Elsevier

Teaching and Teacher Education

Volume 59, October 2016, Pages 285-294
Teaching and Teacher Education

Creating partnerships between teachers & undergraduates interested in secondary math & science education

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.06.008Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Undergraduates and teachers formed partnerships during yearlong program.

  • Participation in these partnerships was sustained but flexible over time.

  • Participants shared and were viewed as resources within the partnerships.

  • Engagement in partnerships was transformative for undergraduates and teachers.

  • Participants viewed their involvement in partnerships as beneficial.

Abstract

During a yearlong program experience, high school teachers and college undergraduates formed three content area partnerships in which they co-planned and implemented lessons aligned to newly adopted math and science content standards. Participants’ within-program experiences and the mentorship that occurred in their developing content area partnerships were explored. Findings suggested that both the high school teachers and undergraduates engaged in mentoring relationships that prompted two-way reflection and colearning. The content area partnerships formed were sustained yet flexible, represented accountability through shared goals, exhibited mutual and equitable sharing, and were transformative as evidenced by practice and identity.

Introduction

This study explores mentoring relationships within a program designed to connect undergraduates interested in math and science education with practicing high school teachers; together they engaged in content area research and discussed curriculum. In California, where this study took place, math and science teachers are in the midst of curricular change brought forth by the state’s adoption of the Common Core State Standards Mathematics (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010) and the Next Generation Science Standards ([NGSS], NGSS Lead States, 2013). Associated frameworks advocate for the use of mentoring to help teachers understand the shifts in practice called for by these new standards (California Department of Education, 2015, National Research Council, 2012).

The program we investigated was designed to: (1) give all participants experience planning, implementing, and reflecting on curricular materials aligned with the newly adopted state standards; (2) provide high school teachers with classroom support as they enacted new lessons; and (3) provide undergraduates an authentic context in which to learn about the teaching profession prior to enrolling in a teacher education program. Participants attended 102 h of program activities consisting of a two-week summer institute and three full-day follow-up sessions during the academic year. The undergraduates also completed 60 h of fieldwork in the teachers’ classrooms during the academic year. With respect to the undergraduate program experience, similar courses and programs have been conducted to stimulate recruitment and teaching interest among math and science undergraduates (Luft et al., 2005, Otero et al., 2006) and graduates (Abell et al., 2006).

Guided by the view that learning occurs within communities of practice (Wenger, 1998), we asked: What is the nature of content area partnerships formed between undergraduates and high school teachers participating in a program focused on math and science education? Through this work, we attempt to demonstrate how mentoring through the content area partnerships shaped teachers’ and undergraduates’ views on mathematics and science education.

Section snippets

Mentoring relationships among teachers

Trust and collaboration are essential elements in mentoring (Awaya et al., 2003, van Velzen et al., 2012) along with relational characteristics that foster dialogue and reflective practice (Fairbanks et al., 2000, Hawkey, 1998). In the mentoring relationship, teachers’ sense of agency matters in their sharing of knowledge and contributes to the identity development of student teachers (Fairbanks et al., 2000, Hawkey, 1998). Hawkey (1998) recognized teacher knowledge as an important mentoring

Learning in communities of practice

We view learning as situated in social contexts and believe that a community of practice (CoP) is necessary for teachers to engage in to learn and contribute to the joint enterprise of instructional practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991, Wenger, 1998). Wenger described a CoP along three dimensions: mutual engagement whereby members learn through their interactions and relationships with others; joint enterprise through which members develop a sense of accountability to one another; and shared

Research context

Currently, there are various teacher preparation routes in the United States. According to Bowe, Braam, Lawrenz, and Kirchhoff (2011), the two most common are “traditional” and “alternative” programs (p. 29). Traditional programs, also known as university-based programs, require four to five years of teaching preparation and include coursework to meet state standards certification (Darling-Hammond et al., 2002, Zeichner and Schulte, 2001). Students in traditional programs may also be in a

Data sources & collection

Multiple data were analyzed to investigate the nature of the undergraduates’ and high school teachers’ content area partnerships. First, we collected data associated with the SI and follow-up sessions, including program agendas and materials such as graphic organizers documenting planning goals during follow-up sessions, attendance records for program events, and fieldnotes of participants’ interactions and discussions.

Data relating to the participants’ work within the classroom were also

Partnership characteristics

Table 2 details the five characteristics found within the content area partnerships.

Our findings provide an overview and examples of how each characteristic was evident within the content area partnerships. We also detail the mentorship that occurred between the participants and describe their views of how they benefitted from these interactions.

Sustained but flexible participation

All content area partnerships engaged in regular meetings. Participants attended all program events and identified common times to work with one

Discussion

Consistent with prior research (Fairbanks et al., 2000, Koballa et al., 2008, Woodgate-Jones, 2012), our study documented mentorship that resulted in colearning among participants. As content area partnerships grappled with developing curriculum, individuals developed shared instructional goals and held one another accountable for products of their co-planning process. Additionally, the content area partnerships proved flexible as participants viewed one another as resources when planning and

Conclusion

Wenger (1998) noted that the benefits of a CoP were not limited to the legitimate peripheral participant; rather, the engagement produces “reciprocal relation of persons and practice” (p. 116). Our study documented colearning and mutual benefit evident in ways that transformed individuals’ practice and identity. In this way, the content area partnerships we investigated embodied several of the same qualities as CoPs described by Lave and Wenger, 1991, Wenger, 1998) and mentoring relationships

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute [grant number 52007571] through the Precollege and Undergraduate Science Education Program.

References (29)

  • A. Awaya et al.

    Mentoring as a journey

    Teaching and Teacher Education

    (2003)
  • K. Hawkey

    Mentor pedagogy and student teacher professional development: A study of two mentoring relationships

    Teaching and Teacher Education

    (1998)
  • A.J. Hobson et al.

    Mentoring beginning teachers: What we know and what we don’t

    Teaching and Teacher Education

    (2009)
  • C. van Velzen et al.

    Guided work-based learning: Sharing practical teaching knowledge with student teachers

    Teaching and Teacher Education

    (2012)
  • S. Abell et al.

    Recruiting future science and mathematics teachers into alternative certification programs: Strategies tried and lessons learned

    Journal of Science Teacher Education

    (2006)
  • V.L. Akerson et al.

    Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice

    Journal of Research in Science Teaching

    (2009)
  • A. Bowe et al.

    Comparison of alternative and traditional teacher certification programs in terms of effectiveness in encouraging STEM pre-service teachers to teach in high need schools

    Journal of the National Association for Alternative Certification

    (2011)
  • California Department of Education

    Mathematics framework for California public schools: Kindergarten through grade twelve

    (2015)
  • L. Darling-Hammond et al.

    Variation in teacher preparation how well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach?

    Journal of Teacher Education

    (2002)
  • L.G. Enochs et al.

    Further development of an elementary science teacher efficacy belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale

    School Science and Mathematics

    (1990)
  • L.G. Enochs et al.

    Establishing factorial validity of the mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument

    School Science and Mathematics

    (2000)
  • C.M. Fairbanks et al.

    The role of effective mentors in learning to teach

    Journal of Teacher Education

    (2000)
  • S. Feiman-Nemser

    Helping novices learn to teach lessons from an exemplary support teacher

    Journal of Teacher Education

    (2001)
  • J.L. Green et al.

    Mapping instructional conversations: A sociolinguistic ethnography

    Ethnography and Language in Educational Settings

    (1981)
  • A previous version of this paper was presented at AERA Annual International Conference, Philadelphia, PA, April 2014.

    View full text