|
Scherff, L & Paulus, T. (2006). Encouraging ownership of online spaces: Support for preservice
english teachers through computer-mediated communication. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 6(4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol6/iss4/languagearts/article1.cfm
Encouraging Ownership of Online Spaces: Support for Preservice
English Teachers Through Computer-Mediated Communication
Lisa Scherff
University of Alabama
Trena Paulus
University of Tennessee
Abstract
High attrition rates among new teachers are of concern
to teacher educators. Support mechanisms may help teachers feel less isolated
in their new profession. Computer-mediated communication (CMC) technologies
can connect novice teachers in ways that are both time and place independent.
Most research on asynchronous online discussions has focused on achieving
formal learning goals through highly structured scaffolds for reflective
thinking and cognitive presence. Less attention is being paid to how novice
teachers who are already accustomed to participating in online communities
turn to these online spaces for the support they need. This case study examined
whether and how eight preservice teachers completing English education internships
at professional development schools chose to use an asynchronous discussion
forum in the absence of a tightly structured or controlled communication
task. The interns chose to use the online space for just-in-time informal
learning and for psychological support on complex issues that were not easy
to discuss face to face. The interns regularly responded to each others’
requests, thoughts, and concerns. The authors propose that highly structured
online forums are not the only way CMC can be used for teacher support,
particularly now that CMC is no longer a novelty, nor should formal learning
be the only purpose for providing such online spaces to novice teachers.
A large number of novice K-12 teachers do not remain in their schools or classrooms
long enough to make the transformation from beginner to experienced or proficient
levels (Berliner, 1998; Gay, 2000; Howey, 2000). Studies show that 25% of beginning
teachers do not teach more than 2 years (Gold, 1996) and nearly 50% leave within
5 years (Quality Counts, 2000). Researchers note that the initial year in the
classroom is a critical part of a teacher’s career with long term implications
for job satisfaction and career length (Feiman-Nemser, 1983; Hebert & Worthy,
2001; Lortie, 1975; McDonald, 1980). Several factors—isolation, working
conditions, low salaries, inadequate preparation, and a lack of support—contribute
to high attrition rates (Andrews & Martin, 2003; Darling-Hammond, 2003;
Kent, 2000; Rogers & Babinski, 1999; Veenman, 1984) and are often compounded
by the lack of structures in place to support beginning teachers as they transition
from “students of teaching to teachers of students” (Chubbuck, Clift,
Allard, & Quinlan, 2001, cited in DeWert, Babinski, & Jones, 2003, p.
312). Learning to feel comfortable, rather than incompetent, in asking for help
and having a secure place to do so are necessary for a successful entry into
the profession. One way schools and universities can assist student teachers
in making the transition to classroom teacher is by creating a network of collegial
contacts (McCann, Johannessen, & Ricca, 2005).
Students in the University of Tennessee’s English education initial
licensure program—one that includes a year-long internship—not only
attempt to become certified teachers but also earn a master’s degree at
the same time. These interns begin their course work and enter their school
placement in August and continue through until the day the public schools end
(usually the end of May). During this time they complete 12 hours of internship
credit and 12 hours of required coursework in English methods, reading, analysis
of teaching, and action research. Successful completion of the year-long internship
is considered equivalent to their first year of teaching on the state’s
pay scale. Thus, their stress of being a first-year teacher is compounded with
attending evening classes, preparing for the Praxis examination, and juggling
lives outside of school. With these multiple demands, combating isolation through
support mechanisms is central to the interns’ success (DeWert et al.,
2003; Ferdig & Roehler, 2003-2004; Rogers & Babinski, 2002).
Our interest in using CMC as a support network originated from our own background
and research interests. At the time of this study, Lisa Scherff was the instructor
of the course and the students’ advisor and program coordinator. Thus,
her interaction with the participants extended well beyond the course. Trena
Paulus was a colleague in the same college, but was not involved in the teacher
education program. She has both theoretical and practical experience with qualitative
research, discourse analysis, and online discussions. Together we wanted to
explore the first-year experiences of these interns as they enter the field,
along with the potential role of CMC during this pivotal time.
Concepts of Support
Gold (1996) has identified two broad concepts of support that beginning teachers
need: instructional and psychological. Instructional support helps novice teachers
succeed in classroom and school settings, while psychological support facilitates
self-confidence, self-esteem, self-reliance, and ways to handle stress (p. 561).
New teachers often struggle with the same instructional issues: managing a classroom
effectively, motivating students, organizing instruction, assessing student
work, relating to parents, dealing with student differences, and acquiring classroom
supplies (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Gold, 1996; Veenman, 1984; Zimpher & Rieger,
1988). In order to combat these problems, instructional support must deal with
four areas: understanding the subject matter, being able to transfer that subject
matter to students, using a variety of methods to teach, and being able to reflect
critically on their practice (Gold, 1996; Shulman, 1986).
Psychological support is an umbrella term that covers many aspects of a teacher’s
life, including emotional support, positive regard, empathetic listening, confidence
building, stress management, and increasing efficacy and self-reliance (Gold,
1996). Gold and Roth (1993) recommended that new teachers be provided with psychological
support that includes awareness of individual needs, knowledge of how to meet
those needs, and available individuals to provide support. Likewise, novice
teachers need to feel valued, safe, and connected to others; have power over
their own ideas and actions; find meaning in their professional lives; and be
willing to take risks (Tang, 2003).
Technology as Support
One way of providing support to interns and new teachers is through computer
mediated communication (CMC) tools. CMC is any form of discussion that requires
the use of a computer (Dietz-Uhler & Bishop-Clark, 2001). As long as students
have access to a computer, CMC can occur at any time or place, thus providing
a level of accessibility to communication with others that is often not fostered
in schools or in classrooms. Technology changes rapidly, and the adoption rates
of technology are faster among the younger generation. Today’s teacher
education students are technologically more savvy and accustomed to participating
in online communities and even expect CMC to be part of their educational experience
(Oblinger, 2003).
