Examining peer group mentoring in teaching practicum and its impact on the process of pre-service teachers’ joint reflection

ABSTRACT

This case study examines joint reflection in the context of peer group mentoring during the teaching practicum, involving three pre-service teachers and a mentor engaging in discussions supported by the video recorded lessons taught by the pre-service teachers. The approach to joint reflection was non-prescriptive and pre-service teacher-initiated. The roles of the peer group and the mentor are explored in the light of their impact on pre-service teachers’ joint reflection process. The findings challenge prior research by demonstrating that pre-service teacher-initiated reflection has the potential to assist peer groups in creating a common language and learning context to acquire practicum knowledge, develop practical tools and build inferential knowledge. The findings also reveal that mentors’ role needs not be directive, but they can maintain the role of a co-reflector throughout the peer group mentoring process. The implications for teacher education are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Joint reflection
• peer group mentoring
• pre-service teachers
• mentor
• teaching practicum

Introduction

Reflecting upon teaching practicum constitutes a crucial tool for the construction of teachers’ practical knowledge (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2020; Davis 2006) which is regarded to guide everyday teaching activities of teachers (Schulman 1986). With respect to learning to teach and teaching practicum experiences in initial teacher education, research has placed attention on pre-service teacher (PST) reflection (Barnhart and van Es 2015; Clarà et al. 2019; Gelfuso 2016; Toom, Husu, and Patrikainen 2015). According to Dewey (1933), reflection and knowing are part of one shared activity. Similarly, several other researchers have emphasised that reflection should take place in interaction with other individuals (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2017; Moore-Russo and Wilsey 2014). This enables them to share their own experiences and learn from those of others, and it helps them to reinterpret and develop own perspectives further.

Mentoring has been deemed crucial in assisting PST learning during practicums, and it has been studied extensively for this reason (Ellis, Alonzo, and Nguyen 2020; Mena et al. 2016). Mentoring conversations have been utilised to explore joint reflection and mentor roles during mentoring discussions (Eriksson 2017; Izadina 2016; Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran 2017; Sheridan and Young 2017). Several authors have emphasised that during joint reflection, the exchange of ideas between PSTs and mentors lead to a construction of practical thinking (Heikkinen, Jokinen, and Tynjälä 2012; McGraw and Davis 2017). Despite this fact, mentors remain directive in their instruction and introduce their own topics during mentoring discussions. Therefore, they do not exploit enough PST practicum experiences and practical knowledge acquisition (Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran 2017), and this restricts PSTs from taking advantage of their peers’ fruitful feedback during joint reflection (Daniel, Auhl, and Hastings 2013). There is still much to be learnt about PST and mentor joint reflection, and how it assists learning when the focus of reflection is initiated by PSTs.

This case study addresses the aforementioned knowledge gap, and it seeks to do so by examining joint reflection in the context of peer group mentoring. This peer group mentoring took place during a teaching practicum where non-prescriptive and a PST-initiated approach to reflection was applied. During an ongoing practicum, PSTs were encouraged to reflect upon their practicum experiences, their own actions and those of others. This approach to reflection is learner-centred and personalised, and the mentor needs to see each PSTs as an individual learner, allowing PSTs to learn based on their own knowledge and learning trajectory. It also allows PSTs to take more initiative and responsibility for their own learning thereby encouraging self-development in authentic learning situations that closely resemble professional practice. In addition, PSTs were asked to view videos of themselves leading lessons in the classroom. These sessions are referred to as peer group mentoring. Unlike the structured and guided approach taken in much of prior literature (Korthagen 2014; Korthagen and Nuijten 2017), this approach to reflection was non-prescriptive and PST-initiated. Reflection was entirely dependent on PST wishes and needs and did not have a predefined plan. Mentor intervention was very limited during this reflection period, and it followed the pre-service teachers’ reflections from their own and their peers’ teaching experiences. This PST-initiated approach is thus far still rare in teacher education with only a few study exceptions (Agurtzane et al. 2019; Trevethan and Sandretto 2017). In this study, the following research questions were addressed: What is the role of a peer group in a joint reflection process? What is the role of the mentor teacher in the process of a non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to joint reflection in a peer group?

Theoretical framework

Reflection in initial teacher education

The theoretical underpinnings of this study are grounded in socio-constructivist approach to learning, suggesting that PSTs learn in social interaction and dialogue with others. This approach acknowledges both the roles of an individual and the group in the learning process. Moreover, we ground our understanding of reflection in Dewey’s (1938) work on reflective learning, but we also derive some principles from the notions of experiential (Kolb and Kolb 2011) and transformative learning (Mezirow 1991). In line with these principles, safe environment and critical reflection upon experience are needed for one to create knowledge, to challenge and transform their understanding and beliefs in order to learn about teaching and learning (Dewey 1938; Mezirow 1991). Moreover, as the knowledge is created in a dialogue, sharing and reflecting on the meaning of experiences in interaction with others is seen to promote learning and growth, leading to richer subsequent experiences (Dewey 1938; Kolb and Kolb 2011).

