Working with Student Teachers: A Mixed Methods Study to Examine the Roles and Self-Identified Dispositions of Cooperating Teachers

A critical component of teacher education is the field experience during which candidates practice under the supervision of experienced teachers. Programs use the InTASC Standards to define the requisite knowledge, skills, and dispositions for teaching. Practicing teachers are familiar with the concepts of knowledge and skills, but they are less familiar with dispositions. Practicing teachers who mentor prospective teachers are underrepresented in the literature, but they are critical to teacher preparation. The research goals were to describe the self-identified dispositions of cooperating teachers, identify what cooperating teachers consider their role in preparing prospective teachers, and explain challenges that cooperating teachers face. Using a mixed methods design, I conducted a quantitative survey followed by a qualitative case study. When I compared survey and case study data, cooperating teachers report possessing InTASC critical dispositions described in Standard 2: Learning Differences, Standard 3: Learning Environments, and Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, but not Standard 6: Assessment and Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration. Cooperating teachers assume the roles of modeler, mentor and advisor, and informal evaluator. They explain student teachers often lack skills and dispositions to assume full teaching responsibilities and recommend that universities better prepare candidates for classrooms. Cooperating teachers felt university evaluations were not relevant to teaching reality. I recommend modifying field experiences to increase the quantity and duration of classroom placements. I suggest further research to detail cooperating teacher dispositions, compare cooperating teachers who work with different universities, and determine if cooperating teacher dispositions influence student teacher dispositions.

REDUCING TEACHER ATTRITION: THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF BUILDING PRINCIPALS IN A LARGE URBAN DISTRICT TO SUPPORT TEACHER RETENTION

The high rate of teacher attrition in urban schools is well documented. While this does not seem like a problem in Carter County, this equates to hundreds of teachers that need to be replaced annually. Since school year (SY) 2007-08, Carter County has lost over 7,100 teachers, approximately half of (50.1%) of whom resigned, often going to neighboring, higher-paying jurisdictions as suggested by exit survey data (SY2016-2020 Strategic Plan). Included in this study is a range of practices principals use to retain teachers. While the role of the principal is recognized as a critical element in teacher retention, few studies explore the specific practices principals implement to retain teachers and how they use their time to accomplish this task. Through interviews, observations, document analysis and reflective notes, the study identifies the practices four elementary school principals of high and relatively low attrition schools use to support teacher retention. In doing so, the study uses a qualitative cross-case analysis approach. The researcher examined the following leadership practices of the principal and their impact on teacher retention: (a) providing leadership, (b) supporting new teachers, (c) training and mentoring teaching staff, (d) creating opportunities for collaboration, (d) creating a positive school climate, and (e) promoting teacher autonomy. The following research questions served as a foundational guide for the development and implementation of this study: 1. How do principals prioritize addressing teacher attrition or retention relative to all of their other responsibilities? How do they allocate their time to this challenge? 2. What do principals in schools with low attrition rates do to promote retention that principals in high attrition schools do not? What specific practices or interventions are principals in these two types of schools utilizing to retain teachers? Is there evidence to support their use of the practices? The findings that emerge from the data revealed the various practices principals use to influence and support teachers do not differ between the four schools.