Field and Clinical Experiences Belief Statement
What is a Quality Field Experience (Research Summary)
What is a Quality Field Experience (PowerPoint)

Field and Clinical Experiences Belief Statement       

 OVERVIEW

       Eastern Kentucky University is committed to providing quality field experiences for all students preparing for careers in education.   We believe that  field and clinical experiences should extend and connect the concepts, skills, and dispositions acquired in the student's program of study.  These  experiences should begin early in the student's program,  allow the student to interact with children in diverse settings,  move sequentially from the observation of students, teachers, and programs to participatory activities, and culminate in full or micro teaching and practicum experiences.  The College of Education is responsible for coordinating all field and clinical experiences and monitoring the quality and effectiveness of these programs.

 EARLY AND CONTINUOUS FIELD EXPERIENCES

       Early field experiences allow students to explore  professional education careers and help determine the particular level where they may wish to teach or work. Beginning with the freshman year and extending throughout the teacher education program, field and clinical experiences are sequenced so that the learning gained through these experiences builds from course to course.  As students  proceed through the professional education program, they  experience increasingly more sophisticated field and clinical tasks including working with individual students and groups of students, tutoring students, micro teaching, assessing student progress, or other functions necessary for the understanding of the teaching/learning processes.

 COLLABORATION

       Optimal  field and clinical experiences  include  clear communication to the host school and the supervising professionals about the expectations for students placed in field and clinical settings.  Conducting debriefing sessions, requiring reflection activities, or otherwise analyzing the field and clinical experience  provide the nexus for linking the college classroom to the real world of the educational professional.

       The University has a  unique opportunity for offering high quality early field experiences since the Commonwealth's only N-12 laboratory school exists on the EKU campus.   Because of its close proximity and mission, Model laboratory School provides field and clinical placements for EKU students under the supervision of  trained faculty who are members of the College of Education and share its commitment to produce quality educational professionals.  At the laboratory school it is possible to create sophisticated field and clinical experiences that would be difficult or impossible to replicate in some other settings.

 GOALS

    Eastern Kentucky University students are placed in schools and educational settings where they obtain relevant field experiences under the supervision of qualified host supervisors.  They encounter students from diverse backgrounds as they advance their knowledge of pedagogy, apply the skills learned in their college courses, encounter current and innovative practices, and reflect upon their experiences.  In order to provide effective field experiences, the University provides information about its expectations  for field and clinical experiences to host teachers and university personnel supervising Eastern preservice teachers.

     Eastern Kentucky University is committed to supporting public schools and their attempt to provide safe learning environments for students.  EKU students working in field and clinical settings are screened and properly prepared so that they do not create a risk in the schools and educational settings where they study.

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

     In order to evaluate its field and clinical sites and assess the effectiveness of its programs to produce high quality educational professionals,  the College of Education maintains relevant longitudinal data and monitors field placements and supervision.  The data collected from the evaluation system is used by the College to refine and improve the placement, supervision, and quality of  field and clinical practices.  The College is committed to continuous assessment as a means for providing the best possible field and clinical experiences for its students.

top

WHAT IS A QUALITY FIELD EXPERIENCE?

Karen thought about the exciting prospect of a different kind of a college experience, one where she hoped she would not have to struggle to stay awake during her 8 o’clock class while the professor lectured about education and occasionally told stories about incidents that happened at school during the professor’s tenure as an elementary teacher. She had not been doing well in following her education professor’s lectures, which for the most part seemed boring and detached. But today, Karen was scheduled to start her laboratory experience in a local elementary classroom, watching real teachers and students. She could hardly wait to get to her field placement, and her steps, normally sluggish at 7:30AM , quickened as she reached her car and began the short trip to a different kind of college classroom.

Over the next five weeks, Karen visited her field site for about two hours each Wednesday. Mostly, Karen watched the teacher and the students, except for rare times when she assisted a group of children with a learning activity, tutored a child, or helped escort the class to the library or gym. Karen used a daily journal to record her observations. She answered a series of questions about various topics that related to classroom activity. At the end of her field experience, Karen brought her notes, journal, and the answers to the questions back to class. In class , the professor placed the students in small groups, and gave them another series of questions, which the group discussed and then reported to the entire class. Karen wrote a paper about her field experience.

Karen’s visit to a local elementary school is typical of field experiences performed by college students in teacher education programs nationwide. Teacher educators have long recognized that placing prospective teachers in classrooms to observe, participate, and study various elements of schooling is important. During the 1980's reform movement in education, experts called for increasing the amounts of field or clinical experiences for preservice teachers (Berliner, 1985).

