Abstract
Background: This study explores teacher educators’ experiences facilitating small-group practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design in a final-year methods course.
Aim: The study examines how teacher educators implement and experience these sessions to support pre-service teachers’ lesson design skills.
Setting: The study was conducted within a fourth-year methodology course designed to deepen pre-service teachers’ understanding of lesson design, emphasising learning and the purposeful development of learners’ competencies for a fast-changing world. The small group practice and reflection sessions, combined with cyclic lesson design, are crucial components of the course.
Methods: Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with six teacher educators during the 2023 academic year. A focus group interview was conducted towards the end of the course. The data were analysed using the constant comparative method, identifying key themes in teacher educators’ experiences.
Results: Teacher educators adapted practice and reflection sessions to address student engagement challenges and to enhance pre-service teachers’ understanding of the lesson design approach. While constructive feedback on cyclic lesson design was vital, it was also time-intensive. The approach allowed teacher educators to observe gradual improvements in students’ lessons, though some students struggled to apply insights.
Conclusion: Cyclic lesson design, combined with meaningful feedback and deliberate practice, promotes deeper, transferable learning. This approach supports pre-service teachers in developing the beginnings of adaptive expertise.
Contribution: This study contributes to research on pre-service teacher preparation, emphasising cyclic lesson design and deliberate practice as essential for fostering adaptive expertise. It recommends adopting similar strategies in teacher education programmes.
Keywords: practice and reflection; teacher education; cyclic lesson design; deliberate practice; adaptive expertise.
Introduction
Background
The world is changing fast, and the future is becoming increasingly difficult to predict and manage (Fadel, Bialik & Trilling 2015; OECD 2017). In a world characterised by rapid change, it is essential to adequately prepare pre-service teachers for the profession (Darling-Hammond & Oakes 2019; Kroon & Gravett 2022). Within the Department of Childhood Education at the university where this study took place, we continuously grapple with how best to prepare pre-service teachers for the demands of teaching in a fast-changing world.
To respond to the demand of preparing pre-service teachers to teach in a rapidly changing world, a team of teacher educators undertook a longitudinal research project focused on lesson design within pre-service teacher education. The project aims to investigate the implementation of a novel lesson design approach rooted in the science of learning literature that purposefully infuses the development of competencies for a fast-changing world. The lesson design approach was piloted in 2020 with final-year students, and insights gained from the pilot were used to refine the approach. The approach is currently integrated into methods courses spanning the first to the final-year of a 4-year bachelor of education degree. The fourth-year serves as a capstone, enabling the pre-service teachers to integrate and enhance their understanding of the lesson design approach. In the fourth-year methods course taught by the author of this article, there is a thorough exploration of the various aspects of the lesson design approach.
So, why focus on lesson design that foregrounds principles derived from the science of learning literature and that explicitly infuses the development of competencies for a fast-changing world? The rationale for integrating principles from the science of learning into the lesson design approach is to bolster pre-service teachers’ understanding of how to guide and support learning in varying school contexts (Gravett & Van der Merwe 2023; Van der Merwe 2022). In lesson design, pre-service teachers can make explicit their understanding of the nature and process of learning, as well as their knowledge of how to guide and support learning through the pedagogical choices that they make and the reasoning they give for making specific pedagogical choices (Cameron & Campbell 2013; Li & Zou 2017; Superfine 2008; Sural 2019). In addition, immersing pre-service teachers in designing lessons that require them to infuse competencies for a fast-changing world explicitly can develop their knowledge of how to infuse the development of these competencies in their everyday teaching (Gravett & Eadie 2020). Preparing pre-service teachers to design and teach lessons that intentionally place learning at the centre and infuse the development of learners’ competencies for a fast-changing world will serve them and their learners well, no matter the circumstances of the schools where they teach or how the context may change (Gravett & Van der Merwe 2023; Gravett, Levinge-Lang & Van der Merwe 2023; Van der Merwe 2022).
Small-group practice and reflection sessions coupled with cyclic lesson design are vital in helping pre-service teachers make sense of the lesson design approach. The sessions, which are facilitated by teacher educators who teach in the programme and that form part of the pre-service teachers’ fourth-year methods course, aim to assist pre-service teachers in acquiring the knowledge and skills to design lessons that foreground learning and that deliberately infuse the development of competencies for a fast-changing world. The sessions were designed to provide a dedicated space for final-year pre-service teachers to deliberately practice aspects of the lesson design approach. During these sessions, the pre-service teachers also engage in reflective discussions about the lessons they are designing, involving both the facilitator and their peers.
In the overarching research project, previous studies have investigated various aspects of the lesson design approach and the course in which it was initially piloted (Gravett & Van der Merwe 2023; Gravett et al. 2023; Merwe 2023; Van der Merwe 2022; Van der Merwe & Levinge-Lang 2023). These include understanding how pre-service teachers made sense of and implemented the lesson design approach (Gravett et al. 2023), exploring pre-service teachers’ views on the course’s effectiveness in preparing them for teaching (Van der Merwe 2022), analysing the lessons learned from emergency remote teaching to strengthen the fourth-year course on lesson design (Van der Merwe & Levigne-Lang 2023) and examining what and how pre-service teachers learned from the lesson design (Gravett & van der Merwe 2023).
