BETWEEN DIDACTICS, THE MENTOR AND THE PUPILS: TRAINEE REFLECTIONS CONCERNING THEIR TEACHING PRACTICES

Main Article Content

Martin Blaszk

Abstrakt

Reflection in teacher development is important as it can help both experiencedand novice teachers to better understand the processes theyare involved in. It can also be used to aid evaluation processes. This paperpresents a small scale study that involved undergraduate Englishphilology students from Gdańsk University who were studying for theteacher specialisation. One of its purposes was to trial a strategy forfeedback that could be used to mediate an already existing model ofassessment for students’ taught lessons, which previous to the studyused only a prescribed set of assessment criteria. Another purpose wasto promote a reflective turn in both the student-teacher and academicmentor (myself), which would then inform the discussions that tookplace after each observed lesson. In addition to this, I was interested tofind out if this strategy would generate a suitable quality and quantityof information, so that it might be used for further research. Overall,the strategy proved a useful aid to reflection in relation to the students’teaching practices. As a research tool, it also generated usable data.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Dział
Artykuły

Bibliografia

  1. Bruner, J. 1996. The Culture of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  2. Galewska-Kustra, M. 2009. „Studium przypadku w pedagogicznych badaniach nad twórczością. W poszukiwaniu praktycznych zastosowań metody” (w) Metody pedagogicznych badań nad twórczością. Teoria i empiria (red. K.J. Szmidt). Łódź: Wydawnictwo Akademii Humanistyczno-Ekonomicznej w Łodzi: 225-275.
  3. Heron, J. Reason, P. 1997. „A participatory inquiry paradigm”. Qualitative Inquiry 3(3): 274-294.
  4. Kębłowska, M. 2006. „Transferring ELT knowledge to the classroom – results of a study”. Glottodidactica 32: 159-171.
  5. Mann, S. 2004. „Evaluation” (w) Adults learning languages: A CILT guide to good prac-tice (red. H. Harnisch i P. Swanton). London: CILT:113-129.
  6. Mann, S. i Walsh, S. 2015. „Reflective dimensions of CPD: supporting self-evaluation and peer-evaluation” (w) Teacher evaluation in second language education (red. H. Donaghue i A. Howard). London: Bloomsbury Academic: 17-34.
  7. Mead, G.H. 1962. Mind, Self and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviourist. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  8. Mercado, L. A. i Mann, S. 2015. „Mentoring for teacher evaluation and development” (w) Teacher evaluation in second language education (red. H. Donaghue i A. Howard). London: Bloomsbury Academic: 35-54.
  9. Schwandt, T.A. 1994. „Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry” (w) Handbook of qualitative research (red. N.K. Denzin i Y. S. Lincoln). London: Sage Publications: 118-137.
  10. Sullivan, H. S. 1953. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
  11. Wallace, M.J. 2008. Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Witkowski, L. 2007. „Kwadratura aksjologicznego AIDS w pedagogice” (w) Edukacja wobec sporów o (po)nowoczesność (red. L. Witkowski). Warszawa: Instytut Ba-dań Edukacyjnych: 141-152.
  13. van Teijlingen, E. R. i Hundley, V. 2001. „The importance of pilot studies”. Social Re-search Update 35. http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU35.html DW 11.10.2014