Reflection is here understood as a cognitive process of constructing knowledge from practical teaching experiences in order to make sense of teaching situations carried out either individually and/or with the help of others (Le Cornu and Ewing 2008; Toom, Husu, and Patrikainen 2015). This allows an individual to rethink their experiences and interpret them with existing knowledge, and it also enables them to contemplate possibilities for future actions (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2020; Hayden, Moore-Russo, and Marino 2013). For these reasons, exploring alternative approaches to pedagogical situations demands an analytical stance (Barnhart and van Es 2015; Loughran, Keast, and Cooper 2016). This is necessary in ensuring that PSTs learn to notice and make connections between different kinds of knowledge from practice and that they can apply this knowledge in the future (Billing 2007). Thus, reflection is a crucial tool for teachers to build knowledge from a practicum. Through reflection, development of practical knowledge and teacher learning is facilitated (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2020). Reflection is a significant tool for professional learning as it alters teacher actions and thinking over time (Trevethan and Sandretto 2017).

In teacher education, reflection was addressed in the context of teacher identity development (Izadina 2016; Lutovac 2020; Lutovac and Flores 2021), through dialogic practice in mentoring conversations (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2017) and in inquiry-oriented approaches to reflective practice, as well as in mentoring groups (Tiainen, Korkeamäki, and Dreher 2018; Lammert, DeWalt, and Wetzel 2020; Liu 2017). Various reflective tools have been applied in teacher education to stimulate PST reflection, such as the use of narratives, personal biographies, group discussions, mentoring models, reflective tasks and video recording of the lessons (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2017; Barnhart and van Es 2015; Trevethan and Sandretto 2017). These studies have generated understanding in how to support PST learning from practice. However, they also highlight reflection as an ambiguous concept, and there is no consensus on how to support the aforementioned learning (Beauchamp 2015).

Joint reflection in initial teacher education

Several researchers have emphasised that joint reflection is a useful catalyst in beginning PST reflection (Martinez et al. 2019; Clarà et al. 2019; Daniel, Auhl, and Hastings 2013). It has also been discovered that PSTs reach higher levels of reflection when assisted by others (Moore-Russo and Wilsey 2014). During joint reflection, both collective experience and individual knowledge are used to expand understanding and knowledge of practice (Allas, Leijen, and Toom 2017). In fact, joint reflection can be used as an ongoing tool to share, discuss, reinterpret experiences, and learn from others’ verbalised thought processes (Liu 2017; Sheridan and Young 2017). As a critical part in joint reflection, Allas, Leijen, and Toom (2017) emphasise the need to use PST practicum experiences to assist the construct of knowledge from practice, as well as to guide their future decisions and actions. When PSTs participate in discussions and share concerns, successes and challenges (Ambrosetti 2014), the overall quality of their reflection increases.

Several researchers noted that it is important for future teachers to acknowledge the role they play in others’ learning as they acknowledge their own learning and find meaning in joint reflection (Daniel, Auhl, and Hastings 2013; Le Cornu and Ewing 2008). Joint reflection in peer group mentoring has the potential for a reciprocal exchange of ideas and a joint construction of knowledge (Sheridan and Young 2017). In fact, through the assistance of others, PSTs progressively internalise new aspects which they may not have been able to do alone, and they also become autonomous in these aspects (Vygotsky 1978). Within a peer group mentoring context, learning is distributed among PSTs and mentors, wherein participants have diverse expertise (Trevethan and Sandretto 2017). To foster open and genuine dialogue it is necessary to understand the roles and positions of both PSTs and mentors during the process of joint reflection (McGraw and Davis 2017; Sheridan and Young 2017).

Joint reflection in a peer group and the role of a mentor

Joint reflection has been studied in various contexts of teacher education. Danielowich (2014) studied PST change-oriented thinking, and this was done through allowing PSTs to select and share video clips from their own teaching. Following this, discussions were held with peers while the supervisor helped only with practicalities. The author found out that loosely-guided context allowed PSTs to generate new understanding about their own teaching and the pursuit of change. Allas, Leijen, and Toom (2017) examined guided reflection procedure in different kinds of reflection conditions (i.e. oral and written). These reflections were carried out either alone, with peers, or with a supervisor. The authors’ findings showed that PSTs who reflected with peers or a supervisor were able to move from real-world teaching experiences to the guiding rules and principles of future teaching activities.

In the study by Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran (2017), the authors used video-recordings of mentoring conversations between PSTs and their mentors. The findings of the study suggested that PST acquisition of professional knowledge was low, and the mentors’ level of participation in knowledge generation was generally high. The authors noted that the directing role of the mentor hindered PSTs from describing their practice and making inferences from it. On the other hand, mentor use of non-directive skills promoted the elicitation of inferential knowledge. This helped PSTs recall practice in a more abstract and generalisable way. In examining mentoring group conversations between PSTs and their mentor, Eriksson (2017) found that PSTs directed the main part of their questions to their mentor. Therefore, the role of the mentor was that of possessing teaching knowledge and experience. Moreover, M et al. (2019) examined mentor methods of assisting pre-service teacher learning and reflection in collaborative settings. The authors found that the mentor used relatively open facilitation strategies that allowed for PSTs to analyse dilemmas. However, while proceeding to the phase of synthesis, the mentor facilitation increased and became more directive.