Presently, there is limited research on the experiences of the teacher educators in facilitating the practice and reflection sessions alongside the cyclic lesson design. Furthermore, there is a gap in the teacher education literature regarding the experiences of teacher educators in facilitating the practice and reflection of pre-service teachers. To address this gap, the present study explored the experiences of the pre-service teacher educators who facilitated the small-group practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design in the 2023 academic year. The research was guided by the following question: What are teacher educators’ experiences in facilitating practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design?.
The next section reviews the literature on integrating practice and reflection in teacher education. This is followed by an overview of how the practice and reflection sessions were structured to support pre-service teachers in understanding the lesson design approach. Next, the methods used to generate and analyse data are discussed. Lastly, the study’s findings are presented and discussed.
Literature review
Deliberate practice in teacher education
When writing about practice in teacher education, many teacher education scholars often refer to deliberate practice (Bronkhorst et al. 2014; Darling-Hammond et al. 2017; Deans for Impact 2016; Dunn & Shriner 1999). But what does deliberate practice mean in the context of teacher education? According to Bronkhorst et al. (2014), deliberate practice involves sustained involvement in activities designed to enhance individual performance. This perspective aligns with the views of Dunn and Shriner (1999), Deans for Impact (2016), and Darling-Hammond et al. (2017), who argued that deliberate practice in teacher education is intentionally structured to foster individual improvement in particular teaching skills. This improvement results from repeated efforts in practice opportunities that demand effort, concentration and motivation. This progress is enhanced by receiving immediate and actionable feedback from a more knowledgeable other (Bronkhorst et al. 2014; Deans for Impact 2016; Dunn & Shriner 1999; McDonald et al. 2014).
Engaging in deliberate practice within teacher education has been associated with developing adaptive expertise. Adaptive expertise involves knowledge of why and under which conditions specific teaching methods are apt (Carbonell et al. 2014). According to Barnett and Koslowski (2002), adaptive expertise relies on having a conceptual understanding that enables individuals to apply their knowledge to unfamiliar situations. Willingham (2018) suggested that many in-service teachers struggle to recall what they learned in their pre-service teacher preparation programmes, possibly due to insufficient opportunities to practice specific skills. Ericsson and Charness (1999), as cited in Barnett and Koslowski (2002), asserted that the amount of deliberate practice an individual undergoes significantly influences the development of adaptive expertise. This was also the view of Carbonell et al. (2014:19), who argued that ‘variety in practice aids the creation of a flexible knowledge base and is thus related to adaptive expertise’. Anthony, Hunter and Hunter (2015) argued that practice activities that encourage students to experiment, make errors and try out different solutions benefit the creation of a flexible knowledge base associated with adaptive expertise. Similarly, Bronkhorst et al. (2011) argued that incorporating deliberate practice in teacher education could prepare pre-service teachers to adapt to the complexity of teaching. In the small-group practice and reflection sessions, which are a core component of the current study, pre-service teachers engage in deliberate practice of lesson design. During these sessions, they experiment with and test different design decisions (Anthony et al. 2015). This process helps them develop an understanding of why and under which conditions certain teaching decisions are appropriate, which is a cornerstone of adaptive expertise. Consequently, this approach lays the foundations for developing adaptive expertise.
Several key principles for incorporating deliberate practice in teacher education programmes have been outlined in the literature. Firstly, it involves engaging in activities that pose challenges exceeding the current abilities of novice student teachers (Deans for Impact 2016). Secondly, these activities should be specifically designed and focused on enhancing particular aspects of teaching (Deans for Impact 2016; Harris et al. 2019; McDonald et al. 2014; OECD 2018). Additionally, deliberate practice requires conscious effort from the novice student teacher (Deans for Impact 2016; Schneider & Stern 2010). High-quality feedback plays a crucial role in this process, requiring actionable feedback to facilitate improvement (Deans for Impact 2016; Dunn & Shriner 1999; Ericsson & Harwell 2019; McDonald et al. 2014; OECD 2018; Pellegrino 2017). Lastly, activities should enable individuals to self-monitor their performance, contributing to ongoing improvement (Deans for Impact 2016; Ericsson & Harwell 2019; McDonald et al. 2014; Pellegrino 2017; Schneider & Stern 2010). The small-group practice and reflection sessions, along with cyclic lesson design facilitated by teacher educators (highlighted in this study), are designed to adhere to the principles of incorporating deliberate practice in teacher education. As such, this approach becomes a strategic and effective method for preparing pre-service teacher education students for the complexities of teaching.
Reflection by pre-service student teachers
The significance of promoting reflective practice among pre-service teachers in teacher education programmes is widely acknowledged (Arslan 2019; Wetzel, De Arment & Reed 2015; Epler et al. 2013; Mulryan-Kyne 2021; Pedro 2005; Wetzel et al. 2015). According to Arslan (2019:111), reflective practice in pre-service teacher education programmes generally involves ‘a process of learning through and from experience’. Maguire (2022:4) defined reflection as ‘a way of making sense of events’, which could assist pre-service teachers in improving their practice. Similarly, scholars like Epler et al. (2013) and Wetzel et al. (2015) explained that reflection is a means of helping pre-service teachers learn from experience.
