This link has been bookmarked by 1 people . It was first bookmarked on 18 Jul 2008, by Odessa Dariel.
-
18 Jul 08
-
Being challenged to articulate what usually remained as tacit, instinctive, unconscious experience-based knowledge helped the mentor to know what she did not know that she knew. Both mentor and trainees contributed to and benefited from this deep level of evidence-based, collaborative lesson deconstruction, bearing out Lave and Wenger’s (1991, p.117) contention that the students’ , ‘’ ‘ constructively naïve’ perspectives and questions [were] an asset to be exploited.. of use however, only in the context of participation, when supported by experienced practitioners who both understand its limitations and its role…crucial for this naïve involvement to invite reflection on ongoing activity.”
-
collaborative construction and re-construction under the guidance of an ambitious notion of good teaching.”(Wang, 2002, p.341).
-
The mentor: a more experienced practitioner than the trainee but also a co-learner.
-
Rather they were enabled to recognise that practitioner knowledge is situated knowledge and in flux as new and alternative understandings emerge from within practice. These understandings were able to be extended or confirmed through the “conceptual inputs” (Hoban, 2002 p.63) we, from our complementary but different stance as teacher educators were able to offer, to help illuminate the judgements they made in relation to various aspects of their professional practice. Informing our actions with mentors was what Fullan (2003, p 11-20) has described as “moral purpose”, in this case directed at benefiting the professional formation of new teachers for whom we had responsibility whilst the actions of mentors and trainees were directed at improving practice to the benefit of their pupils.
-
Out of these interactions and dialogue we built what Wenger et al have called “a community of practice”, “a place of exploration where it is safe to speak the truth and ask hard questions” (Wenger et al 2002, p.37) in a climate of openness and trust, a climate that enabled the various partners to work through difficulties and address issues of quality and commitment that surfaced as we worked together.
-
eadership within the school with the head teacher welcoming the ‘professional discourse’ between the school and the university, recognising the benefits beyond the immediacy of the mentor/ trainee relationship: ‘the risk taking within the … programme allows us to challenge ourselves and be more reflective about the practice of teaching,’
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.