In addition, most studies focusing on joint or collaborative reflection report on structured and guided approach to reflection (Korthagen 2014; Korthagen and Nuijten 2017) in which the core reflection model for mentoring is used, following the prescribed phases for the process of reflection. Throughout the phases, PSTs reflection is assisted and reflection is deepened by focusing on the awareness of PSTs core qualities and inner potential. On the other hand, studies employing non-prescriptive approaches are rather rare. For example, Agurtzane, Nerea, Arana and Mariam (2019) analysed interaction patterns and mentor’s assistance in PSTs’ joint reflection. The authors’ approach to reflection was non-prescriptive, in which the mentor scaffolded the group. The authors also suggested to increase the control given to PSTs progressively. Trevethan and Sandretto (2017) also suggested, that mentors need to shift their focus towards co-learning with PSTs instead of assuming an expert stance. The authors argue that such shift will yield greater professional learning benefits and that mentors need to unlearn their traditional roles.

Majority of research suggests that the relationship between mentor and mentee has developed significantly towards a relationship based on collaboration, collegiality and interaction (Sundli 2007). However, there is still research that reflects a more hierarchical presentation of mentors in the context of joint reflection (Clarà et al. 2019; Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran 2017). Many authors argue that a quality mentor needs to establish a professional relationship where PSTs feel comfortable asking questions and sharing observations (Martinez et al. 2019; Ambrosetti 2014; Mena et al. 2016). Earlier studies highlight PST reflection in groups and the different roles taken during joint reflection when sharing experiences from practice. In order to understand the role of peer group mentoring discussions, teacher education research continues to point the need for research on mutual engagement and participation. In this study, learning from practicum experiences in a supportive context is emphasised (Mezirow 1991), and in this approach, the role of the mentor is to create a context and conditions in which PSTs can learn and grow. In the approach we discuss here, the mentor can acquire in-depth knowledge about the peer-group and each PSTs’ learning process. This means that the mentors’ value lies in the provision of the feedback tailored to the needs of the peer-group and its learning phase. It is essential that PSTs and mentors can learn with and from each other, inquire and reflect. Peer group mentoring is utilised in this study as a context for learning to reflect and teach, and it is also used to explore the roles of peer groups and mentors in the joint reflection process.

Method

Study context: teaching practicum and non-prescriptive, pre-service teacher-initiated approach to reflection

Teacher education in Finland spans over the course of 5 years, and all PSTs complete a Master of education. There are four teaching practicums during the 5-year programme. Three of these practicums take place at university teacher training schools, while one is held in a primary school outside the university training schools. The university teacher training schools are research and development schools run in partnership with university departments of teacher education. In teacher training schools, the PSTs interact with their mentor teachers daily. These mentors are usually the class teachers of the classroom in which PSTs conduct their practicum.

The aforementioned practicum took place in the teacher training school, and it was the first in which PSTs were responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating their teaching as well as that of their peers. Each implemented lesson was planned and evaluated collaboratively in the peer group with a mentor. However, the PST responsibility for teaching increased gradually as the practicum proceeded. PSTs began at first to teach in groups. This was followed by teaching in pairs, and finally, PSTs took on the task of teaching independently. The mentor – who was also the class teacher of the PST practicum classroom – followed each implemented lesson.

Throughout the 6-weeks of the practicum, the PSTs were placed into the same practicum classroom (a combined first- and second-grade classroom). They practised 5 days a week and had peer group mentoring meetings at the end of the school day. At the beginning of the practicum, these peer group mentoring meetings took place twice a week. As the PST teaching responsibilities increased over the course of the practicum, the frequency of peer group mentoring meetings increased to four times a week. Discussions were non-prescriptive and videotaped, and included the presence of the mentor. PSTs were encouraged to reflect upon their peers’ teaching as well as their own through the use of videos. PSTs were also encouraged to initiate joint reflection when they observed situations and experiences that presented an opportunity for learning. In these peer group meetings, lesson videos were used for non-prescribed viewing, which meant that the PSTs were able to reflect on the experiences they felt were significant to them. This approach to reflection is referred to as non-prescriptive, PST-initiated reflection.

Participants and data collection

The participants of this case study included three female PSTs under the pseudonyms of Eve, Lotta, and Suvi, as well as their mentor teacher. The mentor was the first author of this study who has vast experience as a mentor in teaching practicum. The three PSTs comprise what is referred to in this study as a peer group. These PSTs were in the 2nd year of their 5-year studies to become primary school teachers. Prior to the commencement of their studies, the PSTs had no previous experience or professional relations with students and teaching. The university teaching practicum coordinator placed the PSTs into this practicum classroom randomly. The PSTs gave their consent to participate in the study before the practicum began. A total of 20 reflective videotaped peer group mentoring discussions took place during the 6-week practicum. Their duration varied from 15 minutes to one hour. In total, the data set for this study included 19 hours of video recorded peer group mentoring discussions.