Whether and how they participate in online communities is of interest to teacher
educators for many reasons. The purpose of many online communities is to provide
informal learning opportunities beyond what is possible in face-to-face classrooms.
Whether and how teachers choose to communicate in these communities should be
examined not only from the perspective of what teacher educators think novice
teachers should be doing, but also from the perspective of the new teachers
themselves. Past studies, which showed few teachers participating voluntarily
in online discussions and communities (Nicholson & Bond, 2003: Stephens
& Hartmann, 2004), may need to be revisited regularly as the new generation
moves into teaching positions.
Studies have found that online support networks can provide beginning teachers
with “social, emotional, practical, and professional support” (DeWert
et al., 2003, p. 319), moral support (Merseth, 1990), a place to make connections
(Romiszowski & Ravitz, 1997), deeper understandings of teaching and learning
(Ferdig & Roehler, 2003-2004), and practice with collaborative reflection
(Nicholson & Bond, 2003). DeWert et al. (2003) found that as teachers’
feelings of isolation decreased, their confidence and enthusiasm increased,
and they became more critical thinkers with improved problem-solving skills.
Many online spaces are created as part of formal learning environments, and
the instructor’s purpose for such spaces is that novice teachers achieve
specific cognitive goals, such as critical reflection. Highly structured online
environments have often been recommended as the best way to scaffold desired
types of communicative outcomes (Bodzin & Park, 2000; Hough, Smithey &
Evertson, 2004). However, this approach takes the ownership of the space away
from the novice teacher and gives it to the instructor, as pointed out by Fauske
and Wade (2003-2004). By requiring only minimal participation to encourage entry
into the online space and by not assigning specific topics for conversation
or requiring a certain type of discourse, we hoped to provide a space for the
teachers, if they wished, to own. We were curious about how and whether the
current generation of novice teachers, those more familiar with online communities,
when given control of the online space, choose to use it during their first
year field experience.
Background
The purpose of this study was to examine how novice teachers in English education
completing language arts internships at two professional development schools
(PDS) would choose to utilize an asynchronous discussion forum while they were
in the field. A PDS, similar to a teaching hospital, is an innovative institution
formed through a partnership between a colleges or universities and elementary,
middle, and high schools.
The PDS model is a collaboration between schools, colleges, or departments
of education and preK-12 schools and/or school districts. Within a PDS, partnering
institutions share responsibility for increasing student learning and achievement;
engage in continuous inquiry to enhance excellent teaching and student achievement;
take part in meaningful, ongoing professional development; and prepare effective
beginning teachers (Abdal-Haqq, 1998; Ridley, Hurwitz, Hackett, & Miller,
2005). One feature of a PDS-based teacher preparation program is the strong
built-in support system created for both preservice and novice teachers (Mantle-Bromley,
2001; Ridley et al., 2005; Wise, 2000-2001).
We chose to look at the PDS schools, with their smaller cohort of students,
for this initial exploratory study. We specifically looked at PDS interns’
use of CMC because of the enhanced support system inherently built into the
PDS program. This program was unique in that the instructor (as well as the
instructors of the other courses) traveled to the PDS sites to deliver instruction
rather than interns commuting to night classes. Because interns took university
classes at their school sites, they were able to spend more time with their
mentoring teachers and English departments. Even though these interns were in
a more supportive environment than their peers in a traditional internship,
would the PDS be supportive enough? Based on the review of the literature on
concepts of support and CMC as support, one overarching question directed our
investigation: Would these PDS interns choose to use this CMC space, and if
so, how would they utilize it?
Method
Context
As part of the 15-week language arts methods course taught during the fall
by Lisa, the interns were provided with an online space: the asynchronous discussion
forum feature of the university’s Blackboard™ course management
system. Although this type of technology was new to the instructor, Lisa was
motivated to create this space because of her own isolating experience as a
student teacher. Moreover, the discussion board was to be owned by the interns
– providing them, should they need it, a space beyond their weekly class
time to ask questions, vent frustrations, or make comments. To ensure that they
at least entered the space and played around, they were asked to post at least
one question and/or comment per week. However, there were no assigned topics
for discussion or requirements to talk to each other in a certain way (e.g.,
critically reflect on readings). Rather, topics were to be generated by the
interns as needed. We wanted to see how the interns would choose to use this
online space while in the field, rather than formally dictate how they should
be conversing. Lisa indicated that she would be lurking in the space, too, but
would respond only when necessary or directly asked. Minimal instructor intervention
was also a strategy to foster an intern-centered environment for this online
space.
The interns were in the field and also enrolled in the PDS section of the
secondary language arts methods course. To be enrolled in the PDS section of
the class, interns needed to be admitted to the graduate internship program
and also be accepted as an intern into one of the two PDS high schools. As such,
in the fall semester teacher candidates were enrolled in language arts methods,
content area reading, and analysis of teaching (8 hours total), as well as being
registered for 4 hours of internship. During the fall semester, the interns
taught either the first or second block of the day, ate lunch with their mentors
and department members, and then attended their classes in the early afternoon.
Because they were in their placements all day, 5 days a week, the interns had
both experiences to write about and the resources to do so.
Participants and PDS Sites
Participants in the study were eight PDS interns (six females and two males),
ranging in age from 21-23; each had completed either a bachelor’s degree
in English the prior semester or the required number of hours in English coursework.
Four of the interns were at the northern PDS, three were at the southern PDS,
and one was at neither (he attended this class, with his advisor’s permission,
a year before his scheduled internship). At the time of the study, all participants
had taken a technology course, in addition to the foundational courses (educational
psychology, special education, etc.) required by the state. Although all students
were proficient at using e-mail and the Blackboard system, none indicated having
previously used the discussion board in this manner.