Yet, the research regarding the effectiveness of field experiences is mixed (Stone, 1987;Kragler & Nierenberg, 1999). More often than not, little correlation between course work and fieldwork exists, and there is little agreement regarding the most effective formats for conducting field experiences prior to student teaching (Kragler & Nierenberg, 1999). Denton(1982) reported that as a result of participating in field experiences, preservice teachers made modest gains in cognitive attainment in subsequent methods courses, gains in confidence, and improvement in the ability to analyze interactions from the perspective of the teacher. Bischoff, Farris, & Henninger(1988) reported that methods courses taken concurrently and related to early field experiences have been shown to be of value. Generally, there appears to be a consensus that the more time preservice teachers spend in field experiences, the more prepared they will be to teach (Kragler & Nierenberg, 1999), despite the research indicating that increased practice alone does not always lead to the analysis, reflection, and growth needed to nurture the emerging teacher (McIntye, Byrd, and Foxx, 1996).

A serious flaw of many field experience programs in teacher education is their lack of a clear purpose. Too often, host teachers are unsure of the college’s expectations for the students sent into the field (McIntyre, 1983;Zeichner, 1987). Recent research reveals that most teacher education programs are a collection of courses, various types of field experiences, and student teaching. Too often, these components are uncoordinated and are taught by various faculty who do not often communicate with each other (McIntyre, Byrd, and Foxx, 1996). The lack of purpose and coordination between college courses and field experiences results from the absence of a clearly articulated theoretical framework and goals guiding the teacher education process. The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) has addressed this issue by setting standards that require their participating institutions to create a model and knowledge base that are supported by the purposes, processes and outcomes that unify campus courses and field experiences McIntyre, Byrd, & Foxx, 1996).

So how is Karen’s field experience reflective of good practice? Hopefully, Karen’s instructor has briefed her regarding the kinds of issues, skills, concepts, pedagogical practices, or dispositions that she is to look for during her time in the elementary classroom, and how these learnings relate to the lectures, readings, assignments, and class activities of the course. In a well designed teacher education curriculum, the course she is taking is part of an overall program that has delineated the specific content to be taught, and its syllabus fits well into a plan that prepares Karen for subsequent courses and field experiences. The data gathering devices Karen took to the elementary classroom should aid her in collecting the kind of information needed to connect the often abstract world of the college class to the real world of the modern school classroom.

In Karen’s case, she seems enthusiastic about working in a "real" classroom. Hopefully, her enthusiasm for field work is an extension of her desire to become an outstanding teacher. Perhaps she will not ignore the comments she has heard from other students, who seem to view the field assignment as just one more hurdle in the course. Some students must overcome their preconceived notions about classrooms, ideas generated from their own personal experiences with schooling (Resnick, 1987;Clark, 1998;Calderhead & Robson, 1991;Kagan, 1992).

In fact, early field experiences have a significant impact on preservice teachers, suggesting the need for carefully designed and authentic classroom experiences (Aiken & Day, 1999). Some educators consider the field work as the most important aspect of the teacher education program, because novice teachers learn the most about pedagogy from field experiences (Little & Robinson, 1997). If her field experience concentrates on instructional pedagogy and relative content she studies in her college curriculum, then Karen’s field work is following recommended good practice (Kennedy, 1990). To be effective, field experiences must be aligned with the rest of the teacher preparation program (Little& Robinson, 1997).

Key elements in a successful field experience are the interactions among the "triad" of the student, college instructor, and the K-12 cooperating teacher. The cooperating teacher has significant impact on the student teaching experience, especially in developing the student teacher’s attitude toward schooling (McIntyre, Byrd, & Foxx, 1996;Aiken & Day, 1999). Increasingly, educators recognize the need to prepare cooperating teachers for facilitating field experiences. It is not enough to expect that a good"role model" teacher will bring about positive behaviors in student teachers( Becker & Ade, 1982). McIntyre, Byrd, and Fox(1996) assert that "until cooperating teachers are trained to give directions and to demonstrate activities, their influence on the development of their student teachers’ skills should be questioned(p.178). When McIntyre and Killian(1986) found that feedback from cooperating teachers increases when they have been trained in feedback techniques, they concluded that cooperating teachers need training in communication skills and reflective thinking. At minimum, they should receive some training to understand the connections between the field experience and the college’s expectations (Applegate & Lasley, 1982;McIntyre, Byrd, & Foxx, 1996;Little & Robinson, 1997; Coulon, 2000; Kahn, 2001; Ramanathan & Wilkins-Canter, 2001).