Analysis of peer group mentoring discussions

The first author transcribed all video recordings from the peer group mentoring discussions. The transcriptions were in Finnish language and were in the final stage of analysis, for the purposes of this article, translated to English. After the transcriptions were complete, the first author carefully read and reread the data. The data was read with the focus on identifying the episodes of joint reflection as we were interested in what role the peer group plays in this process. The first author identified 102 episodes. The episode was considered to be a segment of a joint discussion where the topic of discussion stayed the same (Rainio 2003). After episodes were identified, the first author read the episodes and made annotations about their content to investigate the role of the peer group in those episodes of joint reflection. The constant comparison method was used (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000) which resulted in identifying three broad roles of the peer-group: 1) building practicum knowledge, 2) developing practical tools and 3) building inferential knowledge. The same steps of analysis were used to examine the role of the mentor in the process of joint reflection. From this analytical phase, three roles of the mentor were identified: 1) the mentor utilises PST understanding about the teaching context, 2) the mentor encourages joint reflection and 3) the mentor encourages the PST own thinking. The first and the second author had several debriefing sessions in which the second author was introduced to the analysed episodes and has formed her own interpretations. The authors then jointly evaluated the interpretations made and have agreed on the final interpretations of the selected episodes. In the findings section, we report on both peer group and mentor roles in the process of joint reflection.

Findings

In this section, the role of the peer group in peer group mentoring discussions is addressed first, and second, the role of the mentor in this process is examined. While the roles of the peer group and the mentor are addressed separately, the findings provide insight into the intertwinement of these roles.

The role of the peer group

In exploring the role of the peer group, we identified three themes referring to the knowledge and skills PSTs gained during the practicum: 1) building practicum knowledge, 2) developing practical tools and 3) building inferential knowledge.

Building practicum knowledge

Joint reflection to build practicum knowledge was prevalent during the first two weeks of practicum. PSTs reflected on the lesson videos and observed students’ individual methods of learning. They clarified difficult situations and also made plans for future steps. The example below is from the second week of the practicum. Eve shared her difficulties in noticing students’ actions based on instruction.

Eve:

From my own point of view, this lesson went better than the earlier one. I can still see myself tensed, but more comfortable. I know that it is difficult for me to think while teaching students how to say things. I couldn’t have recalled all the happenings without that [the lesson video].

Lotta and Suvi:

Oh, yes. [Inquiring intonation.]

Eve:

Over there, [showing the video] I can see that the students were able to understand how to do the voting together. Yeah, I can see they understood the main idea!

Mentor:

Yes, that is true.

Lotta:

You were able to begin the lesson by explaining the instruction and you kept it calm.

Suvi:

Yes, and those questions you made there, enabled the students to follow your teaching easily. I mean that you were not just explaining what to do.. I mean, children this age, are not able to follow long instructions without losing interest and understanding. And, I think, that is why it is important to progress by posing questions and that way you can get answers and progress in teaching.

Eve’s difficulty induced positive appraisals from her peers, and this gradually steered Eve to notice students’ actions in that situation on the lesson video. Her peer, Lotta, specifies Eve’s teaching actions, and Suvi brings additional perspective to the discussion by extracting concrete elements and sharing her understanding about teachers’ actions in that situation. Peer perspectives and suggestions deepened the overall peer group reflection. Together, the peers shared and illustrated practical principles from different peer perspectives. Therefore, peers were able to assist in connecting practicum experience and knowledge gained from the practicum with alternative ways to act. With that knowledge, PSTs were able to gradually build personal practical knowledge.

Developing practical tools

The role of the peer group in the reflection process became stronger as the teaching practicum progressed into the third and fourth weeks. In those weeks, joint reflection focused on PST actions with respect to their students, their interaction and the PST ability to build on the students’ ideas and responses. The example below illustrates the role of the peer group in the reflection and analysis of peers’ teaching and interaction with students.

Lotta:

I guess it is natural to know that when teaching these small students, we have to try to make our speech clear and slow down the speed to be clear. I notice that to do so there (pointing to the lesson video), it makes the situation easier to handle … and in that way my own thinking becomes clearer when slowing down. To do so is a tool for me.

Eve:

Yes, I agree.

Mentor:

Your interaction with the students has improved but also the way you use students’ ideas in your speech.

Suvi:

True, Lotta progressed by making questions. I think it was easy for our young students to follow that teaching-learning discussion. I think it’s also important to proceed in this way... the teacher to act like that so students are able to build their understanding.

Lotta:

True. I actually have noticed it and I know now that I trust my way of posing questions. I also trust that students will certainly answer to me, and begin to discuss. I think I am, we all are, more attuned to be in the classroom, to teacher’s job and task.

While viewing the lesson video, Lotta explained her understanding and principles about interaction with students. In analysing her teaching, she stressed the importance of having a practical tool to assist her in teaching. Peer groups focus on building understanding of that tool. In the beginning of this discussion, Eve agreed with Lotta, and the mentor went on to add that Lotta’s interaction with students contributed greatly to her development of that teacher skill. Suvi explained the way in which she observed Lotta using questioning techniques during teaching, and she proceeded to share her understanding of why it is beneficial during interaction with students. Joint reflection was promoted through the sharing of views on the matter, and different points of views were utilised. As a result, Lotta was able to explain to her peers how she gradually developed practical tools from the practicum to assist her in teaching. Overall, an ongoing reflection was created based on PST experiences. This reflection improved the PST understanding about practicing and transferring practical knowledge into new situations, and using this knowledge as a tool to positively affect their actions in future situation.

