Note: Round 1 results are not comparable with Rounds 2 and 3 because respondents were asked to respond to 46 statements, which were subsequently grouped under the seven Australian Professional Standards for Teachers.
The areas in which more than 75 per cent of graduate teachers felt well prepared by their teacher education programs changed over the three survey rounds. In Round 1, 89 per cent of graduate respondents agreed their teacher education program prepared them to 'Engage in professional learning'. In Round 2, the two key areas with more than 75 per cent agreement in preparation were 'Know students and how they learn' (78 per cent) and 'Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning' (76 per cent). In Round 3 there were no key areas with more than 75 per cent agreement.
There were no areas in which more than 25 per cent of graduate teachers disagreed with being well prepared by their teacher education programs in Round 1. In Round 2 the key area in which more than 25 per cent disagreed that their teacher education program prepared them was ' Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community' (36 per cent). This was also a key area of disagreement in preparation in Round 3 (36 per cent). The area of ' Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning' received a higher proportion of disagreement from graduate in Round 3 than in other rounds (25 per cent).
Graduate teachers' perception of their lack of preparation in the area of professional engagement with parents, carers and the community ties in with previous research on areas of need in teacher professional learning (Doecke et al, 2008). This DEEWR National Mapping of Teacher Professional Learning report found that 83 per cent of teachers felt the area where they needed the most professional development was engaging with parents and the community.
The following figure shows the mean score for the items measuring preparation in the seven professional standards.
Figure . Graduate teachers – by the mean of their preparation in the professional standards
Note: Round 1 n=935; Round 2 n=2,099; Round 3 n=1,727
The professional standards that showed the highest mean score for preparation were:
Round 1
-
Professional learning
-
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
Rounds 2 and 3
-
Know students and how they learn
-
Creation and maintenance of supportive and safe learning environments
The professional standards that showed the lowest mean score for preparation were:
Round 1
-
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
-
Creation and maintenance of supportive and safe learning environments
Rounds 2 and 3
-
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
-
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
Graduate teachers’ preparedness in the professional standards – by gender
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the means in the seven professional standards by gender. The results are shown in Table 74.
Table 74. Comparison of mean for preparation in the professional standards – by gender
|
Males
|
Females
|
Significance
|
Preparation for:
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
p
|
Round 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
3.74
|
0.769
|
3.86
|
0.782
|
0.003
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
3.42
|
1.032
|
3.59
|
0.982
|
0.001
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
3.71
|
0.884
|
3.83
|
0.830
|
0.007
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
3.71
|
0.927
|
3.87
|
0.849
|
0.001
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
3.31
|
1.099
|
3.37
|
1.074
|
0.322
|
Engage in professional learning
|
3.59
|
1.023
|
3.73
|
0.964
|
0.008
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
2.78
|
1.101
|
3.04
|
1.094
|
0.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
3.63
|
0.845
|
3.77
|
0.820
|
0.004
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
3.35
|
1.122
|
3.45
|
1.026
|
0.093
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
3.63
|
0.902
|
3.75
|
0.902
|
0.024
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
3.62
|
0.962
|
3.81
|
0.889
|
0.001
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
3.28
|
1.047
|
3.32
|
1.056
|
0.448
|
Engage in professional learning
|
3.51
|
1.068
|
3.66
|
0.978
|
0.016
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
2.81
|
1.095
|
3.02
|
1.084
|
0.001
|
Note: Round 2: males n= 464; females n= 1,637; Round 3: males n= 381; females n= 1,346 p<0.05
There was a significant difference in the scores for males and females in six of the key areas in Round 2:
-
‘Know students and how they learn’
-
‘Know the content and how to teach it’
-
‘Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning’
-
‘Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments’
-
‘Engage in professional learning’
-
‘Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community’
These results suggest that gender has an effect on feeling prepared in the professional standards areas. Round 3 showed significant differences in the scores for males and females for all the six standards listed above except for 'Know the content and how to teach it'. By the end of their first year of teaching, females seemed more likely to feel better prepared in five of the seven professional standards than males.
Graduate teachers’ preparedness in the professional standards – by program type
To further investigate the content and relevance of the graduate teachers’ preparation, a one-way between subjects ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of program type on the professional standards for Rounds 2 and 3. The results are shown in Table 75 below.
