Content uploaded by Cristiano Mattos
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Cristiano Mattos on Mar 21, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
87
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
Comments:
During the pre-service teacher class: ____(name of the pre-service teacher)________,
do you have any learning diculty? If you want to comment on the student teacher, please use
this space.
Received: January 17, 2018 Accepted: February 25, 2018
Keysy Solange Costa
Nogueira
PhD Student at Interunities Graduate Program in Science Education,
University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, 1371 - 05508-090 Cidade
Universitária, São Paulo, Brazil.
E-mail: keysynogueira@usp.br
Website: http://sites.usp.br/pequim
Carmen Fernandez PhD in Chemistry, Associate Professor, Institute of Chemistry, University of
São Paulo, Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes, 748 - Butantã - São Paulo – SP, 05508-
000, Brazil.
E-mail: carmen@iq.usp.br
Website: http://sites.usp.br/pequim
THE CONTRADICTORY NATURE
OF TEACHER EDUCATION IN THE
PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN UNIVERSITY
AND SCHOOL
André Machado Rodrigues, Cristiano Rodrigues de Mattos
University of São Paulo, Brazil
E-mail: rodrigues@if.usp.br, mattos@if.usp.br
Abstract
There is a growing understanding that teacher education should not be handled either exclusively by the
University or in School settings. Nevertheless, the issues on how to foster a fruitful partnership between
these two dierent institutions remains an open and challenging point. The practicum is a critical point
in the pre-service teacher’s development, usually because it is the rst time they have to face the concrete
professional issues, which they only had a partial view of as students. This research is a year-long inquiry
on practicum in the Physics teaching program developed in the Institute of Physics at the University of
São Paulo, Brazil. Drawing on cultural-historical activity theory, contradiction is used as an explana-
tory principle to examine change and development in the practitioners’ activity. Therefore, the research
includes in the analytical framework the contradictions and the processes of overcoming it. Examples
are provided in which there is little control therefore demanding extra eorts but makes room for active
participation. The data analysis indicates that the source of agency and activities transformation is pre-
cisely a contradictory process, which might be overlooked. The pre-service teachers’ agency is shaped
by contradictory process within the activity – practicum - rather than aligned forces pushing it toward
autonomy, student sensitiveness or professional identity.
Keywords: initial teacher education, practicum, university-school partnership, qualitative research.
Introduction
There is a growing understanding that teacher education is a complex system of activities
that should not be handled either exclusively by the University or in School settings. Nonethe-
less, how to better develop the partnership between these two dierent institutions remains
a signicant challenge (Akkerman & Bruining, 2016; Hartt & Tavares, 2004; K. Zeichner,
2009). The University and basic School shared commitment – with focus on the teaching-learn-
ing process of future teachers – is the cornerstone of the initial teacher’s education program.
Ideally, pre-service teachers would have opportunity to circulate in and experience both envi-
ronments. Although literature indicates a variety of models, mechanisms and strategies to better
integrate School and University in this joint enterprise, the core ideas oat around the harmful
eect of keeping these two institutions apart and the urgent need for more organic integration
between these instances of pre-service teachers’ development.
Nevertheless, the process of integrating dierent institutions and stakeholders is rarely
unproblematic. Indeed, the boundary-crossing is a challenging process where practitioners are
permanently invited to face the contradictions nested in it (Engeström, Engeström, & Kärk-
käinen, 1995; Tsui & Law, 2007). In addition, it is pivotal to bear in mind that, in itself, teaching
is a complex activity with multiple demands in many levels (Shulman, 1987; Yamagata-Lynch
& Haudenschild, 2009). Today teachers must be aware of cultural dierences, inclusion and
exclusion issues, curriculum development, local and large scales assessment, students’ engage-
ment and progression learning etc.
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
88
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
The practicum1 is a critical point in the pre-service teachers’ development, usually be-
cause it is the rst time they have to face the concrete professional issues, which, as students,
they only had a partial view of. The transition between University and School throughout the
practicum goes far beyond the institutional shift (Anagnostopoulos, Smith, & Basmadjian,
2007). Pre-service teachers experience a change in moving from the position of students to-
wards a position of teacher. Moreover, in those transitions it is expected that pre-service teach-
ers take part in teaching activity. Meanwhile, they have to master and actively apply it in such
complex processes.
Frequently, practitioners tend to see practicum – embodying the hierarchical relation-
ship between University and School – as a unilateral movement that goes from the University
to School. Curiously, such perspective could be found in both institutions. On the other hand,
those perspectives that see the School as an extension of the University or a merge of both in-
stitutions in one general event are unable to see the contractions in, within and between them
(Jooganah & Williams, 2016). Even though School and University have similarities, they are
indeed radically dierent institutions, which have their own ways of organizing their educa-
tional tenets as well as diverse cultural and historical backgrounds.