Building inferential knowledge

During the fifth and sixth weeks of the teaching practicum, peer group reflection focused on connecting teaching and student learning. PSTs reflected upon their role as teachers, and emphasised themselves as key actors in the teaching-learning process. Below, an example is provided from Lotta’s lesson. In this instance, Lotta noticed that she needed to change her teaching for the upcoming lesson.

Lotta:

This writing task, they didn’t finish it.

Mentor:

True, they were left unfinished.

Lotta:

I need to clarify this writing task. First, how they should write, I can give an example. I wasn’t able to clarify it so that they would understand it and use my information. Now they only wrote some words. And there (lesson video), I several times find myself asking them how to tell something more than in a couple of words … I am going to clarify the whole task.

Mentor:

Yeah, we had planned a lot for this lesson.

Eve:

Yes, I also saw they were not ready for this big task.

Lotta:

Yes. An example like I said. Could it be helpful to examine one thing together and then they would go and do it?

Suvi:

Yes, I see you are asking here that way actually, “Do you think that the reader understands if you only answer by using one word?” I also did the same. One question, answer it together and then students could continue like that themselves.

Reflecting on her own teaching, Lotta contemplated on how well the entire task functioned. It was further observed that additional explanation was required in order to meet the students’ learning needs. While rethinking her teaching, Lotta identified gaps in her instruction, as she constantly needed to instruct students on the task procedure. In an interesting development, Lotta’s reflection ended in a peer group effort to clarify teaching, both for the teacher and the students. Thus, joint reflection enabled PSTs to combine their thought processes in solving the following issues: what is behind the problem, why it is problematic and how to respond to that problem with newly-acquired practical knowledge? This mode of thought led to PSTs making inferences and using newly-acquired knowledge from the context. Ongoing reflection turned into a process of making joint inferences, and this assisted them in combining their own observations from teaching with their peers’ knowledge.

The role of the mentor in the process of joint reflection

The following presents three roles of the mentor in the process of peer group mentoring discussions: 1) the mentor utilises PST understanding about the teaching context, 2) the mentor encourages joint reflection and 3) the mentor encourages the PST own thinking. These roles were present throughout the peer group mentoring process, and they were also adaptive to the changes in the joint reflection.

Mentor utilises pre-service teachers’ understanding about the teaching context

It is important to emphasise that throughout the entire practicum, the mentor focused on acknowledging PST reflection, and how it changed gradually based on knowledge acquired during the process of joint reflection. One role of the mentor was to utilise PST understanding about teaching and context throughout the practicum. In the excerpt below, the mentor carefully listened to the peer group’s joint reflection and adapted the mentor interaction based on the reflection content.

Suvi:

Today students really discussed with us. It formed into a good teaching-learning discussion. I enjoyed that discussion.

Lotta:

True. I just had to keep up especially carefully with the discussion when they gave so many good ideas. I have little experience with children of this age. And not having the experience, I lack knowledge about what kind of answers they can give. I wondered, “What are they going to invent?” (laughing)

Mentor:

It truly was a good discussion. Up until now, you have created that environment with children by thinking, creating and planning it together. As you noticed, they have created ideas of their own about it and they were able to use that information and knowledge during that teaching-learning discussion. It was of great importance that you showed students that you appreciate their ideas. The way you took into account students’ ideas was practical.

As seen in the excerpt above, the mentor listened to the PST observations and ideas. The mentor proceeded to acknowledge and appreciate these observations and ideas. The mentor focused on the PST thinking, gained understanding about it and used their reflection as a basis to continue peer group mentoring. In the excerpt above, the way to continue PSTs reflection was formative feedback. It included encouraging words but practical introduction in the form of modelling. The formative discussion during joint reflection assisted the mentor in determining what the PSTs already knew about teaching and learning. Through utilising PST understanding about the teaching context, the mentor gained a better understanding of their practitioner knowledge and the phases of their reflective thinking. The mentor was then able to emphasise PST voice with diverse expertise. Using that knowledge, the mentor also posed regular questions based on the reflected experience, the aim of which was to widen the PST thinking and opportunities for learning. In addition to this, the mentor showed interest in PST thinking and reinforced that their observations were relevant. This also helped to emphasise that PSTs should freely share different views while contemplating and reflecting on their practicum experiences.

Mentor encourages joint reflection

The second role entails the mentor encouraging joint reflection. In this role, the mentor supported PSTs in using their newfound knowledge from teaching during joint discussions, as well as in thinking of how to use knowledge in upcoming lessons. In the following excerpt, Lotta explained what she noticed during teaching and that she decided to omit part of the originally-planned lesson.