Both PDS sites are located in a suburban district that serves nearly 60,000
K-12 students. At the time of this study, the northern high school was in its
second year as a PDS, while the southern high school was in its sixth year.
Located in an older part of the county, the northern high school was attended
by 1,036 students, 63% coming from low-income homes. The southern high school,
located in a more affluent part of the district, had an enrollment of 1,554
students, 33% coming from low-income families.
Procedure
A qualitative case study (Merriam, 1988) was selected as the most appropriate
way to explore the online discussions. Yin (2003) emphasized that case study
is a research strategy rather than a method, defining it as “an empirical
inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context,
especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly
evident” (p. 13). Rather than attempt to isolate and investigate variables
impacting the use of the discussion forum, it was more appropriate to first
describe and interpret the interns’ participation as part of the context
itself. Naturalistic case study research of this type emphasizes a focus on
meaning in context and is an “ideal design for understanding and interpreting
observations of educational phenomenon” (Merriam, 1988, p. 2).
Because the purpose of our study is to understand what happened in the online
forum, we chose to look in depth at the dialogue itself rather than collect
interview data or administer pre/post-test instruments. Our goal was not to
make causal claims about whether the online forum achieved some predetermined
goal or “worked” per se; rather we sought to understand through
an exploratory case study how one group of novice teachers chose to talk to
each other when given the opportunity.
Methods used in qualitative case study research are inductive rather than deductive,
so researchers generally avoid prior commitment to theoretical models (Yin,
2003, p. 14). According to Strauss and Corbin (1998), “It is impossible
to know prior to the investigation what the salient problems will be or what
theoretical concepts will emerge” (p. 49). Rather than test a hypothesis
or a preconceived idea of what happened during these 15 weeks, our goal was
to discover what happened by studying the online dialogue itself. Literature
is used as theoretical background for the study, but a specific conceptual framework
was not selected prior to the collection and analysis of the data (as in Strauss
& Corbin, 1998). Rather, the description of the case was linked to the relevant
literature after the data were analyzed.
Merriam (1988) emphasized that qualitative design is emergent, with the process
of data collection and analysis being recursive and dynamic. Qualitative data
includes a detailed description of the context, direct quotations from participants,
and excerpts from documents (Merriam, 1988). Participant observation is a common
source of data for qualitative case studies. Because all of the interns’
conversations took place online via the asynchronous discussion tool, reading
the transcripts is a type of participant observation. Lisa observed the discussions
as they occurred, in addition to analyzing them again at the end of the semester.
At the end of the semester, all discussion forum postings were downloaded into
word processing documents for analysis. All names were replaced with pseudonyms
prior to analysis. The forum transcripts were analyzed to explore emergent themes
related to the research question of how the interns made sense of their experience.
Our analysis proceeded in a modified form of the constant comparative method
(Bogdan & Biklen, 1998; Glaser 1978; Goetz & LeCompte, 1984; Strauss
& Corbin, 1998). Merriam (1988) outlined three phases in this type of qualitative
data analysis: intensive analysis, developing categories, and developing theory.
These roughly correspond to Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) steps of open
coding, axial coding, and selective coding. Intensive analysis began as we read
and reread the data independently, each making notes and reflections to isolate
the most striking aspects of the data. We individually compared and noted themes
related to the research questions. We each kept a list of the major ideas that
cut across the data, searching for regularities and patterns, similar to open
coding as described by Strauss and Corbin (1998). Units of information (Lincoln
& Guba, 1985), that is, excerpts from the online discussions, were isolated
and labeled in the margins of the paper transcripts in preparation for the next
phase of developing categories.
We held a series of meetings during which we developed our initial lists into
categories. Similar to axial coding, we sorted the units into more abstract
categories. Through an iterative process of convergence and divergence, emerging
categories and subcategories were organized. Finally, through a process of selective
coding, a tentative theory about how the interns talked with each other was
developed. From the initial concrete codes, abstract themes emerged. We compared
these themes to the data and then to the literature until both of us were satisfied
with the final themes, presented in the discussion. The list of codes is explained
in detail in the findings and discussion section.
Several methods were used to establish trustworthiness (also known as internal
validity), dependability (consistency), and the overall rigor of this study,
as outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985), LeCompte and Goetz (1982), and Merriam
(1988). We earlier described our roles as researchers in order to clarify our
biases. We also had prolonged engagement with the study site. One or both of
us were actively involved in the process of designing, implementing, and researching
the discussion forum. We were immersed in the data over a long period of time,
well beyond the 15 weeks of the online experience itself. We kept a record of
our meetings and maintained an audit trail of our data collection and analysis
process. During these meetings we engaged in peer debriefing and reflection
on every stage of our analysis.
Findings and Discussion
The participants exchanged 141 messages during the 15 weeks, resulting in an
average of 15.7 messages per person. Five interns posted 18 messages, two posted
15 messages, and one posted 12 messages; the instructor posted eight. Table
1 presents the number of weekly postings by participant.