Assuming that practicum is a highly complex activity which stems from the encounter
of School and University, Fazio, Melville, & Bartley (2010, p. 678) express theoretically and
methodologically the challenges implied in practicum. The authors conclude that “[...] the com-
plex reality of knowledge, motivation, beliefs, capability, and context are clearly intertwined
by a complex web of dialectical interactions, which in turn concomitantly determine teachers’
actions.” Therefore, the practicum activity is not a merely knowledge transfer from University
to School. Accordingly, in their research on University-School collaboration, Anagnostopoulos
et al. (2007, pp. 150–151) concluded that:
Teacher educators are increasingly being called on to improve the learning opportunities they pro-
vide beginning teachers. This necessitates reenvisioning teacher education’s multiorganizational terrain
as a source of not only beginning teacher learning but also of our own learning as teacher educators and
the learning of our K-12 colleagues.
This multidirectional expertise is a key concept, which provides a better picture on Uni-
versity-School connections.
The Research Questions
This research is a yearlong inquiry on practicum in the Physics teaching program of the
University of São Paulo, Brazil. The practicum carried out by pre-service teachers in middle
and high Schools in the urban area around the University campus will be examined. Therefore,
the research aims to scrutinize this particular partnership between University and School and
answer:
1) What kind of contradictions emerged?
2) How the contradictory processes in the practicum shape the pre-service teachers’
agency as future teachers?
The initial hypothesis is that the contradictions within the partnership are not a conse-
quence of a careless planning or a direct impact from the lack of infrastructure. Rather, the con-
1 In Brazilian teacher education programs, the practicum is considered the group of mandatory
activities that pre-service teachers carry out in School. A variety of activities and small tasks might be
designed for pre-service teachers which run from classroom observation to teaching practices. This term
may change across dierent countries or teacher education programs – internship, school-based activities,
school placement etc.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
89
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
tradictions that shall be presented and discussed are an inherent part of this encounter between
two institutions with dierent initial goals.
A Glance into the Brazilian Teacher Training Program
Since 1996 with the last Brazilian National Education Guidelines and Standards Law, the
path to become a teacher is, to some extent, unied. In order to teach Physics in middle and high
School classes the student must attend a specic undergraduate program available in universi-
ties and high education institutions. Moreover, teacher certication programs are not part of the
national education policy and they barely exist as state or municipality education policy. Par-
ticularly, to be a middle and high School teacher, the students should choose the teaching career
form they apply for admission at University. Indeed, in the federal University system there are
just a few universities that oer the course structure as two years of specic content disciplines,
and only later, the students are asked to choose the teaching course path.
The Brazilian National Guidelines for Teacher Education determine that from 3,200
hours of course, 400 hours students are supposed to dedicate for practicum and School place-
ment (Ministry of Education of Brazil, 2015, p. 11). Furthermore, the practicum involves very
dierent sets of tasks in the School such as observations, study of School documents, proposing
workshops, participation in a variety of School meetings, and the teaching of specic subject
matters (idem).
Recent trends indicate a progressive increment of the time spent in School-base activi-
ties (Janssen, Westbroek, & Doyle, 2014; Lampert, 2010), although the concrete institutional
instruments that enable pre-service teachers’ development are not very clear. In other words,
the education policy has provided the conditions to increase quantitatively the time pre-service
teachers spend in School. However, it is not explicit how to enhance quality (Gatti, 2014).
At University, the students choose the career from the beginning. However, not all pre-
service teachers aim the teaching profession. In many cases, the pre-service teachers are not
sure whether they want to be a teacher or not (Hong, 2010). The profession drops out and the
low adherence to teaching career is one of the major issues for initial teacher education in Bra-
zil.
For the last ten years, particularly in the Brazilian context, the educational system was
driven by a combination of high levels of social inequality and a sharp capitalist development.
Specically, teacher education is suering with a well-known contradiction: the need for a vast
squad of new “domesticated teachers” in order to keep in track the economic development
(Sobrinho, 2006). A direct eect is the massication process where teacher education is getting
quicker and homogenized in a high scale (Barretto, 2015). Villani et al. (2009) outlined how
such contradictions have been built in the historical development of Brazilian teacher education
programs. Although the University specialists point towards a complex and autonomous educa-
tion, they do not desist from control and domain over teachers work (idem).
Cultural-Historical Activity Theory
The practicum is a highly complex activity where School and the University meet, com-
bining aspects of University demands, scripts and routines with those from School daily life.
To handle such a complex and dynamic object the research is drawing on Cultural-Historical
Activity Theory (CHAT) seeking to provide a robust framework rooted in dialectical material-
ism and stemmed from Vygotsky’s research tradition (Vygotsky, 1978).