Numerous scholars have explored the application of reflective practice in teacher education to enhance pre-service teachers’ performance. Maguire (2022) suggested that encouraging pre-service teachers to engage in retrospective thinking about their experiences can benefit their learning. Wetzel et al. (2015:3) emphasised the significance of the ‘reflection prompt’ and the teacher educator’s choice of discourse style in guiding the reflection process for pre-service teachers. Arslan (2019) underscored the importance of guiding pre-service teachers in reflecting over time to enhance self-awareness and continually improve their teaching skills. Additionally, scholars like Epler et al. (2013) and Mulryan-Kyne (2021) argued for collaborative reflection, in which pre-service teachers participate in group discussions, fostering a ‘community of practice’ that enables them to engage in reflective tasks with their peers comfortably. The convergence of these insights underscores the importance of promoting a learning environment where pre-service teachers can engage in thoughtful reflection individually and collaboratively.
Using small-group practice and reflection sessions, coupled with cyclic lesson design to guide and support pre-service teachers in learning the lesson design approach
In the fourth-year course alluded to in the introduction of this article, pre-service teachers are required to design lessons cyclically following their engagement with university course materials. This approach is similar to microteaching lesson study (MLS), which underscores collaborative and cyclical lesson development (Fernandez 2010). In the first cycle (of the cyclic lesson design), pre-service teachers design the introduction phase of the lesson, followed by designing the lesson’s body (engaging with the new content phase) during the second cycle. They must also incorporate a revised introduction phase, informed by feedback from the same teacher educator facilitating their small-group practice and reflection sessions (discussed later). In the third cycle, pre-service teachers submit a revised version of the lesson’s introduction and body, again based on feedback from the facilitator of the small-group practice and reflection sessions. Additionally, they develop the consolidation phase of the lesson during this cycle. The fourth and final cycle involves revising all three phases to ensure alignment and submitting the final version of their lesson design. This final version is then reviewed by the teacher educators who facilitate the small-group practice and reflection sessions to assess the pre-service teachers’ understanding of the lesson design approach.
Throughout each design and refinement cycle, pre-service teachers receive feedback on their lessons from the same teacher educator facilitating their small-group practice and reflection sessions. These facilitators act as knowledgeable advisers, as described by Fernandez (2010). In the small-group practice and reflection sessions, typically consisting of 12–15 pre-service teachers, the facilitators delve into course concepts, allowing students to discuss their lesson designs with peers and the facilitator and share ideas. The teacher educators leading these sessions also offer guidance on areas where the pre-service teachers could enhance their lesson designs. The sessions allow for reflection and sharing of design decisions and deliberate practice of specific techniques covered in the course.
Research methods and design
This study adopted an interpretive research approach, aligning with the views put forward by Schwartz-Shea and Yanow (2012). Interpretive research focuses on meaning-making, specifically, understanding how participants in specific settings make sense of their worlds (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow 2012). In interpretive research, knowledge is understood to be socially constructed, acknowledging that participants may offer diverse interpretations of a specific phenomenon or event (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow 2012). Given the focus on exploring the experiences of teacher educators in facilitating practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design, an interpretive research approach was deemed most appropriate for this study.
Data were collected by conducting semi-structured interviews with six teacher educators. These teacher educators facilitated small-group practice and reflection sessions, as well as cyclic lesson design, during the 2023 academic year. Towards the end of the same academic year, a focus group interview was conducted with all six facilitators. The goal of these interviews was to understand the lived experiences of the facilitators as they conducted the practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design and to explore the meaning they derived from these experiences, as Seidman (2006) suggested. Each teacher educator worked with 12–15 pre-service teachers and facilitated 10 sessions throughout the year. The groups were created by placing pre-service teachers in groups at random, ensuring an unbiased distribution.
Data were analysed using the constant comparative method, as proposed by Maykut and Morehouse (1994) and Merriam and Tisdell (2016). The authors explain that the constant comparative method functions as its name implies, by continuously comparing data segments until themes emerge (Maykut & Morehouse 1994; Merriam & Tisdell 2016). Using this analysis method allowed to identify themes in participants’ interview responses and understand their experiences in facilitating small-group practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design.
The data analysis process involved transcribing each interview (semi-structured and focus group) verbatim in Microsoft Word. Subsequently, each transcript underwent a thorough reading to identify provisional categories. Once provisional categories were determined, coding was applied to each transcript. Coding involved highlighting text segments and assigning a code that captured the essence of the highlighted content. The next step involved sorting the codes into the provisionally identified categories, following the look and feel alike criteria proposed by Maykut and Morehouse (1994). In cases where codes did not align with provisional categories, new categories were developed. This process led to the merging and discarding of some initial categories. The method of continuously comparing categories made it possible to refine categories further. Ultimately, this iterative process made it possible to generate four themes, which serve as the study’s findings and are presented in the next section.
Reflexivity was employed to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings. This involved critically examining the author’s own sense-making and consciously acknowledging his assumptions and preconceptions during data generation and analysis. By doing so, the author avoided a ‘rush to diagnosis’ or ‘settling too quickly on a pattern’ (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow 2012:105). This process required ‘prolonged engagement with data sources’ and not just a ‘shallow reading of the data once, but a persistent and meticulous rereading of the data’ (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow 2012:108), aligning with the constant comparative method of data analysis.