Lotta:

And in that situation there, we didn’t write that task on the class board. It would have assisted students to understand how to proceed in that task. I did not illustrate the nature of the task by writing, but only by discussing. That is why I started to think that this should be done more concretely in my next lesson.

Mentor:

Yes, good. We have practiced with students mathematics and numbers, assisting them in thinking by showing how to speak about the task, and then how to write the tasks. Lotta has the math pouch that contains number cards and she used those cards in creating and writing the math tasks - to understand mathematics.

Lotta:

True, and there we did so. Students were telling their solutions, they verbalised them, and I said very good - now you write what you just said.

As seen above, the mentor joined PST-initiated discussion, and this illustrated the importance of the PST observations while connecting them to the student-oriented pedagogy implemented in the practicum classroom. The mentor pondered over the progression of the maths lessons, clarifying the ways PSTs planned and practiced their teaching. At the same time, the mentor clarifies the pedagogies used based on the PST thinking. Overall, ongoing observations of PSTs teaching and shared peer group mentoring discussions assisted the mentor in making judgements about the potential need for detailed, practical examination of practicum experiences and their connection to theory. By participating in discussions during PST-initiated reflection, the mentor served the role of being a part of joint reflection in the peer group mentoring context. In doing so, the mentor supported the practice of reflective thinking by giving attention to group members’ reflections and using their perspectives and explanations to do so. The mentor contributed to the continuum of reflection by illustrating the usefulness of exchanging ideas and perspectives during joint reflection.

Mentor encourages pre-service teachers’ own thinking

The third role of the mentor during peer group mentoring was to encourage PSTs to use their own thinking throughout the practicum. The mentor encouraged PST knowledge and provided them with opportunities to construct and reconstruct their beliefs and understanding about aspects of their teaching. In the excerpt below, Lotta examined her lesson thoroughly and accurately before proceeding with her reflection:

Lotta:

Here we go through how to progress in a task.

Mentor:

What do you think, was it enough to explain it in the beginning of the lesson as you did?

Lotta:

Yes … I can see that they were able to write a math task, even the boys who had difficulties to proceed in an earlier lesson. I’m looking at those two groups there. Oh, I thought that they were able to write it. I thought that they got it, and they were telling it in a fine way. No, they did not get it. I need to still focus on helping them.

Suvi:

The task wasn’t easy for them; I really can see it.

Lotta:

True. I found it difficult to assist them, too. I need to get them to focus on the main idea, what they really are supposed to do.

Mentor:

I quite agree. There you have the main problem setting, and you also have the facts they can use.

Lotta:

Yeah, and there is also the question. It was from these that the task was formed. But I now understand that I could have made instructions for them on their tables available there for them to check.

In the excerpt above, Lotta brought up the problem for joint discussion. The mentor-based inquiry on this issue, asking for the peer group’s opinions and whether or not they thought the students were able to proceed with the task. The joint discussion turned into a collaborative search for meaning as the PSTs continued to dismantle the problem. During this process, the mentor posed questions and reiterated the main ideas from PST reflections. This catalysed PST-initiated reflection and turned it into progress. In sum, the role of the mentor as a collaborator assisted in the shared problem solving between PSTs. It also gradually encouraged an inquiry stance towards practice.

Discussion

In this study, the roles of the peer group and the mentor in the process of joint reflection were addressed. Unlike majority of previous research literature, a non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to reflection was utilised. This study revealed three main roles of the peer group in supporting joint reflection during the six weeks of practicum: ‘building practicum knowledge’, ‘developing practical tools’ and ‘building inferential knowledge’. These three roles highlight the focus on different aspects and situations in the practicum, as well as the way in which it is entirely dependent on the PST own decisions and needs. Without a doubt, PST reflection focused on students, teachers’ actions and the content being taught. These findings are encouraging, as the roles of the peer group characterise the aspects of teaching, which are key elements of teachers’ instructional core (Toom 2006). However, these findings extend prior literature, demonstrating the true effect of a non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to reflection. This approach brings about knowledge based on PST shared discussions and observations from the practicum.

During the practicum’s first and second weeks, the first role of the peer group focused on ‘building practicum knowledge’. The peer group created practicum knowledge about the students and context as well as knowledge about themselves as teachers. This catalysed deeper reflection by creating understanding of practice. This beginning phase of the peer group mentoring process was congruent with the finding of Allas, Leijen, and Toom (2020), who highlighted the importance of creating awareness of teaching in PSTs, and assisting them in deciding their future actions as teachers. The role of the peer group in reviewing experiences and sharing peer perspectives assisted them in capturing essential aspects of their experience. This also helped PSTs gain understanding and clarity about key issues of teaching, as well as further steps to take in regard to it. However, in contrast to the research done by Mena et al. (2016), the findings from this study indicate that joint aspects of peer group discussions involved less recalls and appraisals of practice; rather, precise knowledge from practice was utilised, deepening PST joint reflection (Daniel, Auhl, and Hastings 2013). This study argues that jointly-created knowledge from practice assists PSTs in seeing their teaching experiences as the basis for continuum of rational choices. Based on these findings, it became evident that the peer group assisted PSTs in gaining and sharing confidence. It also reflects an improvement in their ability to speak frankly and thus create trust and collegial context, both of which are essential for engagement and reciprocal commitment (Sheridan and Young 2017).

