1 / 10

Post-Lesson Observation Conferencing Between University Supervisors and PETE Students

Post-Lesson Observation Conferencing Between University Supervisors and PETE Students. Steven Wright University of New Hampshire steven.wright@unh.edu. Lack of Research in this area. Early field experiences and student teaching are vital to preparing preservice teachers (PTs) to teach.

september-major
Download Presentation

Post-Lesson Observation Conferencing Between University Supervisors and PETE Students

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Post-Lesson Observation Conferencing Between University Supervisors and PETE Students Steven Wright University of New Hampshire steven.wright@unh.edu AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  2. Lack of Research in this area • Early field experiences and student teaching are vital to preparing preservice teachers (PTs) to teach. • No current PETE literature pertaining to PTs expectations of supervisors and types of supervision desired. • Nothing is known of university supervisor (US)/PT discourse after observed teaching lessons in PE. AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  3. Methods • Sample: 58 students completed survey on supervisor expectations and supervision model desired. • 24 elementary practicum students; 12 secondary practicum students; 6 student teachers and 16 graduate-level interns = • Also: PT/US conferences were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis – 54 have been analyzed so far. AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  4. Data Collection • Survey was designed using a review of educational literature and a panel of experts. Questions I and 2 pertained to PTs perceptions of USs’ overall role in supervision and their role during conferencing. Questions 3-5 had PTs respond to vignettes pertaining to ‘Direct’, ‘Indirect’ and ‘Collaborative’ supervision. PTs wrote positive and/or negative thoughts. Question 7 had PTs choose their preferred style and Question 8 asked for further comments on supervision. AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  5. Data Analysis • Open-ended questions from the survey were analyzed inductively (Bogdan & Biklen, 2006). • Conference data were analyzed using Tsui et al.’s (2001) categories related to lower and higher order questions and responses, via “idea units.” • Inter-observer reliability for higher versus lower order offerings and questions was found to be greater than .9. • Study was approved by our IRB committee AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  6. Results of Survey • Overall role of US? Give feedback on lesson (69%); provide guidance/support (22%); observe lesson (20%); help PT reflect (12%); PT is teaching correctly (7%) • Role during conferencing? Give feedback (69%); help PT reflect (36%); help PT improve teaching (16%); focus on goals (7%) AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  7. Type of Supervision Preferred • Direct: Positive (10%); Negative (28%); Mixed (62%) • Indirect: Positive (9%); Negative (47%); Mixed (44%) • Collaborative: Positive (95%); Negative (0%); Mixed (5%) • Which would you choose? Collaborative (91%); Direct (7%); All three are okay (2%) AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  8. Conferencing Results • 54 conferences analyzed to date • Total word count of 141,000+ or an average of 2,623 words per conference • Overall, PTs spoke slightly more (52%) than USs (48%) that suggests the conferences were collaborative. • PTs had a total of 3,294 “idea units”, with most being offerings/statements (92%), followed by confirmations or ‘yes’ statements (6%) and very few questions (2%). • The majority of PT offerings/statements (69%) were higher order (reflection, evaluation, explanation). AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  9. US Results • USs had a total of 3,510 “idea units”, with the majority being offerings/statements (64%), followed by questions (31%) and confirmations or ‘yes’ statements (5%). • The majority of US offerings/statements were higher order (60%), and the rest (40%) lower order (information or observation). • Most of the US questions were higher order ones (76%). • An example of a higher order question (reflection) was– “Why did you choose to do a small-sided game with three students per side? A lower order question (information) was – “Was this the second lesson in this unit? AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

  10. Professional Development for USs • Three USs sharing information on the process of conferencing has been invaluable. • Discussed issues that ranged from time constraints to higher order questioning. SUPERVISION IS SO IMPORTANT!! • What training is available to USs in your institutions? AAHPERD 2011 - March 31, 2011

More Related