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of Johannesburg, Faculty of Education Research Ethics Committee (No. Sem 2-2020-091). Participants gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. As part of obtaining informed consent, the ethics procedure was explained to participants before data collection began. They were informed that measures would be taken to protect their identities and that they could withdraw from the research at any time without any negative consequences.
Results
The data analysis process generated four themes that encapsulated the teacher educators’ experiences facilitating small-group practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design. The themes are presented in the sections that follow.
Theme 1: Teacher educators adapted practice and reflection sessions to address student engagement challenges
The process of analysing the data showed that the teacher educators managed to create an environment where most pre-service teachers were engaging during the practice and reflection sessions. This is illustrated in the following excerpts from the interviews:
‘It was very engaging. Students were able to share their ideas. They were contributing. They were engaging in the sessions that we had.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘The engagement was good. I need to give them big ups for that because the engagement from my side, like in my group, was very high. They were bouncing ideas off of each other, which made it exciting to be in every session.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Focus group interview, October 2023)
However, the data also revealed that pre-service teachers sometimes did not engage in the practice and reflection sessions. Some students tended to attend but remained passive, choosing to ‘hide’ behind their more eager peers. This is demonstrated by the quotes extracted from the interview transcripts:
‘There were some students hiding behind other people’s thoughts.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘There are some pre-service teachers who just don’t want to engage, almost like they just want to exclude themselves from the whole group.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘Some students won’t come prepared to the sessions, and you won’t know what to do with them, and you would constantly have the same students who are answering and asking questions.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘Some of them are still struggling to apply the principles in line with the activities that they have. And I think that is because of the lack of engagement during the sessions.’(Teacher Educator 3, Focus group interview, October 2023)
As some pre-service teachers hesitated to engage in the practice and reflection sessions, teacher educators experimented with various strategies to boost engagement. The following excerpts from the raw data highlight this finding:
‘I made sure that the students were engaging by giving everyone a chance to share what they think or to share their ideas. So everyone got a chance, everyone had to speak.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I would structure different questions and activities that include open-ended questions to get them to engage in discussions. I would encourage them to add to what their peer has said, and then they would add to it.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I used little name blocks to learn the student’s names, and I found that this was very helpful in increasing their engagement. But that also made cold calling very specific, and that really helped me to get the conversation going if students were reluctant to answer questions or give their comments.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Focus group interview, October 2023)
‘How I facilitated the engagement was just to allow students to take control of decisions, discuss what they are planning or share ideas with one another and then I just came in if I thought it was necessary.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
Theme 2: Teacher educators used various strategies during practice and reflection sessions to support pre-service teachers in understanding the lesson design approach
As mentioned earlier, the primary goal of the practice and reflection sessions was to help pre-service teachers understand the lesson design approach. The findings suggest that teacher educators employed diverse strategies to aid pre-service teachers in comprehending the lesson design approach. The findings revealed that teacher educators encouraged individual reflection among pre-service teachers on the lessons they were designing in cycles, as indicated by the following quotes from the interviews:
‘We would start by breaking the ice and then reflect on our previous session and reflect on what they changed and why they made the changes. After reflecting on the previous sessions, then we would start.’ (Teacher Educator 2, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘When you are facilitating students’ reflection, you have to allow them to share what they think first, and then from there, you can advise them, especially if you want them to add something or if you want them to change something. But don’t just tell them you need to change this and this. Try to engage them in a way that they will see that “No actually maybe if I do this … I can incorporate this …”, it would be like they are the ones who come up with the ideas.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘My job as a facilitator is to get them to reflect and to identify gaps in their understanding, and then help them to fill in those knowledge gaps.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
Apart from promoting individual reflection, the teacher educators also fostered peer and collaborative reflection. The following quotes exemplify this finding:
‘What we would do is I would go around, and I would ask, “What do you plan on doing?” Then I would ask somebody else, “What do you think about your friend or his idea? Do you think it would work? Why do you not think so? What would you suggest he does?”. So I try instead of me talking too much, I tried to get them to give each other ideas. I tried to get them to speak about what they plan to do, what they have done to reflect on the feedback that I gave them, and ask each other questions.’ (Teacher Educator 1, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘The way they were interacting with each other showed they were also learning from their peers.’(Teacher Educator 2, Individual interview, October 2023)
The findings revealed that teacher educators employed an additional strategy in the practice and reflection sessions to assist pre-service teachers in grasping the lesson design approach. This involved modelling various aspects of the lesson design approach during the sessions. The support for this can be observed in the following quotes from the interviews:
‘I think during the sessions it is important to lead by example and to intentionally include the [science of learning] principles within your own planning for the sessions and then at the end of the session, perhaps asking students some reflective questions and asking them to think back to the last 50 minutes and to try and identify how you as the facilitator had included some of the principles, and then to discuss ways in which it could be adapted to foundation phase learners.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘Whenever I was able to model a principle, I would have a reflective discussion towards the end of the session where I would ask students if they saw evidence of the principle in my facilitation of the session, and I had a conversation with them based on this. So I do think that I modelled, but I made it explicit to them and drew their attention to how I used the principle.’(Teacher Educator 5, Focus group interview, October 2023)
