in learning to teach. The next paper in this issue, from Agurtzane Martinez and colleagues from the University of Mondragón in Spain, presents a study into a tutor-assisted joint reflection on the theory–practice nexus. Various patterns of interaction were identified, but invariably, the tutor’s input to the collective was needed to establish the relationship between the situational and academic representation of teachers’ knowledge. Evidence is presented to suggest that student teachers show a progressive increase in their ownership and exercise of the reflection on the theory–practice nexus.

This professional relationship suggests co-construction of knowledge, and this is the focus of the next paper in this issue, by Kelly Dockerty, from the University of Hull in the UK. In the study presented, the affordances of online discussion were harnessed to support professional dialogue during ITE students’ practicum. Interpreting her data through the lens of situated learning (Lave and Wenger 1991), Dockerty demonstrates that online communication among student teachers who were shown to be peripheral participants lent greater agency compared with action by providing a ‘safe space’ before meeting the challenges of the practicum itself. This paper represents an example of the theory–practice nexus enacted by a teacher educator as a researcher, bringing theory to bear on practice to the benefit of her students.

Another example of this is presented by Sum Kwing Cheung and Cheuk Sin Kam, both of teacher education universities in Hong Kong, who researched Early Years student teachers’ views of parental involvement in their children’s education. Merging sociocultural practice theory and social cognitive theory, they argued that while their data showed some ambivalence between parental involvement strategies and student teachers’ own confidence in implementing them, there were clear links with the quality of the relationships in their own family upbringing. The empirical findings in this study fall clearly within the theory–practice nexus. The application of the figured world notion (from sociocultural practice theory) to teaching and that of the development of self efficacy in student teachers (from social cognitive theory) demonstrates that those student teachers who enjoyed close relationships with their own parents were more likely to feel increased confidence in communicating with the parents of their future pupils and getting them involved in their children’s learning.

Lesson Study in ITE is the focus of the next contribution. Aoibhinn Ni Shuilleabhain from University College, Dublin, and Raymond Bjuland from the University of Stavanger present an international comparative study between Ireland and Norway of the use of Lesson Study in ITE. Based on a large corpus of research and founding theory (e.g. Fernandez and Yoshida 2004), Lesson Study increasingly features in ITE programmes internationally. In this intervention, the authors report that the design of the ITE pedagogic module in which the lesson study cycle appeared was strongly founded on theory. The interventions themselves provided clear opportunities for the theory–practice nexus at each stage of the cycle, linking the work in the university and in schools and ‘locating theory IN practice’.

Returning to the UK and the University of Bristol, where I have fond memories of the high quality of the ITE and very able student teachers, Kate Hawkey and colleagues present an interdisciplinary study in which they challenged history, science and geography students to work together on the ‘wicked’ problem of climate change and to plan and deliver a session for school pupils. The challenge of subject sub-culture immediately arose (John and la Velle 2004), and the student teachers were required to emerge from their subject silos into the ‘wicked’ area of contested, uncertain knowledge. Evidence is presented to suggest that the experience of working with colleagues from another discipline generated more powerful, collective pedagogic content knowledge. Again, this application of theory – in this case that of the notion of ‘wicked’ problems – to the practice of teacher education – in this case in an interdisciplinary context – demonstrates vividly the theory–practice nexus.

The final paper in this issue, from Israel, departs from the predominant theme of the theory/practice nexus in ITE, although there are indirect links to it. Mary Gutman from the Mofat Institute in Israel looks at the motives underlying international career moves of senior teacher educators and presents evidence that the experience of teaching, research and/or management in a higher education institution with a contrasting culture from that of their own engenders resilience and internationalisation. Resonating with the notion of a more interconnected, diversified world view, it is suggested that nurturing tolerance for a range of cultural groups serves very well all those involved in education and particularly in the education of teachers.

Two short pieces conclude the papers section of this issue. The first is an ‘In Progress’ paper from Bin Shen and Barry Bai from the University of Hong Kong who describe the problems faced by Chinese teachers of writing in English and put forward a model of continuing professional development characterised by peer-assisted research and the implementation of teamwork. Evaluative findings suggest that the model is successful in changing teachers’ attitudes towards the use of peer assessment. The final short Research-in-Progress paper is from Pauline Mak, also from Hong Kong and also focussing on assessment. The reported findings of the evaluation of a novel continuing professional development (CPD) workshop on assessment strategies with consequential follow-up suggest that the programme has a positive impact on the teachers’ development of competencies in assessment.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.