Table 1
Number of Messages Posted by Participant by Week
| Student |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
Total |
| Amber |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
18 |
| John |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
18 |
| Jordan |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
18 |
| Kimberly |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
18 |
| Charity |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
18 |
| Janelle |
1 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
15 |
| Theresa |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
15 |
| Michael |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
12 |
| Instructor |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
| Anonymousa |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
| Total |
8 |
8 |
8 |
13 |
20 |
11 |
7 |
7 |
9 |
11 |
8 |
10 |
8 |
6 |
7 |
141 |
| aOne student posted as Anonymous due
to the sensitive nature of the content of her/his message. |
The interns posted slightly more than one message per week. Table 1 illustrates
that the messages were spread evenly throughout the semester rather than occurring
all at once. Of note is that whenever an intern posted a question it was rarely
left unanswered by the end of the week. The interns were not required to respond
to each other, yet they did so. This result may be consistent with what Rourke,
Anderson, Garrison, and Archer (2001) characterized as “interactive responses,”
which help build relationships in an online environment. Although one message
per week may seem negligible, asynchronous messages are time-consuming to read
and respond to, as they are generally longer than either e-mail messages or
synchronous chat messages. Thus, reading between 6 and 20 messages per week
could well be a significant undertaking for these busy interns, and it is striking
that they chose to respond to each other when not specifically asked to do so.
The next phase of our research (Paulus & Scherff, in press) investigated
this pattern of post and response in greater detail.
The interns chose to talk about six broad themes, which were categorized as
either psychological support and instructional support in an effort to extend
the previous literature on teacher support. A total of 175 codes were assigned
to the 141 messages; messages sometimes included more than one code. Table 2
outlines our coding categories, subcategories and descriptions of psychological
support. These findings are presented next.
Table 2
Coding Categories and Description: Psychological Support
Code |
Description |
|
Category #1: Social Presence
|
| a. Socialize |
“Checking-in” to convey their presence in the forum, responding
empathetically to their peers’ postings, thanking each other for support |
b. Personal lives |
Offering information about their personal lives or incidents that are
non-school related in any way |
| c. Humor |
Sharing any sort of humorous story, joke or comment |
Category #2: Stories From the Field
|
| a. Good story |
Reporting positive instructional and/or personal events that take place
at school |
| b. Bad story |
Reporting negative instructional and/or personal events that take place
at school |
| c. Mentoring teachers |
Sharing positive and negative interactions and/or relationships between
interns and mentors |
d. Middle school |
Discussing middle school experience |
| Category #3: Feelings
of Stress |
| a. Stress |
Conveying feeling of being stressed and/or overwhelmed due to experience
of internship teaching, coursework and life in general |
| b. Speed |
Referring to how fast the semester or year is going |
Psychological Support
Ninety-one percent of the messages, 129 of the 141, addressed issues related
to psychological support. Three broad categories captured these issues: social
presence, stories from the field, and feelings of stress. Examples of each are
provided in the following section.
Social presence. Rourke et al. (2001) defined social presence as
“the ability of learners to project themselves socially and affectively
into a community of inquiry” (p. 2). This category includes interns checking
in to convey their presence in the forum, sharing non-school-related personal
stories, socializing, responding empathetically to their peers’ postings,
and thanking each other for their support. This category also includes humorous
exchanges. Seventy-eight of the 141 (55%) messages fell into this category.
At the most basic level, the interns posted messages to the forum to simply
check in with their classmates and exchange personal information. For example,
in week 8 John posted, “I would just like to remind everyone that I am
going to Scotland in one week and while I am there, I will see Othello performed
in Manchester. I will be sure to bring back many great stories. . .”
Interns also shared their experiences and requested responses from others.
The following is Charity’s posting in week 11 about a mandatory in-service
day:
Is anyone else not feeling these Inservices? I have to go to _________ Middle
School tomorrow morning to spend half the day doing something with our End
of Course exams: . . . My mentoring teacher and I have to create them and
have them approved. Supposedly they will be wanting a copy of the one we already
did, a fat lot of help that will do after the fact. Anyway, just wanted to
check in and see what everyone else had in store for this torture, I mean
inservice day.
The following day, Janelle responded to Charity in an empathetic manner: “I'm
not really feeling the inservice vibe either. I just got out of a department
meeting and now I don't really know what I am supposed to be doing until 1:30
when our faculty meeting is . . . ”
A humorous exchange about the internship experience appeared in the following
response from Janelle in the week 10 discussion:
Some days I just think that I should not be held responsible for my actions
in applying to the college of Education. I plead temporary insanity. It is
completely not what I thought that teaching would be, which is sometimes okay
and sometimes, well, harrowing and abysmal to a point that I never knew. But
my week is going great :) Ha Ha . . .
Amber responded 2 days later in an empathetic manner:
Well, it seems like you have your hands full like the rest of us. However,
I hope that you are still doing well, don't get discouraged. Remember they're
kids and they aren't like us, well, for the most part. They struggle with
issues that we can only imagine and then return to us on a daily basis seeking
help, love, and advice. Even though that may come out in negative ways. Good
luck!
This theme of social presence, as documented by the previous examples, is
consistent with literature indicating that new teachers need empathetic listening
and need to feel connected to others (DeWert et al., 2003; Merseth, 1991; Romiszowski
& Ravitz, 1997). Establishing social presence is important to foster a sense
of community in online environments, which are otherwise bereft of cues (Haythornthwaite,
Kazmer, Robins & Shoemaker, 2000; Rourke, et al., 2001). That the interns,
most of whom interacted with each other daily in the schools, made each other
aware of their online presence and responded to each other empathetically may
have helped foster a sense of trust, which in turn made the next two themes
possible—sharing stories from the field and acknowledging feelings of
stress.
Stories from the field. Thirty-two of the 141 (23%) messages included
stories, both good and bad, about the interns’ current teaching experiences.
Stories included relationships with mentoring teachers and the difficulty of
the middle school experience. In week 4 Kimberly shared this story:
Today I observed my Freshman Honors presentations in which they played the
part of the gods and goddesses. It was so impressive. . . . Additionally,
a student in one of my Fundamentals class discovered that she is getting a
"B." She was amazed and her face glowed. . . . It was very uplifting,
in contrast to our third block Fundamentals class, which is struggling. .
. .Many seem unconcerned and our attendance is disgraceful. However, we have
also had one severe disruption in which two of our students were expelled.