The idea of training public school teachers to facilitate a quality field experience is not unanimously accepted. In one study, fifty percent of the teachers surveyed said that they considered the idea of a training program unrealistic (Ramanathan,& Wilkins-Canter, 2000). Yet, cooperating teachers have expressed a willingness to be trained in specific aspects of evaluation, particularly interpreting purposes, evaluation criteria, writing negative evaluations, and awarding grades (Aiken & Day, 1999). Since preservice teachers are more likely to have active, sequentially and systematically evaluated experiences when placed with a trained cooperating teacher (Killian & McIntyre, 1986), the argument for training host teachers is compelling, despite the difficulty of providing training to teachers who may resist. Ideally, teachers working with students in field placements should take formal training, usually offered by the college as a course. However, course work, particularly in supervision techniques, is not typically required (Haberman & Harris, 1982; Kingen, 1984). Ramanathan and Wilkins-Canter(2000) found that among the teachers they surveyed, most preferred meetings and workshops as vehicles for training. Hauwiller, Ausel & Sparaphine(1988-89) found that a series of short term inservice workshops provided by university supervisors for cooperating teachers appears to be an effective method for improving communication. Aiken and Day(1999) recommend on site meetings or workshops after school hours for training.

So, Karen’s field experience will be enhanced if: (1) her host teacher has been trained in the expectations of Karen’s instructor for her field experience, and (2) the roles played by Karen, the college instructor, and the cooperating teacher during the field experience are made clear. If Karen is participating in more sophisticated field experiences later in her program or student teaching, then the training of her host teacher should include attention to communication skills, feedback techniques, reflective practices, and evaluation methods.

Because university supervisors typically don’t consult cooperating teachers regarding ways to evaluate field experiences, the evaluation of Karen’s field experience, according to current practice, will most likely become the responsibility of her college instructor(Ramanathan & Wilkins-Canter, 1997). Often systematic and written feedback from cooperating teachers to student teachers is absent (Wilkins-Canter, 1997). Involving cooperating teachers in collecting evaluation data from the field is important. Coulon(2000) found that cooperating teachers can provide student teachers with important feedback that focus on instructional behaviors rather than just management and planning behaviors, and student teachers prefer a "collaborative" style of supervision by their cooperating teachers in contrast to "directive" or "nondirective" styles.

Karen’s instructor is following good practice by conducting a de-briefing session with his students after the field experience. However, the frequency and the nature of de-briefing activities are important(Maxen, Risku, Rudney, 1999). Wepner and Mobley(1998) believe that participants in field experiences need regular and frequent opportunities to de-brief classroom experiences. One way to accomplish such a goal is to use a website for de-briefing activities, including E-mail, chat rooms, video clips of classroom events, general information that describes the triad’s roles and responsibilities, and procedural information containing important dates and deadlines.

In a good teacher education program, college students learn effective ways to involve their future students in relevant and meaningful classroom activities that help students learn. Much of Karen’s training to become a teacher will encourage her to adopt a "constructivist" philosophy of education in which learners investigate knowledge, use prior knowledge, and construct new concepts , generalizations, and truths. Construstivist theory places the teacher in the role of helping students organize and manage information, not merely dispense information to be tacitly absorbed by learners(Henson, 2001). It may be, though, that the questions she answers about her experiences in the elementary classroom and the paper she writes will relate to routine and managerial teaching activities without references to any experimentation with curriculum or instruction(Balli, Wright, & Foster, 1997;Kragler, Nierenberg, 1999). Hopefully, Karen’s field experience is more than observing students and teachers and will allow her to participate in classroom activities she can draw from when she has a classroom of her own(Balli, Wright, & Foster, 1997). Research indicates that novice teachers tend to follow written plans step-by-step without modifications, even when new situations require an alteration in the plan(Westerman, 1991).

So, how can Karen emulate a constructivist approach to the field experience, thus reinforcing a major thrust of her teacher education program? Little & Robinson(1997) note that most schools do not provide an environment for "reflection" where novice teachers can flourish by developing critical decision-making skills, so important for inquiry and problem solving. In contrast, teacher education programs stress reflective decision-making, where teachers make decisions based upon changing and sometimes different information rather than relying on a set of behaviors that can be applied to all situations(McIntyre, Byrd, & Foxx, 1996). Preservice teachers should experience teaching from the very beginning as a problem solving process, rather than a set of routines to be practiced and then delivered(Little & Robinson, 1997).

If reflective decision making is a major thrust of Karen’s program, then training her cooperating teachers in ways to facilitate such practices and experiences is crucial. Selecting cooperating teachers who will provide an environment to facilitate the goals of the teacher education program, such as constructivism, becomes very important(Aiken & Day, 1999).

