2. Some Common Approaches to Initial Teacher Education

There are many different modes of teacher education and several ways of developing typologies. For the purposes of this paper a simple ideal-typical schema has been developed⁵ that differentiates four main pathways to becoming a qualified teacher. These are encapsulated as:

1. Full-time certificate/diploma/undergraduate college-based training in purpose-built institutions usually lasting for 3 to 4 years

2. Full-time postgraduate training in higher education institutions subsequent to the acquisition of a degree level award

3. Apprenticeship models based on service in school with in-service support leading to certification as a qualified teacher.

4. Direct entry as teachers without training who are subsequently certified

⁵ This schema is most applicable to Anglophone countries; Franco-phone and Lusophone countries have different patterns

Table 1 offers some familiar distinguishing features of each approach in terms of duration, entry, curriculum, teaching practice, teaching methods, certification and probable costs per student.

Table 1: An Ideal Typical Typology of Initial Teacher Education Programmes

This simplified typology cannot reflect the many detailed variations on the characteristics identified for each Type. Thus it is not uncommon for Type 1 programmes to have different characteristics depending on the level of entry. It is also the case that in some systems students graduate from certificate, through diploma to degree programmes over an extended period interspersed with teaching in schools. Degree level B.Ed programmes may or may not have additional Honours years dependent on completion of the basic qualification. University-based B.Eds may have different entry criteria and curricula to college-based programmes. Curricula may treat academic and subject-based courses concurrently in each year or more sequentially with a shifting emphasis as the course proceeds. Type 2 courses probably have less variation. Nevertheless their duration is not standard, the mix of curricula requirements varies widely especially in relation to teaching practice, and they may be offered part-time and non-residentially.

Type 3 arrangements can be found de facto or de jure in a substantial number of countries. It is not uncommon for large proportions of those accepted for initial training to have experience as untrained teachers. They may also have taken part in in-service programmes and will have received more or less systematic induction into teaching from those with whom they work. This is important. It means that those who enter initial training may already be familiar with the classroom environment, and schools as organisations. It is also likely to be true that they have acquired teaching styles, pedagogic dispositions, and beliefs about pupils' learning and the nature of the subjects they teach which reflect those commonly held by their teacher colleagues. These may or may not resonate with the teacher education curriculum and its realisation. What has been learned may need to be (at least partially) unlearned or developed in different ways than might be the case with inexperienced school leavers. It certainly has implications for the nature, value and extent of periods of school practice in professional training. These issues are obviously relevant to Type 3 training and are also germane for Type 1 and 2 programmes where a significant proportion of the entry have prior school experience.

Type 4 patterns are those closest to apprenticeship. Graduates, or those with sub-degree qualifications are allowed to enter teaching by virtue of their final academic qualification. In some cases this is sufficient to teach indefinitely; in others a probationary period has to be completed successfully. The possibilities are very wide. Induction may be systematically supported and monitored or may depend on informal arrangements with minimal reporting. Prior experience may or may not be recognised. Higher levels of qualification may be accepted in lieu of training. Sufficiently long service may result in recognition as a qualified teacher.

Another important feature of initial teacher qualification systems, which carries cost and resource implications which cannot be simply captured in the typology, concerns the rubrics which define different levels of qualification. These are usually linked to conditions of service and salary scales determined by public service commissions or similar bodies. This is a complex area. Teachers' salaries are often determined by the highest level of academic qualification and the level of training certificates. Entry onto one scale or another influences earnings over long periods independent of performance. Once on a scale, seniority is generally the basis for increments. This means that the point of entry is of great significance. It can and does create pressures for would-be teachers to pursue the highest levels of academic qualification and training before career entry, or to focus on up-grading after experience. It can mean fully qualified and trained teachers have experienced between 5 and 10 years of formal education and training beyond the school leaving age. In countries where primary and secondary school teachers are on different salary scales independent of academic qualification and training, it may mean that disproportionate numbers of those who are primary trained rapidly gravitate to secondary school posts.

A further observation is of interest. It has become fashionable in some countries with a long history of college-based teacher education to argue the merits of an increased emphasis on school-based training. In England this has resulted in mandatory guidelines that require partnerships between training institutions and schools and the allocation of substantial amounts of training resources to participating schools. In exchange for resources that may exceed those allocated to the training institution, schools play a central role in the initial training curriculum.

In many developing countries school-based training is in reality the default method of training. As noted above, trainees have often cut their teeth as untrained teachers. Their largely informal training takes place as an unstructured and unrecognised apprenticeship. Some countries deliberately provide school experience through on-the-job training before admission to training programmes (e.g. Trinidad). These programmes can be used to filter and select trainees.