Janelle responded to Kimberly just a few hours later, in a supportive manner:
You are doing great! I know that it is discouraging that so many have Fs
and don't care, but don't take it too hard—there's only so much you
can do and in the end you cannot MAKE them care. Hang in there and I'm across
the hall if you need to vent or talk.
Of note here is that the interns saw other interns every day at the PDS, and
they seamlessly integrated their online and offline worlds, choosing to talk
about some issues in person and other issues online. Blended environments are
becoming more prevalent in higher education and should perhaps be considered
in teacher education programs as well (Osguthorpe & Graham, 2003). We do
not know specifically how the interns negotiated these worlds beyond their noting
it in their online conversations; how they did so is an area for further investigation.
In week 10, Michael shared a story about his middle school experience: “I
already know that middle school is not for me. I absolutely hate grammar, and
so far that's all it's been in the classroom. What fun the next three weeks
there will be.” Janelle replied to Michael the following morning, again
in a supportive manner, “I completely know what you mean. After I finish
my middle school experience all I could think was, ‘That was fun, but
I am never doing that again!!!’”
Relationships with mentoring teachers can be particularly difficult for interns
to navigate. The forum was used by one intern as a safe space to raise an issue
about working with his/her mentoring teacher. In fact, the intern posted this
message anonymously in order to ensure his/her safety in raising the issue:
My mentoring teacher has a tendancy to be somewhat hostile towards me. .
. .One moment she'll act like she thinks that I am adequate and the next she
acts like I will be the largest disgrace to the profession of teaching. .
. I just feel like I am working my butt off in this program and it is all
for nothing because she treats me like I am nothing more than an annoyance.
I am posting this as anonymous because I do not want anyone to know this for
fear that it will somehow get back to her and she'll really take the gloves
off. . . .If anyone is having a similar experience or has any advice please
respond. I feel as though this is my only outlet and if I don't write this
out then I will explode from acting like everything is wonderful with my internship.
Choosing to share this information anonymously suggests that not all issues
can be discussed openly and directly face to face. This intern chose to use
the forum as an outlet that may not have been available had for obtaining support
when needed.
In general the instructor only replied to student posts when she felt that
her experience and leadership position would provide insight that other interns
were unable to offer. In this case the instructor replied the next day to the
anonymous post:
You are in a tough situation, but know that it is not you! It could be any
number of things. . . .The thing to keep in mind is that you know you are
doing a good job, and all of us know that you are too! Just keep your professionalism
at all times, especially in front of the kid.
Kimberly also responded, the following day:
I am so sorry that you are going through that. . . .Don't EVER let anyone
make you feel badly about yourself! I know how capable you are... and please
e-mail or call me if you ever need to speak to someone somewhat anonymously.
I hope that everything improves for you! Keep up the good work!
That Kimberly responded even after the instructor had posted a response may
further reflect that the instructor’s voice did not dominate the discussions
taking place among the interns. It was also striking to us that interns responded
to nearly every school-related story that was posted. The interns did not necessarily
ask questions in which they expected an answer from others in the cohort; rather,
their self-disclosure of struggles prompted the empathy and support that followed.
This corroborates findings by Ziegler, Paulus, and Woodside (2006), DeWert et
al. (2003) and Merseth (1990, 1991) concerning the effectiveness of online discussion
forums for providing support. Beginning teachers indicated that an “online
community provided them with much needed emotional support and encouragement
while diminishing their feelings of isolation and helplessness” (DeWert
et al., 2003, p. 318).
Feelings of stress. Nineteen of the 141 messages (13%) conveyed feelings
of stress and being overwhelmed by the heavy load of teaching, coursework (three
graduate classes) and other life responsibilities being balanced by the interns.
Michael, in week 8, conveyed his stress as follows: “I'm just waiting
for this week to end. . . . For the past three weeks I've been telling myself,
‘If I can just make it to Friday, I'll be alright.’” This
category also included references to how quickly the semester or school year
was passing. John, in week 7, wrote the subject line: Going Fast!
Not sure about the rest of you guys, but this semester has kicked into hyper
drive for me. Weeks seem to be going faster and faster by, but I am not complaining.
. . . I hope the time is moving as fast for everyone as it is for me.
Statements of stress occurred more often at the beginning and at the end of
the semester. In fact, the entire discussion in the final week of the course
was centered around stress, as illustrated by the following exchange. Kimberly
asked,
Is anyone else completely overwhelmed? I am trying desperately to catch
up, but it seems as if there is always more to do. . . . I hope that everyone
else is doing well. Good luck with the rest of the semester!
Janelle, the following day, empathized, “Am I overwhelmed? Uh, YESSSSSSSS!
I haven't slept a full night (like 5 - 6 hours) in I can't remember when. Hang
in there! It's almost over.” Feeling “stressed out” is a common
concern of novice teachers (see, for example, Hansen & Sullivan, 2003; Nagel
& Brown, 2003; Thomas, Clarke, & Lavery, 2003). The interns chose to
share these feelings with each other in the forum, which may have provided an
additional needed space for such conversations.
The PDS interns used the forum primarily for psychological support. They connected
with each other online by establishing social presence, even though they were
physically located in the same schools. They shared stories from their internships,
including issues with mentoring teachers. The online forum permitted sharing
difficult experiences such as these anonymously, something not possible in person.
They also expressed their feelings of stress. Next we look at how the forum
was used for instructional support.
Instructional Support
The interns did not use the online space as much for instructional support
as they did for psychological support. However, 38% of the postings (54 of 141)
included themes related to instructional support. These instructional issues
were organized into three broad categories: programmatic concerns, teaching
ideas and advice, and sense of teaching efficacy. Table 3 outlines these categories.
Examples are discussed next.