The second role of the peer group focused on ‘developing practical tools’, and it illustrated the ways in which PSTs analysed their interaction with their students. This led to a shared creation of practical tools, and these tools could then be tested during the practicum. This finding indicates that the peer group assisted PSTs in creating an analytic stance towards their practice (Barnhart and van Es 2015; Loughran, Keast, and Cooper 2016). Working together as peers, they made connections between various kinds of teaching knowledge. This finding is in line with the study by Mena et al. (2016) who stressed that precisely-articulated knowledge leads to the construction of new knowledge. It is also worth noting, in line with Loughran, Keast, and Cooper (2016) that the peer group was able to assist PSTs in seeing otherwise unnoticed aspects of practice as well as in realising the gaps in their own and their peers’ thinking, all while clarifying, explaining, reviewing and reconstructing situations. This finding is also promising as it demonstrates that peer group mentoring can assist pedagogical reasoning (Loughran, Keast, and Cooper 2016). On the other hand, this finding challenges the earlier study of Clarà et al. (2019) by highlighting PST-initiated reflection in a peer group and how it relates to allowing for different views from experience. Through this approach, experiences are analysed, and both thinking and experiences interact to make a synthesis. The synthesis makes a way for the development of new understanding, generalisations and practical tools. Interestingly, Dewey (1933) stresses analysis- and synthesis-based pedagogical reasoning as essential for a productive reflection process involving others. This study considers this role of the peer group as promising due to its widened practical understanding of beginning PST experiences (Mena et al. 2016). In this way, their practice became more accessible and has assisted their decision-making process. Hence, this study argues that the role of the peer group during a non-prescriptive, PST-initiated reflection process may have significant influence on PST ownership of their experiences (see Loughran, Keast, and Cooper 2016). It may also allow them to link those experiences with their own pedagogical thinking in order to gradually make their professional learning more autonomous (see Sheridan and Young 2017).

During the final two weeks of the practicum, the third role of the peer group was focused on ‘building inferential knowledge’. This finding indicates PSTs focus on student learning and how to better respond to it, as well as on details of interaction during teaching to improve their decision-making for the next lesson. This finding also challenges earlier research that suggested PSTs should tend to students and their ideas when instructed to do so (Barnhart and van Es 2015; Davis 2006). However, as opposed to previous studies, this study focused on non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to reflection. Also, we observed that the peer group assisted in the creation of common learning context and common language, and this in turn supported students’ needs across the practicum. This finding is encouraging, and it contrasts that of Barnhart and van Es (2015) study which stressed that responding to students and their ideas is a difficult and complicated skill. The PSTs in question, however, demonstrated this skill without having been instructed to do so. The findings revealed that when PSTs were encouraged to examine their own beliefs about teaching and learning, they were able to construct new images of practice and show inquiry orientation. This research claims that peer groups have the power to foster an inquiry stance and provide PSTs with space to engage in critical inquiry. Arguably, PST-initiated reflection in the context of peer group mentoring may influence the ways in which PSTs gain knowledge during different phases of the practicum. It may also influence the way PSTs learn to use that knowledge to guide their decisions for teaching. However, there should be emphasis placed on commitment to reciprocity and reciprocal learning relationships. Emphasis must also be placed on the value others’ learning as much as it is placed on a PST own learning.

This study also revealed three roles of the mentor in the peer group mentoring: 1) the mentor utilises PST understanding about the teaching context, 2) the mentor encourages joint reflection and 3) the mentor encourages PST own thinking. The mentor roles indicate that when a mentor is focused on the PST thinking, it assists PSTs in constructing their own thinking during the joint reflection process. This allows for them to learn to make educational decisions as teachers. This finding is in congruence with the study of Sheridan and Young (2017) as it illustrated the mentor as a figure whose role was to encourage genuine discussions between group members, and this assisted PSTs to use their teaching experiences as a basis for their learning. However, this finding is interesting as it indicates that the mentor utilised PST-initiated thinking and was open for the different perspectives and thoughts that formed a basis for peer group mentoring. This also challenges the observations of Clarà et al. (2019) and Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran (2017), who asserted that the mentor becomes imperative when PSTs join their views to make new knowledge.

This study’s findings on mentor roles demonstrate the mentor encouraging PST voice when assisting them in talking about their experiences and teaching (Izadina 2016). The findings illustrate the mentor’s focus on both PST learning needs and phases of their learning in becoming a teacher (Barnhart and van Es 2015; Tiainen, Korkeamäki, and Dreher 2018). Moreover, it was observed that the mentor in this study adapted her role to the PST learning, which also contradicts previous research (Eriksson 2017). The roles of the peer group and the mentor were intertwined, allowing the mentor to become a co-reflector rather than – as observed by several previous studies – hierarchical in relation to PSTs (Clarà et al. 2019; Eriksson 2017; Mena, Hennisen, and Loughran 2017). This finding is interesting as it stresses the reciprocal process of reflection and collaborative inquiry (Feiman-Nemser 2001). These aspects are considered the central aspects in providing PSTs with space to engage in inquiry and examine their own beliefs and understanding about teaching and learning. It also allows them to gradually take control of their learning and become more responsible for it.