‘In terms of engagement, I would do cold calling. I emphasised to the students that I was doing that on purpose.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
The teacher educators emphasised the importance of creating a safe and comfortable environment during the sessions to enhance learning. According to the findings, they aimed to provide a space in which pre-service teachers felt at ease, enabling them to share their ideas and reflect on their lessons freely. This is evident in the following interview excerpts:
‘If they are more comfortable, then there will be more engagement.’ (Teacher Educator 2, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘They were more comfortable to engage towards the latter part of the sessions, and I think this is because they realised that the sessions were a safe space and that they were free to answer, to ask any question, even if they might within themselves feel embarrassed to ask the question.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘A priority for me to create that safe environment because I think we do see that some of the students are reserved and shy to engage.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Individual interview, October 2023)
Theme 3: Providing comprehensive, clear and constructive feedback for the cyclical lesson design is crucial for students’ learning, albeit time-consuming
The results revealed that teacher educators recognise the significance of providing thorough, clear and constructive feedback on pre-service teachers’ lesson designs, acknowledging its critical role in the learning process for pre-service teachers. Nevertheless, the teacher educators also noted that this task is exceptionally time-consuming. Support for this finding can be found in the following excerpts from the semi-structured interviews:
‘[Marking] takes time, especially because you have to give detailed feedback. Having to go through, you know, all four columns, making sure that there’s alignment, it takes a long time.’ (Teacher Educator 1, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I tried to be detailed with my feedback to really get them to understand that “This is a closed question, it is not an open-ended question. It’s closed and this is how you can rephrase it”. So I think it played a significant role in allowing them to see what they’ve improved on and what they can still improve on.’ (Teacher Educator 1, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘Most of the students went through the feedback that they got, and it was not like they were making those changes for the sake of making them. They made sure, like they showed me, that they understood the feedback that they got, and they understood that they had to change this part or add this or remove that. So they took the feedback as constructive.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘The feedback assists students with the lesson design because when they are designing their lessons, you’d find that in most cases they miss small details. So when they get feedback it assists them with identifying the aspects that they need to improve on when they are designing their lesson.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘It becomes a lot because you have to provide very, very in depth feedback, and personally, I am very slow when I mark, so one lesson will take like 30 minutes or even more. So it was a lot because we also have other work to do while you’re supposed to be marking.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
Theme 4: Designing a lesson in cycles enabled teacher educators to observe gradual improvement in pre-service teachers’ lessons; however, there were some challenges
Analysing the data revealed evidence that teacher educators observed gradual improvement in the ability of pre-service teachers to design lessons that prioritise learning. This is achieved by incorporating principles derived from the science of learning and intentionally infusing the development of competencies for a fast-changing world. This finding is encapsulated in the following excerpts from the interviews:
‘They improved so much when it comes to asking open-ended questions, infusing the principles and the competencies.’ (Teacher Educator 1, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘A lot of them learned a lot, looking at their progress and looking at every time they submit. I believe they learnt how to be teachers that infuse a lot of important aspects like infusing play, infusing creativity, creating a safe environment for learners. They were able to apply most of the content that was taught during lectures into their lessons.’ (Teacher Educator 2, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I could see some improvement. They improved in terms of the competencies in terms of how they infused them, the principles in terms of how they invoked them. So I think there was improvement.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘The majority of students that I was working with progressed quite nicely, and perhaps between the 1st and the 2nd iteration that they submitted, the progress wasn’t evident. But in the third iteration, they really, I want to say, almost grasped it much better. You could see between iterations how the light bulb came on for some students and how, after maybe one or two sessions of me providing them feedback they learned how to use the feedback or how to effectively show the changes that they had made. So overall, I think the progression was evident in the assessment, and it is enjoyable to mark and to see the students achieving better every time and to see their growth.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘This year, the learning was exponential. If I could put it in a graph, it would increase for the group, because with this group, I felt like there was a lot of growth in terms of the lesson design.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
The results indicated that teacher educators credited the learning of pre-service teachers to the practice of designing lessons in cycles, resulting in incremental improvement. Supporting evidence for this can be found in the following quotes:
‘It was good for them to see the improvements. I mean also the things that they’ve done wrong. So, from the first iteration to the second one, they could see, “OK. So I can do better in my introduction. Oh, I’ve actually done this well, so maybe I can carry it on to the engagement phase.” I think it was good for them to see their progress.’ (Teacher Educator 1, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I think throughout the practice and reflection sessions and feedback and comments that they receive on the iterative lesson designs that they are able to express themselves much better with regards to the principles and competencies, because I think one of the things that they struggle with is to make it explicit within their lesson planning.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I think there was significant improvement that I noticed over the four cycles.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Focus Group interview, October 2023)
‘There was a level of progression in how the students designed their lessons. The students became more knowledgeable.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Focus Group interview, October 2023)