According to Engeström (2001, pp. 134–135) the “concept of activity took the paradigm
a huge step forward in that it turned the focus on complex interrelations between the individual
subject and his or her community.” In this perspective, the human activity is a mediated process
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
90
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
in which human beings change the surrounding world, whereas they are transformed by it. A
two-way process that changes the concrete material relation simultaneously changing the con-
sciousness. The concept of activity as presented by Engeström (1987, 2001) is a well-known
way of conceptualizing organizations, cross-boundary processes and institutional interactions
insofar it enables the researcher to relate dialectally individual and collective features of trans-
forming activities.
Engeström (2001) proposed ve principles in which activities are constituted:
1) activity is the unity of analysis;
2) the activity system is multivoicedness as an entanglement of dierent perspectives
from the subjects of the activity;
3) the activity is historical, i.e., activity system is shaped and develops through time;
4) contradictions and the process of overcoming them are the source of change, innova-
tion and development in an activity system;
5)the activity expands, changing qualitatively.
All those ve tenets of CHAT approach work as heuristics principles compounding its
basis and consequently they should be seen integrally related to one another. Considering this
unity, the research is focusing on the role of contradiction in the development of a cross-bound-
ary practice – the practicum.
The Role of Contradictions
The common use of the term contradiction refers to dual opposite positions that contra-
dict each other. The formal logic inuence in the common thinking associates contradiction
with a sort of blind alley of the thought in a problem-solving process. In this vein, contradiction
must ultimately be avoided in any process of conceptualization since it means a logical error
(Ilyenkov, 1977). The fundamental law of non-contradiction in classical formal logic expresses
that a statement and its denial cannot both be true at the same time. However, in any other dia-
lectical approach, contradiction has a radically dierent meaning:
Contradiction is not the end of the matter, but transitional point of stability, an aporetic movement
of reection that must cancel itself out at a higher ground than can be aorded by any of the concepts at
the present level (Hahn, 2007, p. 38).
According to Engeström (2001, p. 137), in cultural-historical activity theory the term
contraction is the “historically accumulating structural tensions within and between activity sys-
tems”, indicating that “dialectics deals with systems in movement through time.” (Engeström &
Sannino, 2011, p. 370). This means that contradictions are embodied in the activity. From this
perspective, the common unfruitful misunderstandings and misuses of the contradiction as an
explanatory principle are in the inquiries that ignore movement and concreteness, i.e. historical
development and its complexity.
Ultimately, the contradiction is not an analytical mistake, but an explanatory principle to
examine change and development in the practitioners’ activity. Therefore, one should include in
the analytical framework the contradictions and the processes of overcoming it.
Methodology of Research
General Background
In 2009, within the Physics teacher training program, a relatively stable format for
a discipline entitled Practice of Physics Teaching was consolidated. This discipline aims at
articulating the Physics specic content matter, pedagogical theory, and the practice done at
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
91
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
School placements. Its syllabus starts with the objective of the course: “to enable the students
[pre-service teachers] to develop, autonomously, the integration of the contents of Physics and
pedagogical ones, initiating them [pre-service teachers] into professional practice” (Institute
of Physics, 2008, p. 10). From the outset of the program, the pre-service teachers must engage
in School placements (practicum) at specic partner public Schools. It also involves much
more guided assignments to be done at School than the pre-service teacher uses to perform in
previous moments in the program. In 2010, several working routines were more stabilized and
synchronized with partner Schools. For example, the number of visits, didactic material dis-
tribution, specic procedures to develop the experiments in the classroom and the partnership
among pre-service teachers started to gain a stable format. The coordination of actions was,
at the same time, process and product of the University and School mutual acknowledgment.
Hence, School mentors and the University professors intensied the planning meetings to look
for joint solutions of issues such as lack of materials, better synchronism between School and
University tasks, align pedagogical approach within the classroom.
During the implementation of the teacher educations reforms, University sta started
knowing some aspects of School routines by a kind of trial and error process. However, even
with a stable routine at University, the inverse way remains practically impossible, considering
that Schools are not seen by the practitioners as an empowered institution for teachers’ instruc-
tion, and thus having little inuence into University educational system decisions (Fazio et al.,
2010; Whitney, Golez, Nagel, Nieto, & Nieto, 2002).
One of the hardest problems during 2010 was the School teacher – mentor – absences
throughout the year. Since there is no institutional formal compromise among University and
mentors, many of them were not authentically involved with the pre-service teachers’ assign-
ments at School, the implications of this aspect shall be discussed later in this paper. In many
cases, the presence of pre-service teachers at the classroom was seen as an opportunity for
the mentor to accomplish other small works, thus pre-service teachers conducted the classes
without proper teacher supervision neither orientation. A similar situation is highlighted by
Edwards and Protheroe (2004, p. 194) saying that mentors “with students in their classrooms
were considered to have increased freedom to undertake other work in School, hence they were
regularly absent from the classroom.” That situation was not general, touching only part of the
pre-service teachers under specic mentor’s supervision.