Table 3
Coding Categories and Description: Instructional Support
Code |
Description |
| Category #1: Programmatic
concerns |
| a. University courses |
Discussing issues regarding university courses, positive or negative |
| b. Applicability |
Referring to the usefulness and/or success of ideas from the textbooks
or class |
| c. Bureaucracy |
Expressing frustration over bureaucracy concerning the program (“jumping
through hoops”) |
| Category #2: Teaching
ideas and advice |
| a. Need advice/ideas |
Asking for help regarding a situation at school or help regarding teaching
at school |
| b. Provide advice/ideas |
Providing advice, responding to questions or needs of peers, and/or sharing
of ideas with or without solicitation from other interns |
|
Category #3: Teaching efficacy |
| a. Self-doubt |
Questioning own teaching efficacy |
| b. Self-efficacy |
Conveying a sense of enjoying teaching and displaying a sense of efficacy.
Also includes developing self-awareness about teaching profession and own
role as a teacher |
Programmatic concerns. Twenty-nine of the 141 (21%) messages addressed
issues related to the internship program itself. This category included comments
on the internship program bureaucracy, comments about university courses the
interns were currently taking, and applicability of ideas learned in formal
coursework to their actual teaching contexts. Janelle summed up many of these
programmatic concerns with her post during week 1:
Okay, what frustrates me? Well, for starters, when we were told about the
PDS program, three different people told me (because I kept asking to make
sure) that we would be in our placement schools all day and then we would
have classes at night. Since I believed this, my mentoring teacher and I planned
to have me teach her fourth block class [which is now not possible] . . .
a little planning and communication would have been nice.
In week 5, Amber and Kimberly discussed one their university courses. Amber
posted,
Good grief . . .did you see the homework for this week? HOW IN THE WORLD
am I supposed to find the time to make up a survey and then use my STUDENTS’
CLASS TIME to make them fill out a survey for MY CLASS.
Kimberly responded the following day:
YES! I completely understand and agree. Actually, it really does make me
frustrated. Many of my students are extremely self-conscious of their reading
ability and I am tired of “questioning” them for the purposes
of a [university] class . . .
Even though their instructor, a professor and not a fellow intern, was lurking,
they openly discussed programmatic issues online with each other.
Interns reported on their use of ideas and activities learned through the
textbooks and class time, as illustrated by Theresa’s post in week 12:
I used the activity to teach following directions in my class on Friday,
and it went very well. The kids loved it and it was lots of fun. At the end,
I asked them what they had learned was necessary for the game to work (to
follow directions), and they said, reading, listening, and paying attention.
Hmmmm . . .
The instructional support requested and conveyed by the interns reveal their
interpretation of the online space as one that was safe. Many of the programmatic
concerns they conveyed may have been unprofessional if spoken of during (university)
class time or with their mentoring teachers, colleagues, and/or university faculty.
Like other reported research (DeWert et al., 2003; Scherff, Ollis, & Rosencrans,
in press; Valli, 1992; Veenman, 1984), interns in our study were more inclined
to talk about broad and complex issues (such as relationships with mentors and/or
university faculty members) than curriculum and instruction matters.
Teaching ideas and advice. Thirteen of the messages (9%) included
requests for and replies to ideas and advice regarding situations (instructional,
classroom management, discipline, etc.) at schools. One such exchange regarding
research papers occurred between Jordan and the instructor during week 10. Jordan
posted,
Two of my students have chosen very difficult careers to research: professional
basketball player and body piercer. These two students hardly ever turn in
assignments, so I told them they could research any career (that is appropriate
for school). They were excited about my letting them do “their thing,”
but now they are frustrated b/c there is not much useful information on either
career. Should I encourage them to choose something else?
Later that same day Lisa responded,
Can they use interviews for their research? I would tell them that if they
want to continue to do those career choices, they need to interview ## number
of people or people related to that field.
Novice teachers need instructional support in the area of managing a classroom,
organizing instruction, and teaching methods (see, for example, Doyle, 1986;
Gold, 1996; Smagorinksy, Gibson, Bickmore, Moore, & Cook, 2004). However,
they need this support in a timely manner. Timely support can be difficult to
provide in person during the once a week official class sessions. Because interns
in the PDS program saw their instructor only once per week, the accessibility
of the discussion board allowed them to have contact with her and fellow interns
7 days a week. When a lesson went wrong, or when an intern needed a teaching
idea, help was available within 24 hours rather than within a week, something
that would not have been possible without CMC.
Sense of teaching efficacy. Twelve of the messages (9%) included
statements expressing doubt or confidence in their teaching efficacy. This category
also includes statements reflecting a growing awareness about the teaching profession,
in general, and their own role within it. In week 3 Jordan shared feelings about
her growing responsibilities in the classroom, “I am feeling like ‘the
teacher’ rather than ‘the intern.’ This has been my first
week to do it all: plan, grade, ISS [internal suspension], etc.” The next
week, Theresa commented on the reality of teaching versus what interns learned
in school and wanted to teach:
I was thinking today how, at [the university] with all its education ideals,
DOL [daily oral language] and end-of-course tests prep seem monotonous and
dull, but they are reality. . . .While I majored in English and read books
that my students may never even care to hear about, my job as their teacher
is to have them ready for every grammar trip they could come across.
Janelle, also in week 4, expressed some self-doubt regarding her decision to
become a teacher:
Does anyone else have this wave of panic that comes over them sometimes
and makes you go "what have I gotten myself into?" . . . I have
always wanted to teach and so I think that I should be going home everyday
going "I love my students!" and "I can't wait to go back"
but the last couple of days I have felt like "If I don't get away soon
someone's going down and it probably will be me but I'm going to take a few
with me." . . . I just feel that I am bearly keeping my head above it
all and that any day now someone is going to realize what a fraud I have been
in pretending to be any good at teaching. Be brutally honest - Am I bonkers?