The results revealed that while there was a gradual improvement in the student teacher’s ability to design lessons that foreground learning and intentionally incorporate competencies for a fast-changing world, some encountered difficulties applying what they had learned during practice and reflection sessions to their lesson designs. This challenge may arise from the likelihood of these students completing the lesson design at the last minute. The following quotes serve as examples:
‘They were giving me these great examples, and there were other students that were adding onto that. And then it was just a lively discussion. And then only to find out that when they sit down by themselves and they design their lesson that there are gaps, and then it kind of begs the question, “But you were engaging so well in the PR session so what actually happened? Is it because you did it at the last minute?”.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘They are completing the lesson maybe a day before or two days before they have to submit it. So they are rushing and they don’t know how to apply the feedback given during the sessions anymore. You know the feedback that we provide, I feel like it’s detailed, it’s in depth.’ (Teacher Educator 4, Focus Group interview, October 2023)
‘I do think that regardless of the encouragement and the warnings, the students do start the day before, and then all these lovely discussions are not remembered because they’re under such time pressure. So even if you take a lot of time to make detailed comments, they struggle to apply the comments.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Focus Group interview, October 2023)
Another factor contributing to the challenges faced by some pre-service teachers in applying the insights gained from practice and reflection sessions to their iterative lesson designs was their inconsistent attendance. This inconsistency led to missing crucial learnings, and its impact was evident in the lessons they were designing. This finding is reflected in the following excerpts from the data:
‘I had a student that didn’t attend the sessions, and then when their marks came, they were not happy, but I addressed everything in the session that we had.’ (Teacher Educator 3, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘I think attendance fluctuates quite a lot, so that obviously influences the engagement. If they’re not there, they can’t engage and ask a question in real time about something that is unclear to them, which then affects the iterative lesson designs that they submit because I might unpack something specific regarding the upcoming iterative lesson design that is due and they have missed the discussion on that. So missed content is crucial or is a very big contributor to students struggling.’ (Teacher Educator 5, Individual interview, October 2023)
‘Even if we try to make the sessions as engaging and as interesting as we can, I don’t know, some still don’t see a need to attend. Hence they don’t come or they just come inconsistently, they are here this week, they are not there next week and so on.’ (Teacher Educator 6, Individual interview, October 2023)
Discussion
This study explored teacher educators’ experiences in facilitating practice and reflection sessions alongside cyclic lesson design. The findings revealed that teacher educators employed various strategies during the small-group practice and reflection sessions to support pre-service teachers in understanding the lesson design approach. Firstly, teacher educators prompted pre-service teachers to reflect on their lessons individually and in groups, fostering peer reflection and the exchange of ideas. Pre-service teachers were encouraged to reflect on their design decisions and to consider the feedback they received from the teacher educator and their peers. By guiding pre-service teachers in reflecting on their lesson design decisions, the students actively participated in reflection-for-action and reflection-on-action (Schon 1983, 1987), thinking about what would work best and why. According to Maynes and Julien-Shultz (2011), reflection is crucial in developing pre-service teachers’ understanding of lesson design and various aspects of teaching. According to Averill et al. (2016:488), engaging pre-service teachers in individual reflection is essential for ‘learning about teaching’. Similarly, Wetzel et al. (2015) emphasised the importance of individual reflection on practices, such as lesson design, for the positive development of adaptive expertise.
Epler et al. (2013:49) noted that while individual reflection is meaningful, collaborative reflection can sometimes promote deeper reflection. When pre-service teachers reflect collaboratively with their peers, it allows them to construct meaning based on their experiences in a situated context. Mulryan-Kyne (2021) also supported this view, arguing that group reflection often leads to deeper learning for pre-service teachers. Therefore, it is a promising finding that teacher educators engaged pre-service teachers in individual and group reflection.
Secondly to guiding pre-service teachers through individual and group reflective exercises, teacher educators explicitly modelled various aspects of the lesson design approach during the practice and reflection sessions. According to Loughran and Berry (2003), modelling of practice should involve teacher educators doing what they expect student teachers to do in their practice. Furthermore, Loughran and Berry (2003) suggested that this modelling should include teacher educators explicitly articulating their pedagogical reasoning for the specific decisions they make in their practice. The study’s findings showed that, in the practice and reflection sessions, teacher educators intentionally invoked principles from the science of learning in how they facilitated the sessions. Throughout these sessions, they communicated to pre-service teachers both how and why they were incorporating these principles into their approach. Intentionally modelling key aspects of the lesson design approach in the design and implementation of small-group practice and reflection sessions offers significant benefits. It serves as a springboard for meaningful discussions, allowing pre-service teachers to understand how to apply these aspects in their practice. Additionally, it provides them with concrete examples of how specific techniques and strategies can be incorporated into lesson design. This finding supports Boyd’s (2014) argument that modelling in teacher education encourages pre-service teachers to reflect on the practices demonstrated by the teacher educator. It also prompts them to consider and discuss how they might apply or adapt these practices in their own teaching.
The results indicated a gradual improvement in pre-service teachers’ lesson designs. The small-group sessions provided a dedicated space for practicing the lesson design approach, incorporating the intentional practice of specific techniques. For instance, pre-service teachers practiced open-ended questioning, aligning with Fernandez’s (2010) findings on MLS. This cyclic lesson development, combined with reflection and discussions, aligns with Bronkhorst et al.’s (2011) assertion that deliberate practice and reflection lead to richer and more integrated learning. Another finding from this study, which aligns with Bronkhorst et al.’s (2011) assertion, is the challenges some student teachers faced in applying what was discussed during the small-group practice and reflection sessions to their lesson designs. The teacher educators who facilitated these sessions observed that some students struggled to apply the discussed concepts to their lesson designs. Reasons cited included non-attendance of the small-group sessions and completing the lesson designs at the last minute.