The general activity was compounded by two-week cycles in two dierent layers each
- planning and teaching. During the rst week of the planning layer, the University professor
presents a draft of the lesson plan and in the next week the pre-service teachers along with men-
tors design hands-on assignments. During the rst week of the teaching layer, pre-service teach-
ers develop Physics experiments and hands-on activities at School and in the next week, they
spend some time evaluating the previous Practicum lessons in class discussions at University.
The cycles feed each other with new information.
Sample Selection
Roughly 20 hours of video recording and 241 weekly written reports produced by 52
pre-service teachers working in pairs at School in 2010 was considered to select a representa-
tive sample. Furthermore, some eld notes were used for a substantive triangulation of the data
(Kadri & Roth, 2015; Roth, 2005). All the participants signed the research agreement explicitly
discussed at the beginning of the data gathering. Additionally, the participants’ names in the
paper are pseudonyms.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
92
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
Instrument and Procedures
Data were gathered at the Physics teacher education course at University of São Paulo
(Brazil) in a two year-long research project. Although some pieces of information and impres-
sions from high School students and mentors were collected, data gathering was focused pri-
marily on pre-service teacher experiences and action within the whole system. A camera was
xed at the classroom corner and the dialogs transcription – originally made in Portuguese
– was translated into English. Each excerpt was marked with a number that refers to original
marks made in the speech turns’ transcription.
Table 1. Timetable and description of the topics discussed over 2010 within
video recording data.
N Date Time length Topics discussed and general features.
1 February, 22th 86 min Professor explanation on courses, practicum routines and rules. Debate about
the text “How people learn” (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000).
2 March, 1st 37 min Pre-service teachers’ seminar about “energy conservation and transformation”.
Debate over concept map of energy.
3 March, 8th 97 min Hands-on experiment with pre-service teachers on energy transformation and
process of respiration.
4 March, 15th 95 min Work in groups on an experiment of thermodynamics. Pre-service teachers'
seminar on heat and energy as a product of the discussion groups.
5 March, 22th 98 min Work in groups on an experiment in electromagnetism. Organization of the
pairs’ work in schools, set on schedule and timetables.
6 April, 5th 107 min Final preparation for school placement. Talk about the experiences and hands-
on activities. Some conversation in groups.
7 April, 19th 63 min General discussion on rst experience in school. Some problems and many
pre-service teachers’ frustrations.
8 May, 3rd 95 min Continuation of the discussion on school placement experiences. More specic
actions in school and discussions on the general characteristics of the schools.
9 May, 17th 106 min Discussion on school assignments and hands-on activities. Debate on agency
and commitment with the school interventions.
10 May, 31st 109 min Experienced teacher gives a talk about violence and teacher’s action at school
to control and deal with difcult situations.
11 June, 7th 92 min General discussion on major difculties at school placement.
12 August, 2nd 100 min Elaboration and organization of laboratory guides. Group discussions.
13 August, 30th 88 min Pre-service teachers present some feedbacks about the work at school place-
ment.
14 December,
13th
52 min Evaluation meeting and general discussion on year performance. Pre-service
teachers point out prominent problems and make some suggestions.
Data Analysis
The thematic content analysis was done (Kapustka, Howell, Clayton, & Thomas, 2009)
and data was coded using a hybrid system of theory-driven and data-driven categories (Fereday
& Muir-Cochrane, 2008). The discussions at classroom were described and characterized us-
ing a set of data-driven categories (Edwards & Protheroe, 2004). Especially for the case study
presented in this paper an overlapping of critical situations, agency and activity change was
observed.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
93
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
Results of Research
Connecting University and School
Considering the concrete conditions to establish the practicum activity, one of the very
rst challenges was to wave partnerships with the Schools around the University campus. The
University professor in charge of practicum was responsible to begin the negotiation with
School principals. At the very rst contacts with some schools’ principals, the University pro-
fessor had unsuccessful attempts to carry out a joint project. This initial resistance is partly due
to the criticism that School stas use to receive University people when they adhere to this sort
of partnership. Principal and teachers use to interpret that University activities include School
only as a scenario for researches and, in return, University gives faultnding critics. It was
identied, during the initial visits to the Schools, that this sort of understanding repels Schools
and teachers from initial teacher education and inuences Schools that had no previous inter-
action with the University. During the interview, the University professor also conrmed such
resistance.
A fruitful response came only through nding and contacting directly teachers that are
willing to mentor pre-service teachers with no reward but the experience of mentoring. Ul-
timately, the informal and non-institutionalized contact indicates the burdensome aspect of
developing the partnership at School level. The School and University partnership was not
established at an institutional level, rather it was a personal commitment between mentors,
University professor and pre-service teachers.