While Brennan and Miller(2000) caution that reflection is a difficult skill that grows with coaching, some research highlights the benefits of reflection to preservice teachers in field experiences. Willard-Holt and Bottomley(2000) studied preservice teachers in a one- week summer enrichment camp where the novice teachers were given considerable autonomy regarding curriculum and instructional decision making. The most reflective preservice teachers were also the most effective, leading the researchers to conclude that systematic-guided instruction in reflectivity and instructional problem solving in field settings may be crucial to the development of teaching effectiveness. Moore, et. al., (1999) report that elementary teachers in their study successfully conducted reflective classroom research. The researchers concluded: "Preservice teachers can and should be given the opportunity to learn how to become reflective practitioners, capable and confident of making pedagogical decisions based on what they are learning about themselves and their students(p. 273). Maxen, Risku, & Rudney(1999) studied preservice teachers’ growth in multicultural understanding and successfully used a reflective document as an assessment tool. Little and Robinson(1997) believe that student teachers need to learn "...inquiry-oriented decision making processes that will enable them to respond to the needs of diverse students in different school and community contexts over time"(p.250).

More research is needed to determine which kinds of field experience best accommodate reflective skills and practice, and professors need more information about the factors involved in effective teaching and ways to promote reflection in concert with effectiveness(Willard-Holt & Bottomley, 2000). Willard-Holt and Bottomley(2000) maintain that field experiences that combine reflection, innovation, and ownership have the greatest potential for effectiveness.

Hutchinson and Allen(1997) provide a guide for reflection in field experiences. After preparing the students for the experience, the instructor should match the field experience with the particular goals in mind. For example, if a goal is for students to understand the nature of diverse learners, then the question should be asked: What experiences do students need to prepare them to succeed in a diverse school? During their reflections on the field experience, students should be able to read about the experience, write about it, talk about it in groups, and discuss their observations. In the final step of the process, students should have opportunities to "mirror" the experience and examine themselves, "microscope" the experience, allowing the students to enlarge the experience, and then use "binoculars" to closely examine activities that appear distantly. The importance of reflection may be under emphasized in current literature. Kragler and Nierenberg(1999) found that journals were not as important in supporting reflection as were conversations about teaching.

Exactly how long Karen needs to spend in school classrooms during her required field experiences is subject to some debate. When Kragler and Nierenberg(1999) studied increased time during field experiences and the perceptions of the preservice teachers, they concluded that: "Students with more time in elementary classrooms seemed to perceive greater benefits(p.50)." Also they reported that more time in the field experience created more reflective practitioners who were better able to apply what they had learned in course work to the classroom. But the length of field experiences is only one requirement for the development of reflective skills; the quality of the experience is equally important(Kragler and Nierenberg(1999). In their review of research about the amount of time needed for effective field experiences, McIntyre, Byrd, and Foxx(1996) noted that although there is some evidence that extended field experiences bring added benefits to the development of novice teachers, it appears the nature of the field experience is more critical to the education of teachers. A shorter field experience with well-integrated activities is more likely to produce effective teachers than a lengthier one whose major attribute is merely length(McIntyre, Byrd, and Foxx, 1996).

As Karen matriculates through her teacher education program, taking more courses that require field experiences, and finally student teaching, she should have many and varied opportunities to participate in genuine teaching situations. She should have opportunities to work in classrooms other than elementary so that she can make an informed choice regarding where she wants to teach and see education from different perspectives(Aiken and Day, 1999). If Karen is typical of most preservice teachers she will not enter teacher education with the skills, attitudes, and knowledge necessary to work successfully with a diverse population of students. Yet, experience with diverse populations of students is critical for her preparation as a teacher, particularly since population trends in the United States show steady growth in the diversity of the general population while the teaching population remains homogenous(McIntyre, Byrd, & Foxx, 1996). Many teacher education programs provide limited multicultural field experiences because: (1) many teacher education programs are located in areas of the country without significant diverse populations(McIntyre, Byrd, and Foxx, 1996) and (2) minority students are being drawn to careers that are more lucrative than teaching(Henson, 2001).

Finally, Karen will probably become a teacher and her success will be due, in large part, to the kind of preparation she will receive while in her undergraduate program and later during her first few years of teaching. Her success as a teacher will depend on a close alignment of her college courses, her field experiences, and a clearly articulated theoretical framework.

References

                                       Zeichner, K. (1987). Toward an understanding of the role of field
                                   experiences in teacher development. In M. Haberman & J.M. Backus
                                       (Eds.) ADVANCES IN TEACHER EDUCATION. (Vol. 3 pp. 94-
                                       117). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

top