This implies that pre-service teachers who missed some sessions lost opportunities to deliberately practice aspects of the lesson design approach and engage in individual and peer reflection guided by the facilitator. This could explain why some pre-service teachers struggled to apply what was discussed in the small-group sessions. Additionally, the finding that some pre-service teachers left the completion of their lesson designs to the last minute suggests that they struggled to apply what was learned during the small-group sessions. The term ‘design’ itself refers to ‘deliberate, purposive planning involving reasoned choices, and the ability to provide a rationale for the choices’ (Gravett et al. 2023:66). Therefore, lesson design is not something that can be done at the last minute.
From the teacher educators’ perspective, these sessions offered valuable opportunities to observe, guide and support pre-service teachers’ growth in designing lessons. The cyclic lesson design, along with practice and reflection sessions, exemplifies deliberate practice advocated in teacher education programmes by various authors (Bronkhorst et al. 2011; Darling-Hammond et al. 2017; Deans for Impact 2016). Deliberate practice, defined as prolonged engagement designed to enhance individual performance (Bronkhorst et al. 2014), played a crucial role in deepening pre-service teachers’ understanding of the lesson design approach.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this study underscores the importance of integrating deliberate practice into teacher education programmes to enhance pre-service teachers’ understanding of lesson design. By providing opportunities for cyclic lesson design, coupled with practice, reflection and meaningful feedback, teacher education programmes can facilitate deeper, transferable learning. This approach helps pre-service teachers develop the foundations of adaptive expertise, which is crucial for their future teaching careers. The study contributes to the scholarship on pre-service teacher preparation by demonstrating the effectiveness of this approach. It suggests that teacher education programmes should consider adopting similar methods to equip pre-service teachers with the skills and knowledge necessary for adaptive expertise. By doing so, these programmes can better prepare future teachers for the complexities of teaching in a fast-changing world.
Acknowledgements
Competing interests
The author declares that no financial or personal relationships inappropriately influenced the writing of this article.
Author’s contributions
D.v.d.M. the sole author of this research article.
Funding information
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Data availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the author.
References
Anthony, G., Hunter, J. & Hunter, R., 2015, ‘Prospective teachers development of adaptive expertise’, Teaching and Teacher Education 49, 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.03.010
Arslan, F.Y., 2019, ‘Reflection in pre-service teacher education: Exploring the nature of four EFL pre-service teachers’ reflections’, Reflective Practice 20(1), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2018.1564652
Averill, R., Drake, M., Anderson, D. & Anthony, G., 2016, ‘The use of questions within in-the-moment coaching in initial mathematics teacher education: Enhancing participation, reflection, and co-construction in rehearsals of practice’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 44(5), 486–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2016.1169503
Barnett, S. & Koslowski, B., 2002, ‘Adaptive expertise: Effects of type of experience and the level of theoretical understanding it generates’, Thinking and Reasoning 8(4), 237–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780244000088
Boyd, P., 2014, ‘Using “modelling” to improve the coherence of initial teacher education’, in P. Boyd, A. Szplit & Z. Zbrog (eds.), Teacher educators and teachers as learners, University of Cumbria, pp. 51–73, Lancaster.
Bronkhorst, L.H., Meijer, P., Koster B. & Vermunt, J.D., 2011, ‘Fostering meaning-oriented learning and deliberate practice in teacher education’, Teaching and Teacher Education 27(7), 1120–1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.05.008
Bronkhorst, L.H., Meijer, P., Koster B. & Vermunt, J.D., 2014, ‘Deliberate practice in teacher education’, European Journal of Teacher Education 37(1), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2013.825242
Cameron, L. & Campbell, C., 2013, ‘The case for using learning designs with pre-service teachers’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education 38(6), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n6.1
Carbonell, K.B., Stalmeijer, R.E., Könings, K.D., Segers, M. & Van Merriënboer, J.J.G., 2014, ‘How experts deal with novel situations: A review of adaptive expertise’, Educational Research Review 12, 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2014.03.001
Darling-Hammond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F. & Shulman, L., 2017, ‘The design of teacher education programs’, in L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do, pp. 390–441, Wiley, San Francisco.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Oakes, J., 2019, Preparing teachers for deeper learning, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge.
Deans for Impact, 2016, Practice with purpose: The emerging science of teacher expertise, Deans for Impact, Austin, TX.
Dunn, T.G. & Shriner, C., 1999, ‘Deliberate practice in teaching: What teachers do for self-improvement’, Teaching and Teacher Education 15(6), 631–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00068-7
Epler, C.M., Drape, T.A., Broyles, T.W. & Rudd, R.D., 2013, ‘The influence of collaborative reflection and think- aloud protocols on pre-service teachers’ reflection: A mixed methods approach’, Journal of Agricultural Education 54(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.01047
Ericsson, K.A. & Charness, N., 1999, ‘Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition’, in S.J. Cesi, W.M. Williams & M.A. Malden (eds.), The nature-nurture debate: The essential readings, Blackwell Publishers, Inc, pp. 725–747, Washington.