On the one hand, it entails that School teachers that become responsible for the develop-
ment of the partnership should be fully committed and personally involved in the mentoring
activity. This personal engagement is one of the key elements to sustain such a non-institution-
alized partnership. This commitment also gives much more freedom of action to subjects of the
activity. The ill-structured and less bureaucratized relationship left space for local individual
initiatives and collaborative action, on the other hand, a non-institutionalized relationship re-
quires from the subjects extra eorts to carry out even small coordinated actions. Moreover, it
makes the partnership far more fragile as it relies primarily on personal commitment. Occasion-
ally teachers willing to take part in mentoring have overload of work, which might compromise
the engagement in a long run.
Nevertheless, this problematic situation of teacher's work overload might help to make
some room for agency emergence. The pre-service teachers ended up receiving less attention
than what was initially planned, and the mentoring process turns out to be much looser. This
general scenario somewhat shaped participants’ agency within this activity system. The proto-
cols to solve any small problem were very exible and have to be done case by case.
One unexpected consequence, unfolded by the fragmentation of the University action
in School, was the simultaneous activities developed by dierent groups and subject matters.
Only after ten months the Physics group nds out that there was a dierent group from Chem-
istry developing Practicum in the same Schools. Those actions reach the Schools from distinct
sides, showing the disjunction within the University. From the researchers’ perspective, it is a
consequence of having a particular connection – one by one – and not a connection between
two whole institutional activities.
Embedded Activities
Even though it is explicitly called ‘School-based activity’ in opposition to ‘campus-
based activities’, one should ask to what extent the practicum is integrated with School activity.
Even a small School activity is assembled by many dierent actions and operations. Although
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
94
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
classroom lessons are central to understand the schooling process, there are many other aspects
to consider such as teachers meetings, planning, assessing, teacher-parent relationship etc. The
social interaction processes grown outside the classroom indicate how pre-service teachers have
to behave within the classroom. During the weekly meeting with the University professor, the
pre-service teachers reported many impacting events from outside the classroom, for instance,
the problem of where they could nd extra materials for experimental activities, what to do with
disruptive students or what type of extra support they might get from other School teachers.
Although the partnership between University and School has some instance of collabo-
ration, the situation could be considered as a University activity nested within School context.
The major empirical indicator is associated with pre-service teachers’ reports on successful les-
sons. They commonly describe successful lessons as those in which they were able to develop
the full planned lesson, fullling all the planned steps for the experimental activity. Mainly in
the beginning of the academic year, they were attracted by the idea of the fulllment of the
experimental protocol as the objective benchmark for successful lessons and seldom mention-
ing students learning or well-being as something to take into account. This sort of educational
goals narrowing happens mainly because pre-service teachers are indeed engaged in a Univer-
sity activity, even though all the events happen in the School context. They are answering to
University expectations and standards.
In other words, pre-service teachers start the practicum committed with the University
within School though. Ultimately, this commitment with the University goals (nal grade, their
own learning and development, accomplishing experimental protocols, etc.) not only shapes
the pre-service teachers’ agency in the practicum, but also determines how well they connected
themselves to School life.
The class was interested, but the students were very dispersive. We could not apply the entire
experiment until the end. The second class was hectic, displayed less interest and one group did nothing
... In this class, we also could not apply the experiment until the end. (Pre-service teachers’ weekly report:
Mellisa and Rebecca, April 2010)
This excerpt reects the over-concern with the experiment, rather than with students’
needs. They frequently replace the students’ learning by students’ interest. It happens because
the student’s engagement in the lesson is the rst level of evaluation pre-service teachers have
available. There is a signicant shift in the reports, showing that pre-service teachers’ activity
moves towards students learning, which may work as an empirical indicator for pre-service
teachers’ connectedness to School activity.
Furthermore, the process of unidirectional connection between University and School is
not completely clear to pre-service teachers, making shifts in their thinking and behavior much
slower. It indicates that practicum was not a fully shared activity, since it kept on intense sub-
ordination ties with the University. This aspect shows up in a variety of ways, when the lesson
planned in the University contradicts with the current practice in School.
I took the advantage that the teacher was not there and had the freedom of asking for the students'
notebooks. I took a quick look. 'Guys, let me check your notebooks.’ I looked one by one and I was like
... [shocked]. Because, until now, they have only half page of Physics. (Pre-service teacher group discus-
sion: Fernando, May 2010)
Indeed, pre-service teachers have diculties to envision what happens in School when
they are not present. As they have a limited connection with the School, it is not an easy task to
gure out the class and School lives.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
95
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
Disruptive Dynamics or Mismatching Routines
The encounter of two dierent institutional dynamics and historical backgrounds aects
pre- service teachers’ work in School. It is important to take into account that the University
calendar, routines, hierarchical organization, protocols and ways of doing things – the whole
cultural milieu – as well as the University goals within the practicum shape pre-service teach-
ers’ activity. In the rst ve weeks that pre-service teachers spent at school, conducting the
planned lessons – all including weekly hands-on experiments – they dedicated some eort try-
ing to match the dierent demands in both institutions. The weekly reports were largely focused
on School institutional ambiance.