Lisa chose to offer support that only an experienced teacher could provide:
You WILL NOT love every day. In fact, there will be days that you hate your
life, your job, and the kids, BUT everyone, in every job, goes through that
. . . our best days will be better than anyone else's!!! The one student who
"gets it" will make you want to hug everyone (okay, not everyone,
but a lot of people). Trust me . . . the internship is harder than when you
have your own room!!!!!
The PDS interns made the discussion forum their own by using it for instructional
support for programmatic concerns, teaching ideas, and exploring their sense
of teaching efficacy. Although these concerns were not as prevalent as those
of psychological support, they reveal an additional way that CMC was used by
the interns – as a just-in-time support mechanism during their field experiences.
As previous research has shown (Bodzin & Park, 2000; DeWert et al., 2003;
Hough et al., 2004; Nicholson & Bond, 2003), online communities can foster
feelings of efficacy and lead to professional growth. Investigating why they
chose to talk more about psychological rather than instructional issues in this
venue is an area for further investigation.
Conclusions, Implications, and Directions for Further Research
Despite the best intentions of and extensive planning by teacher education
and mentoring programs, novice teachers frequently cite the first year as unsupportive
and lonely. Technology has proved itself a valuable tool in many areas of education
(Bodzin & Park, 2000; DeWert et al., 2003; Merseth, 1990, 1991); we propose
that it should perhaps have a larger role in teacher preparation programs, particularly
in the area of providing online spaces in which novice teachers are free to
provide each other the support they most need. Even though a PDS is designed
to be an inherently more supportive model of the internship experience, findings
from this study show that CMC tools such as Blackboard’s discussion forum
may be able to provide interns with even more support during this crucial time.
The interns in this study used the discussion forum to request and provide
psychological support to each other on issues that could otherwise be difficult
to address. They also used the forum as a mechanism for timely and immediately
relevant instructional support. Several of the factors that contribute to high
attrition rates for novice teachers—isolation, working conditions, inadequate
preparation, and a lack of support (Andrews & Martin, 2003; Darling-Hammond,
2003; Kent, 2000; Rogers & Babinski, 1999; Veenman, 1984)—were voiced
by interns in the discussion board postings. Even though these interns were
in a PDS school, they chose to use the online space for additional support that
they may not have been able to get in person. Because Lisa could access the
discussion board any time and at any place, she was able to read and respond
to interns’ concerns normally limited by the 3 hours per week face-to-face
time the methods course provided. Although she could not solve all of their
problems, reading about the interns’ issues and needs (such as lesson
and classroom management ideas) provided her with the opportunity to devote
class time to them.
Building trust in online environments has often been challenging in a lean
CMC environment. However, these interns knew each other in person and also quickly
established social presence online by checking in, exchanging stories, and expressing
their frustration to each other. In this way they were able to share concerns
with each other that they may have been unable to share with their university
professors, internship supervisors, or mentoring teachers. The level of trust
displayed in a short time could be explained by the fact that these interns
spent more time with each other than did interns not included in the PDS program.
This points to our next area of research: comparing these findings with how
interns in a traditional internship program (where participants do not know
each other as well as the PDS interns) use the discussion forum.
Adding the voices of the interns to our findings is another area of future
research. Although we chose not to interview interns at this phase of the study,
additional data such as interviews or pre-post online experience surveys could
shed light on how their feelings of support changed over time, how the online
and face-to-face support mechanisms intersected, and how they felt about the
online experience. Our next phase of research has moved beyond capturing what
the interns chose to talk about in this space to examining how they engaged
each other in these discussions (Paulus & Scherff, in press).
We agree that highly structured online discussions may promote more critical
thinking and reflection, as is desired by instructors of graduate courses. However,
we also feel that the interns themselves may be the best judges of what psychological
support and just-in-time instructional support they need day to day. In addition
to researching highly structured online discussions, we propose that it is time
to return to examining the informal online spaces in which novice teachers take
ownership of what matters to them and respond to each other in kind.
References
Abdal-Haqq, I. (1998). Professional development schools:
Weighing the evidence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Andrews, S. P., & Martin, E. (2003). No teacher left
behind: Mentoring and supporting novice teachers. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Georgia Association of Colleges for Teacher Education/Georgia
Association of Teacher Educators, St. Simons Island, GA.
Berliner, D. (1998). Implications of expertise in pedagogy
in teacher education and evaluation. Paper presented at the Educational
Testing Service Invitational Conference.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative
research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Bodzin, A. M., & Park, J. C. (2000). Dialogue patterns
of preservice science teachers using asynchronous computer-mediated communications
on the World Wide Web. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching,
19(2), 161-194.
Chubbuck, S. M., Clift, R. T., Allard, J., & Quinlan,
J. (2001). Playing it safe as a novice teacher: Implications for programs for
new teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(5), 365-376.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it
matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-13.
DeWert, M. H., Babinski, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003).
Safe passages: Providing online support to beginning teachers. Journal of
Teacher Education, 54(4), 311-320.
Dietz-Uhler, B., & Bishop-Clark, C. (2001). The use of
computer-mediated communication to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions.
Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 269-283.
Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In
M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.; pp. 392-431).
New York: Macmillan.
Fauske, J., & Wade, S.E. (2003-2004). Research to practice
online: Conditions that foster democracy, community, and critical thinking in
computer-mediated discussions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
36(2), 137-153.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983). Learning to teach. In L. Shedman
& G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 150-170).
New York: Longman.
Ferdig, R.E., & Roehler, L.R. (2003-2004). Student uptake
in electronic discussions: Examining online discourse in literacy preservice
classrooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(2),
119-136.
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory,
research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in
the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
Goetz, J.P., & LeCompte, M.D. (1984). Ethnography
and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.
Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring,
and induction. In J. Sikula, T. J. Butterly, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook
of research on teacher education (2nd ed; pp. 548-594). New York: Macmillan.
Gold, Y., & Roth, R. A. (1993). Teachers managing
stress and preventing burnout: The professional health solution. Washington,
DC: Falmer Press.
Hansen, J., & Sullivan, B. A. (2003). Assessment of
workplace stress: Occupational stress, its consequences, and common causes of
teacher stress. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 480 078.
Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M.M., Robins, J., & Shoemaker,
S. (2000). Community
development among distance learners: Temporal and technological dimensions.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1). Retrieved November
1, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/haythornthwaite.html
Hebert, E., & Worthy, T. (2001). Does the first year of
teaching have to be a bad one? A case study in success. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 17, 897-911.
Hough, G., Smithey, M., & Evertson, C. (2004). Using computer-mediated
communication to create virtual communities of practice for intern teachers.
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(3), 361-386.
Howey, K. (2000, March ). A review of challenges and innovations
in the preparation of teachers for urban contexts: Implications for state policy.
A paper presented to the Title II Teacher Quality Institute, Biloxi, MS.
Kent, S. I. (2000). Problems of beginning teachers: Comparing
graduates of bachelor’s and master’s level teacher preparation programs.
The Teacher Educator, 35(4), 83-96.
LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, J. P. (1982). Problems of reliability
and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1),
31-60.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Lortie, D. (1975). School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Mantle-Bromley, C. (2001, April). The status of early theories of professional
development school potential: Progress of four settings across the United States.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Seattle, WA.
McCann, T. M., Johannessen, L. R., & Ricca, B. (2005). Supporting
beginning English teachers: Research and implications for teacher induction.
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
McDonald, F. (1980). Study of induction programs for beginning teachers
(Vol. 1). The problems of beginning teachers. A crisis in training. Princeton,
NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Merriam, S.B. (1988). Qualitative research and case study applications
in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merseth, K. K. (1990). Beginning teachers and computer networks: A new
form of induction support (Report No. 90-9). East Lansing, MI: The National
Center for Research on Teacher Education. ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 324 309.
Merseth, K. K. (1991). Supporting beginning teachers with computer networks.
Journal of Teacher Education, 42(2), 140-147.
Nagel, L., & Brown, S. (2003). The ABCs of managing teacher stress. The
Clearing House, 76(5), 255-258.
Nicholson, S.A., & Bond, N. (2003). Collaborative reflection and professional
community building: An analysis of preservice teachers’ use of an electronic
discussion board. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(2),
259-279.
Oblinger, D. (2003 July/August). Boomers, Gen-Xers & Millennials: Understanding
the “new students.” Educause Review, 36-47.
Osguthorpe, R. T., & Graham, C. R. (2003). Blended learning environments:
Definitions and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education,
4(3), 227-233.
Paulus, T., & Scherff, L. (in press). “Can anyone offer any words
of encouragement?”: Online dialogue as a support mechanism for pre-service
teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education.
Quality Counts 2000. (2000). Who should teach? The states decide. Editorial
Projects in Education, 19(18), 8-9. Retrieved October 15, 2006, from http://counts.edweek.org/sreports/qc00/templates/article.cfm?slug=execsum.htm
Ridley, D. S., Hurwitz, S., Hackett, M. R. D., & Miller, K. K. (2005).
Comparing PDS and campus-based preservice teacher preparation: Is PDS preparation
really better? Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 46-56.
Rogers, D. L., & Babinski, L. (1999). Breaking through isolation with
new teacher groups. Educational Leadership, 56(8), 38-40.
Rogers, D. L., & Babinski, L. M. (2002). From isolation to conversation:
Supporting new teachers’ development. Albany: SUNY Press.
Romiszowski, A. J., & Ravitz, J. (1997). Computer-mediated communication.
In Cr. R. Dilles & A. Romiszowksi (Eds.), Instructional developmental
paradigms (pp. 745-768). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing
social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal
of Distance Education, 14(3), 51-70.
Scherff, L., Ollis, J., & Rosencrans, L. (in press). Starting the journey
together: A teacher educator and her “students” navigate their first
semester in the secondary English classroom. Issues in Teacher Education.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Smagorinsky, P. Gibson, N., Bickmore, S. T., Moore, C. P., & Cook, L.
S. (2004). Praxis shock: Making the transition from a student-centered university
program to the corporate climate of schools. English Education, 36(3),
214-245.
Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stephens, A.C., & Hartmann, C.E. (2004). A successful professional development
project’s failure to promote online discussion about teaching mathematics
with technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1),
57-73.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research:
Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Tang, S. Y. F. (2003). Challenge and support: The dynamics of student teachers’
professional learning in the field experience. Teaching and Teacher Education,
19, 483-498.
Thomas, N., Clarke, V., & Lavery, J. (2003). Self-reported work and family
stress of female primary teachers. Australian Journal of Education, 47(1),
73-87.
Valli, L. (1992). Beginning teacher problems: Areas for teacher education
improvement. Action in Teacher Education, 14, 18-25.
Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of
Educational Research, 54(2), 143-178.
Wise, A. E. (2000-2001). Creating a high-quality teaching force. Educational
Leadership, 58(4), 18-21.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Ziegler, M., Paulus, T.M., & Woodside, M. (2006). Creating a climate of
engagement in a
blended learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research,
17(3), 295-318.
Zimpher, N. L., & Rieger, S. R. (1988). Mentoring teachers: What are the
issues? Theory Into Practice, 27(3), 175-181.
Author Note:
Lisa Scherff
University of Alabama
lscherff@bamaed.ua.edu
Trena Paulus
University of Tennessee
tpaulus@utk.edu
|