Ericsson, K.A. & Harwell, K.W., 2019, ‘Deliberate practice and proposed limits on the effects of practice on the acquisition of expert performance: Why the original definition matters and recommendations for future research’, Frontiers in Psychology 10, 2396. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02396
Fadel, C., Bialik, M. & Trilling, B., 2015, Four-dimensional education. The competencies learners need to succeed, Center for Curriculum Redesign, Paris.
Fernandez, M.L., 2010, ‘Investigating how and what prospective teachers learn through microteaching lesson study’, Teaching and Teacher Education 26(2), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.012
Gravett, S. & Eadie, S., 2020, ‘The sandbox project: Developing competencies for a changing world in South African schools’, in C. McNaught & S. Gravett (eds.), Embedding social justice in teacher education and development in Africa, Routledge, New York, NY.
Gravett, S., Levinge-Lang, R. & Van der Merwe, D., 2023, ‘Lesson design in preservice teacher education drawing on a science of learning perspective’, in S. Gravett & N. Petersen (eds.), Future-proofing teacher education: Voices from South Africa and beyond, pp. 63–77, Routledge, London.
Gravett, S. & Van der Merwe, D., 2023, ‘Learning-centered lesson design and learning about teaching in a pre-service teacher education course’, Cogent Education 10(1), 2202123. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2202123
Harris, C.J., Krajcik, J.S., Pellegrino, J.W. & DeBarger, A.H., 2019, ‘Designing knowledge-in-use assessments to promote deeper learning’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 38(2), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12253
Kroon, R. & Gravett, S., 2022, ‘A framework for initial teacher education in an uncertain and fast-changing world’, in S. Gravett & N. Petersen (eds.), Future-proofing teacher education: Voices from South Africa and beyond, pp. 3–16, Routledge, London.
Li, W. & Zou, W., 2017, ‘A study of EFL teacher expertise in lesson planning’, Teaching and Teacher Education 66, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.04.009
Loughran, J. & Berry, A., 2003, ‘Modelling by teacher educators’, in paper presented at the ‘Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association’, Monash University, Chicago, IL, 21–25th April.
Maguire, K.R., 2022, ‘Pre-service teachers’ reflections on content knowledge through microteaching’, Reflective Practice 24(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2022.2146082
Maykut, P. & Morehouse, M., 1994, Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide, The Falmer Press, London.
Maynes, N. & Julien-Schultz, L., 2011, ‘The impact of visual frameworks on teacher candidates’ professional reflection’, in L. Butler-Kisber, M. Stewart & D. Mitchell (eds.), Learning landscapes: Mind, brain, and education: Implications for educators, pp. 193–210, Learn, Quebec.
McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., Kelley-Petersen, M., Mikolasy, K., Thompson, J., Valencia, S.W. et al., 2014, ‘Practice makes practice: Learning to teach in teacher education’, Peabody Journal of Education 89(4), 500–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2014.938997
Merriam, S.B. & Tisdell, E.J., 2016, Qualitative research. A guide to design and implementation, 4th edn., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Mulryan-Kyne, C., 2021, ‘Supporting reflection and reflective practice in an initial teacher education programme: An exploratory study’, European Journal of Teacher Education 44(4), 502–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1793946
OECD, 2017, Future of education and skills 2030: Reflections on transformative competencies 2030, OECD, Paris.
OECD, 2018, Future of education and skills 2030: Conceptual learning framework: A literature summary for research on the transfer of learning, OECD Conference Centre, Paris.
Pedro, J.Y., 2005, ‘Reflection in teacher education: Exploring pre-service teachers’ meanings of reflective practice’, Reflective Practice 6(1), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1462394042000326860
Pellegrino, J.W., 2017, ‘Teaching, learning and assessing 21st century skills’, in S. Guerriero (ed.), Pedagogical knowledge and the changing nature of the teaching profession, pp. 223–248, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Schneider, M. & Stern, E., 2010, ‘The cognitive perspective on learning: Ten cornerstone findings’, in H. Dumont, D. Istance & F. Benavides (eds.), The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice, pp. 69–90, OECD Publications, Paris.
Schon, D., 1983, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action, Basic Books, New York.
Schon, D., 1987, Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the professions, Jossey Bass, San Francisco.
Schwartz-Shea, P. & Yanow, D., 2012, Interpretive research design: Concepts and processes, Routledge, New York.
Seidman, I., 2006, Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences, 3rd edn., Teachers College Press, New York.
Superfine, A.C., 2008, ‘Planning for mathematics instruction: A model of experienced teachers’ planning processes in the context of a reform mathematics curriculum’, The Mathematics Educator 18(2), 11–22.
Sural, S., 2019, ‘An examination of pre-service teachers’ competencies in lesson planning’, Journal of Education and Training Studies 7(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i3.3902
Van der Merwe, D., 2022, ‘Preparing pre-service teachers to guide and support learning in South African schools’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v12i1.1163
Van der Merwe, D. & Levinge-Lang, R., 2023, ‘The lessons learnt from emergency remote teaching to strengthen a course on lesson design’, Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice 20(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.3.03
Wetzel, A.P., De Arment, S.T. & Reed, E., 2015, ‘Building teacher candidates’ adaptive expertise: Engaging experienced teachers in prompting reflection’, Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives 16(4), 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1064380
Willingham, D.T., 2018, ‘Unlocking the science of how kids think: A new proposal for reforming teacher education’, Education Next 18(3), 42–49.
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