In many cases, during the discussion in the University they developed complex compari-
sons to contrast University and School routines. In spite of the particularities of each school,
part of the School routines are familiar to them, and, somehow, they are familiar with the stu-
dents’ activity in the School, however the teachers’ activity is completely new for them.
The examined teacher education program uses to accept candidates from dierent parts
of Brazil, especially from the countryside where Schools have a very dierent social structure.
Some pre-service teachers get surprised with the large dierence from when they used to go to
School.
The main point here is that initial teacher education is not a clear goal for School. The
whole School organization, all the components of School activity are settled around and orient-
ed toward student learning as the core outcome. In many cases, practicum is seen as a marginal
task, which may disturb the School regular routines. This is not a particular perspective from a
teacher or a principal rather than an underpinning objective of School organization. For a nov-
ice it is not a simple task to understand the School organization and how it reaches its goals as
reported in the weekly discussion.
For instance, in the lesson named ‘vector race’, students should learn about vectors. The
‘vector race’ is a game that should be carried out in order to introduce the concepts of addition
and multiplication of vectors. One of the pre-service teachers – Fernando – decided to break the
planning previously made in the University and changed the course of actions during the class.
He justies it, saying:
What happened this specic day is that they [students] simply did not know anything about vec-
tors. They knew it was an arrow. […] In an entire class, no one could understand how the rules of the
game worked. There was no way to play. So… you're saying we have to follow the script, then we do
not. We did not follow the script ourselves. I could not follow the lab protocols. But you do not have to
worry about the student. When we decided to change the script, it means we were concerned about the
student. But isn’t the purpose just to use the lab protocols to teach something? (Pre-service teacher group
discussion: Fernando, May 2010)
This example expresses the contradiction of two divergent dynamics, as well as of their
goals. In this case, to break with the University planning and commitment, means to respect the
students timing and needs. This disruptive agency, which changed the course of actions as well
as the set of commitments, is a critical moment in practicum. In other words, the contradiction
moves the edge between University and School organizational dynamics.
Identity Formation as a Contradictory Process
One of the main contradictions aecting directly pre-service teachers’ engagement and
disposition to try out, is the fact that, although they are in a teacher’ training program, they do
not necessarily mean to be teachers at the end of the process. In an initial questionnaire, only
56.3% (out of 82 answers) of pre-service teachers have clear intention to become a high School
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
96
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
teacher afterwards. This point was especially critical in the moment of practicum, since the
pre-service teachers had to actively face their professional future. In another moment, where
the course content is focused and exclusively held in the University, the pre-service teacher
could postpone the professional issues. However, the practicum touches these issues in a very
concrete way.
Although the University sta knew the critical point of pre-service teachers’ interest in
entering in teaching career, this topic was overlooked during the class discussions at the Univer-
sity. The teachers’ identity – as well as their belonging – may work as an intermediate concept
indicating how the subjects are engaged in the teaching activity.
I have learned that teaching practice does not depend solely on techniques and strategy, but also
has a very important human element. Even if I use the best educational techniques and strategies, if I can-
not instigate, encourage and show that what I teach has some relevance in the student's life, my practice
will be quite dicult, and the results will probably not be long lasting. […] So, if encouraging students is
an essential part of teaching practice, how to do it in an environment where you are discouraged from the
very rst moment? (Preservice teachers’ weekly report: Eric, December 2009)
This excerpt presents that the pre-service teachers were in a critical moment for his
identity formation. Nevertheless, the experiences in School facing at concrete situations are not
always pleasant or encouraging. Throughout research pre-service teachers reported frustration,
stress and work overload.
The practicum will work as a rst meeting with teaching practice. I expect that there are discus-
sions about the career and its responsibilities, about the pertinent concepts to the discipline (Physics),
some teaching trends and their applications, the current school structure. (Pre-service teachers’ initial
questionnaire: Daniel, April 2010)
From the beginning, pre-service teachers expect this confrontation. Pre-service teachers
cope with a wide range of diculties from which their identities are formed. This experiences
in and through practicum are relevant for identity formation, reinforcing or challenging their
initial disposition. In this case, teacher identity seems to be part of the meaning making process
of the teaching activity, which, in turn, shapes their agency in School setting. Their concrete
agency in School impacts and is impacted by this contradictory encounter between future teach-
ers’ expectations and their actual experiences.
Discussion
Zeichner (2009, p. 9) indicated that “even in the current wave of School-University part-
nerships in teacher education, colleges and universities continue to maintain hegemony over
the construction and dissemination of knowledge”. Moreover, Schools remain in the position of
practice elds “where student teachers are to try out the practices provided by the University”.
This type of one hand relationship in which University sets goals and strategies upon School
is reected in the concrete social dynamic during the practicum. As the literature corroborates,
the unbalanced partnership between University and School reects negatively in the develop-
ment of mentoring as well as in the pre-service teacher learning opportunities (Zeichner, 2009;
Keogh, 2010).