Proponents of more school-based training strategies argue the advantages of initial training close to the chalk face focused on basic skills and competencies modelled by practitioners close to the realities of effective learning and teaching. They contest the ability of conventional college-based training to provide relevant and contextualised professional learning. Depending on how school-based training is costed this may have some economic attractions. Trainee teachers contribute teaching time to schools at low cost, teacher mentors may be cheaper per unit of tutoring than college staff, and if trainee teachers are more competent at the point of initial qualification than would otherwise be the case, cost-effectiveness will be increased.

A brief historical digression may be of interest to some readers as it illustrates that recent fashions in education usually have their precursors in previous practice. Various forms of school-based teacher training have a long history. In the 1930s a lively debate took place between the proponents of the system used at the Institute of Education, London, and that used at Oxford (Dixon 1986:14). At the London Institute teaching practice involved a preliminary 3-4 week period in schools:

As a means of turning back, before it is too late, young people who seem plainly unfitted to the teaching profession and ought not to prepare for it at public expense.

Subsequently students spent two days a week in school and the remainder of their time at the Institute (they thus did not undertake block teaching practice). Tutors were paid to supervise students in school and also gave tutorials in the Institute, for which they were paid about one-third of a lecturer's salary.

This approach had many of the elements of school-focused training intended to link college and school-based experience in a continuous dialogue. It was contrasted with the orthodoxy of block practice which the University of Oxford used. At a meeting of the university departments of education and the Headmistresses' Association the issues were debated in 1938. London defended its system, which required students to spend at least 60 days in school on teaching practice, extending over the school, not the university, term. The advantages were said to be that theory and practice could be welded together and methods tutors were specifically invited to ensure their lectures addressed problems of presentation, classroom management and teaching craft skills. In contrast Oxford representatives argued that block practice gave students early responsibility for learning, and integrated student-teachers into school life where they could develop skills systematically. The conservatism that this implied - students would adopt existing practice rather than experiment with new ones - was criticised by London tutors. Subsequently, Oxford adopted school-based internship models as did many other institutions in the UK, sometimes apparently reinventing practice with a long history (McIntyre 1990).

The historical record also reminds us that the major elements of the teacher education curriculum are long standing. The London Institute's Teaching Diploma examination in the 1930s required successful performance in:

- Principles of Education, Methods of Teaching,
- Elementary Psychology and Hygiene, The English Education System
- One of: History of Education, Comparative Education, Further Educational Psychology.

Successful practice teaching in a school was the final requirement. Term essays were included in the assessment along with the closed book written examination papers for the Diploma. Further Educational Psychology included a course in vocational testing and guidance for an extra fee (!). In this system students had personal tutors who conducted weekly seminars and arranged demonstration lessons. They also advised on personal matters not otherwise referred to the Warden or the Advisor to Oversea (sic) Students. A "Colonial Course" was run as a variant on the Diploma for those preparing for teaching or educational administration in the colonies which included core courses from the Diploma and special inputs in comparative education and the teaching of English to "non-Western" peoples.

Much could be said about the attractions, disadvantages and necessary antecedents for effective school-based training. Not least, it is plausible that the advantages are more than counter-balanced by possible problems. These include difficulties arising from locating a sufficient number of partnership schools where good practice is abundant, mentor teachers are willing and available to train new teachers, and where the costs of adequate infrastructure support (e.g. advisory visits, training of mentors, monitoring of standards and assessment of competencies) are not excessive. It was implied earlier that many of the normative conventions of teacher training can trace their origins back to once rational practices elsewhere - the familiar curriculum of the London Institute in the 1930s is an admittedly fragile illustration of the extent to which this might be the case.

In summary, this section has drawn attention to the range of common patterns of initial teacher qualification. It has highlighted some important features that may be significant in responding to new needs and the changing qualities of trainees in many developing country training systems. Specifically attention is drawn to the fact that many trainees have experience of learning and teaching on entry to training programmes. It is likely that these students will have established patterns of working and grounded (if possibly naive) theories of learning and teaching, which may or may not match with the presumptions of training curricula. Issues, which relate to the content and length of training, are also flagged. Normative practices and bureaucratic regulation seem to have been at least as important as considerations of professional competence in making decisions on the teacher education curriculum and its length. Lastly it is suggested, using school-based training as an illustration, that many proposed innovations in initial education may have antecedents which invite further analysis, especially if the norms which currently exist in many countries derive directly or indirectly from them through processes of historical (colonial) transfer or through contemporary diffusion by the diaspora of teacher educators.