It is important to note here that the lesson videos used in peer group mentoring had an important meaning for joint non-prescriptive, PST-initiated reflection. This applied to both the recognition of a situation to be reflected upon and to creating practical understanding during practicum to guide future steps. In addition, the PST non-prescribed viewing of peers’ lesson videos may have assisted them in expanding their understanding about students, teachers’ actions and the content known as key elements of teachers’ instructional core (Toom 2006).

As this is a small case study, we are careful not to generalise our findings within and across different educational and cultural contexts and need to consider some limitations of our study. First, PSTs in Finnish teacher education context undergo a rigorous entrance examination process to be able to begin their studies, which means that they tend to be highly motivated, self-directed learners with good social and communication skills. This profile of PSTs also tends to be more reflective which might had influenced the positive outcomes of this study. Second, we need to acknowledge that this study was conducted in a special environment – teacher training school in Finland. The staff in these kinds of schools is required to have higher competency in supervising PSTs than required in field schools. Similarly, the mentor in this study has vast experience in mentoring teaching practicum and is also qualified to teach mentors how to best support PSTs in their learning from practicum. This is a significant point which may hinder the application of our approach in contexts that do not resemble ours. Third, teacher training school as a practice teaching environment has access to significant material resources for the recording and viewing of the teaching sessions led by the PSTs. This affordance is likely not possible in all contexts.

Finally, Finnish educational context and teacher education have been praised and valued internationally (Sahlberg 2010, September), however, the type of peer mentoring and the approach to reflection which we presented here – the one that gives voice to PSTs in terms of how they learn from their practicum experiences is still rare, also in Finland. The limitations of this study nonetheless provide the possibilities for further research to determine how the approaches reported in this study could translate to other contexts, examining for example the possible variety in applications of peer group mentoring across different contexts. In addition, more knowledge is needed on non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to reflection and how it could be adapted to suit various teacher education contexts. The mentor in this study has consistently for over a decade applied peer group mentoring with non-prescriptive and PSTs-initiated approach to reflection gaining an insight that the approach was an educative and reciprocal learning experience for both PSTs and the mentor.

Implications for teacher education

Both the findings of this study and the non-prescriptive, PST-initiated approach to reflection in a peer group are useful for teacher educators. This is particularly true for teachers who are interested in assisting reflection in ways that develop PSTs and lead them to generate practical knowledge during practicums. In assisting reflection, an emphasis is placed on the importance of peer group mentoring in the co-construction of teacher knowledge and on diverting attention from a mentor (an expert) to a PST. Moreover, PST-initiated peer group mentoring provides teacher education with the possibility to regard PSTs and their mentors as reciprocal co-learners. These co-learners take into account others’ perspectives, and they also share responsibility and ideas while valuing others’ learning as well as their own. When reshaping PST and mentor roles and responsibilities, it is essential that both teacher educators and mentors shift focus from mentor-centred roles to PST initiation. In this mentoring context, the PSTs learn to understand that teaching is a profession where they learn through practice. By becoming a PST-centred mentor, mentors must shift their practices.

In sum, we argue that certain kind of professional culture embodied in the mentor is needed to assist peer group mentoring and non-prescriptive and PST-initiated joint reflection. Some of the aspects of this culture involve: a) the focus is placed on educative experience (Dewey 1938) promoting the growth and learning which leads to richer subsequent experiences, b) creating an environment of trust and nurturing the reciprocal dialogue and genuine professional conversations, c) assisting PSTs to focus on their own leaning needs and concerns from their practicum experiences, and d) mentor abandons the role of the expert and engages in a shared knowledge construction and joint reflection. Additionally, it is of great importance that teacher education provides mentor training programmes to raise awareness with the possibilities for more reciprocal roles. However, further research is required to determine the usefulness of these findings in other peer group mentoring contexts. Also, longitudinal studies are necessary to learn about how the non-prescriptive, PST-initiated reflection approach supports future teachers. With further studies, more can be understood on the approach and how it can assist these individuals, put them on a path to becoming reflective practitioners and form them into educators who use their constantly developing practical knowledge as the basis for their professional learning.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

Lutovac’s work was supported by the Academy of Finland (grants 307672 and 332232). Academy of Finland exercised no oversight in the design and execution of the research, nor the writing of this article.

Notes on contributors

Outi Tiainen

Outi Tiainen, Lic.Ed. is a teacher, teacher educator and a lecturer in Teacher Training School at Oulu University. She is a trainer for the teacher mentors in a network of Teacher Training Schools in Finland. Her research focuses on reflection and mentoring practices in teacher education.

Sonja Lutovac

Sonja Lutovac, Ph.D. is associate professor at the Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Finland. Her research expertise is in identity development in initial teacher education with a focus on the role of prior experiences and affect in this process. She has published greatly on the themes such as teacher identity in the context of mathematics, beliefs, emotions and reflection in teacher education.