Regarding the contradictory processes within the School, Chetcuti & Buhagiar (2014)
underline that the current model for initial teacher education might be reformulated in terms of
the community of practice. The authors indicated “This can lead to the apprenticeship model
where the expert shows the apprentice how to do a task, the apprentice observes before starting
to practice the skills involved, and then gradually takes more responsibility of his or her own
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
97
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
learning.” (Chetcuti & Buhagiar, 2014, p.48) To a large extent, it is aligned with the ndings
presented.
On the one hand, the practicum might operate as a positive inuence toward teacher
identity. It might build a meaningful experience for newcomer teachers. On the other hand,
the practicum confronts the pre-service teachers with their career, diculties, and challenges.
Hence, it might exacerbate the career dropout, what is align with the national tendency (San-
tos & Curi, 2012, Vargas, 2012). Additionally, one should take into account the undervalue of
teacher career in Brazilian context (Vargas, 2012), which might severely impact the pre-service
teacher’s decision to carry on after the practicum.
The current literature supports the idea that School should be an active part of pre-ser-
vice teacher’s instructions (Edwards & Protheroe, 2004; Ferrier-Kerr, 2009; Zeichner, 2009).
Nevertheless, the models and institutional scheme developed so far lag behind in describing the
particular and general mechanisms of institutional partnership.
Commonly, the University and School connections are seen as natural and unproblemat-
ic, however, the results presented indicate that pre-service teachers are still strongly connected
to University tasks when in the School setting. The results also indicate that the connections be-
tween University and School evolve through contradictions which range from the institutional
level to the personal as well as professional levels. This aspect is corroborated by the literature
(Ferrier-Kerr, 2009). Ultimately, the results show some detailed mechanisms that underpin the
institutional partnership.
Conclusions
The pre-service teachers’ agency is shaped by contradictions of the activity – practicum,
rather than aligned forces pushing towards autonomy, student sensitiveness or professional
identity. The modeling of teacher development in initial teacher training is much more complex
and evolves in several levels. Such a complex, multilevel and contradictory process runs from
how the practicum is institutionalized as cooperative stance between University and School,
incorporated within Schools and classrooms, and embodied as identity formation.
In this research, it is depicted what seems to be the core process in each level. Con-
tradiction as an analytical tool allows the researchers to see beyond the apparent obstacles or
shortages, it reveals a deeper dynamic, which should be taken into account when analyzing the
practicum. So far, the results provide a picture of contradictions, but it is important to bear in
mind that all contradictions presented and discussed evolve in time and are strongly dependent
of practitioners’ agency. The way students conceptualize the contradiction between University
and School changes throughout the academic year and demands further investigation.
Practically, this analytical framework makes possible to outline the subjects’ develop-
ment even when the particular context indicates the contrary. As examples indicated, the situa-
tion in which there is little control eventually demands extra eorts but leaves room for active
participation. The data analysis indicates that the source of agency and activities transformation
is precisely in the contradictory process, which might be overlooked because the theoretical
framework is not able to disentangle the processes in teacher development. Finally, the practi-
cum has a great number of elements and participants that, in many cases, rub against each other,
producing something meaningful for practitioners and researchers.
It should be underlined that practicum is a crossing boundary activity in many ways.
Pre-service Science teachers have to move across institutions as well as they have to move their
own position in the whole activity – from student to teacher. From the results, it is possible to
conclude that the pre-service teacher’s agency is shaped, above all, in contradictory processes,
rather than a linear force that leads them to autonomous practice.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
98
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
References
Akkerman, S., & Bruining, T. (2016). Multilevel boundary crossing in a professional development school
partnership. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25 (2), 240–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406
.2016.1147448. who teach physics in high school]. Ciência & Educação, 18 (4), 837–849. https://
doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132012000400007.
Anagnostopoulos, D., Smith, E. R., & Basmadjian, K. G. (2007). Bridging the university–school divide
horizontal expertise and the “two-worlds pitfall”. Journal of Teacher Education, 58 (2), 138–152.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487106297841.
Barretto, E. S. D. S. (2015). Teacher education policies in Brazil: Contemporary challenges. Revista
Brasileira de Educação, 20 (62), 679–701. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782015206207.
Chetcuti, D., & Buhagiar, M. (2014). Assessing the eld placement in initial teacher education: Finding
a balance between formative and summative assessment. Problems of Education in the 21st
Century, 58, 39–52.
Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2004). Teaching by proxy: understanding how mentors are positioned in
partnerships. Oxford Review of Education, 30 (2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498042
000215511.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization.
Journal of Education and Work, 14 (1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747.
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing
in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and
Instruction, 5 (1), 319–336.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Discursive manifestations of contradictions in organizational
change eorts: A methodological framework. Journal of Organizational Change Management,
24 (3), 368–387. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811111132758.
Fazio, X., Melville, W., & Bartley, A. (2010). The problematic nature of the practicum: A key determinant
of pre-service teachers’ emerging inquiry-based science practices. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 21 (6), 665–681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9209-9.
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2008). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach
of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 5 (1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107.
Ferrier-Kerr, J. L. (2009). Establishing professional relationships in practicum settings. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 25 (6), 790–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.01.001.
Gatti, B. A. (2014). Formação inicial de professores para a educação básica: pesquisas e políticas
educacionais [Initial teacher training for basic education: research and educational policies].
Estudos em Avaliação Educacional, 25 (57), 24–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.18222/eae255720142823.
Hahn, S. S. (2007). Contradiction in motion: Hegel’s organic concept of life and value. Cornell: Cornell
University Press.
Hartt, G. J., & Tavares, N. J. (2004). Obstacles as opportunities in the promotion of teachers’ learning.
International Journal of Educational Research, 41 (4–5), 353–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijer.2005.08.006.
Hong, J. Y. (2010). Pre-service and beginning teachers’ professional identity and its relation to dropping out
of the profession. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (8), 1530–1543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tate.2010.06.003.
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays on its history and theory. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Institute of Physics. (2008). Syllabus booklet for teacher education program. São Paulo: Institute of
Physics - University of São Paulo.
Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., & Doyle, W. (2014). The practical turn in teacher education: Designing a
preparation sequence for core practice frames. Journal of Teacher Education, 65 (3), 195–206.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113518584.
Jooganah, K., & Williams, J. S. (2016). Contradictions between and within school and university
activity systems helping to explain students’ diculty with advanced mathematics. Teaching
Mathematics and Its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 35 (3), 159–171. https://
doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrw014.
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
PROBLEMS
OF EDUCATION
IN THE 21st CENTURY
Vol. 76, No. 1, 2018
99
ISSN 1822-7864 (Print) ISSN 2538-7111 (Online)
Kadri, M. S. E., & Roth, W.-M. (2015). The teaching practicum as a locus of multi-leveled, school-based
transformation. Teaching Education, 26 (1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.997
700.
Kapustka, K. M., Howell, P., Clayton, C. D., & Thomas, S. (2009). Social justice in teacher education: A
qualitative content analysis of NCATE conceptual frameworks. Equity & Excellence in Education,
42 (4), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680903260101.
Keogh, J. (2010). (In) forming formal evaluation: Analysis of a practicum mentoring conversation.
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 7 (1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1558/
japl.v7i1.51.
Lampert, M. (2010). Learning Teaching in, from, and for Practice: What Do We Mean? Journal of Teacher
Education, 61 (1–2), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347321.
Ministry of Education of Brazil. Resolution number 2 of 1st July 2015. (2015).
Roth, W.-M. (2005). Doing qualitative research: Praxis of method. (Vol. 3). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Santos, C. A. B. dos, & Curi, E. (2012). A formação dos professores que ensinam física no ensino médio
[The training of teachers who teach physics in high school]. Ciência & Educação, 18 (4), 837–
849. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132012000400007.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational
Review, 57 (1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411.
Sobrinho, J. D. (2006). Changes in Brazilian higher education and their eects on the enhancement of
teaching (1995–2005). New Directions for Higher Education, 2006 (133), 91–99. https://doi.
org/10.1002/he.209.
Tsui, A. B. M., & Law, D. Y. K. (2007). Learning as boundary-crossing in school–university partnership.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 23 (8), 1289–1301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.003.
Vargas, H. M. (2012). Teacher careers and teacher education: A Brazilian dilemma. Problems of Education
in the 21st Century, 47, 144–151.
Villani, A., Pacca, J. L. de A., & Freitas, D. de. (2009). Science teacher education in Brazil: 1950–2000.
Science & Education, 18 (1), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9116-4.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard
University Press.
Whitney, L., Golez, F., Nagel, G., Nieto, C., & Nieto, C. (2002). Listening to voices of practicing teachers
to examine the eectiveness of a teacher education program. Action in Teacher Education, 23 (4),
69–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2002.10463090.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Haudenschild, M. T. (2009). Using activity systems analysis to identify inner
contradictions in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 (3),
507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.014.
Zeichner, K. (2009). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and eld experiences in
college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61 (1–2), 89–99.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347671.
Received: December 12, 2017 Accepted: February 26, 2018
André Machado Rodrigues PhD, Assistant Professor, Institute of Physics, University of São Paulo,
Rua do Matão, Travessa R, 187, São Paulo, Brazil.
E-mail: rodrigues@if.usp.br
Cristiano Rodrigues de Mattos PhD, Professor, Institute of Physics, University of São Paulo, Rua do
Matão, Travessa R, 187, São Paulo, Brazil.
E-mail: mattos@if.usp.br
André Machado RODRIGUES, Cristiano Rodrigues de MATTOS. The contradictory nature of teacher education in the partnership
between university and school