Table 75. Comparison of mean for preparation in the professional standards, by program type
|
Masters
|
Bachelor
|
Grad. Dip.
|
Significance
|
Preparation for:
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
p
|
Round 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
3.81
|
0.824
|
3.91
|
0.753
|
3.75
|
0.79
|
0.000
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
3.67
|
0.936
|
3.59
|
0.983
|
3.45
|
1.024
|
0.002
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
3.85
|
0.864
|
3.8
|
0.846
|
3.81
|
0.834
|
0.723
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
3.85
|
0.894
|
3.88
|
0.854
|
3.77
|
0.87
|
0.042
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
3.51
|
1.062
|
3.31
|
1.105
|
3.34
|
1.054
|
0.026
|
Engage in professional learning
|
3.67
|
1.02
|
3.73
|
0.987
|
3.68
|
0.96
|
0.539
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
2.92
|
1.14
|
3.04
|
1.107
|
2.91
|
1.079
|
0.026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
3.83
|
0.828
|
3.78
|
0.794
|
3.66
|
0.856
|
0.009
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
3.63
|
1.044
|
3.49
|
0.992
|
3.26
|
1.095
|
0.000
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
3.82
|
0.946
|
3.74
|
0.849
|
3.67
|
0.938
|
0.085
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
3.8
|
0.987
|
3.79
|
0.873
|
3.72
|
0.933
|
0.362
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
3.48
|
1.071
|
3.28
|
1.058
|
3.31
|
1.047
|
0.030
|
Engage in professional learning
|
3.71
|
1.085
|
3.63
|
1
|
3.57
|
0.972
|
0.186
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
3.04
|
1.172
|
3.02
|
1.09
|
2.88
|
1.065
|
0.041
|
Note: Round 2: Masters n=270, Bachelor n=1,004, Grad. Dip. n=726; Round 3: Masters n=244, Bachelor n=775, Grad. Dip. n=547 p<0.05
There was a significant effect for program type on graduate teacher preparedness at the p<0.05 level in four of the professional standards in both Rounds 2 and 3. These were:
-
‘Know students and how they learn’
-
‘Know the content and how to teach it’
-
‘Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning’
-
‘Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community’
A post hoc test was conducted on these standards in Rounds 2 and 3, and the significant differences are shown in Table 76.
Table 76. Comparison between groups of mean for preparation in the professional standards – by program type
|
Significance p
|
Comparisons between program areas
|
Round 2
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
|
|
Masters and Bachelor
|
0.205
|
0.727
|
Masters and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.524
|
0.026
|
Bachelor and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.000
|
0.027
|
|
|
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
|
|
Masters and Bachelor
|
0.487
|
0.160
|
Masters and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.006
|
0.000
|
Bachelor and Graduate/Postgrad Diploma
|
0.011
|
0.000
|
|
|
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
|
|
Masters and Bachelor
|
0.020
|
0.025
|
Masters and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.071
|
0.073
|
Bachelor and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.838
|
0.913
|
|
|
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
|
|
Masters and Bachelor
|
0.236
|
0.946
|
Masters and Graduate/Postgraduate Diploma
|
0.981
|
0.122
|
Bachelor and Graduate/Postgrad Diploma
|
0.029
|
0.058
|
|
|
|
In summary, post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for:
-
‘Know students and how they learn’ was significantly different between the bachelor and graduate diploma programs in both rounds;
-
‘Know the content and how to teach it’ was significantly different between the masters and the graduate diploma programs and the bachelor and graduate diploma programs in both rounds;
-
‘Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning’ was significantly different between the masters and bachelor programs in both rounds;
-
‘Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community’ was significantly different between the bachelor and graduate diploma programs in Round 2.
For Round 2, taken together, these results suggest that graduates who completed a graduate diploma felt less prepared than those from the other two program types in three areas:
-
Know students and how they learn
-
Know the content and how to teach it
-
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
Those graduates who completed a masters qualification felt better prepared than those from the other two program types in the area of Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning’. Those graduates who completed a bachelor’s degree felt better prepared than those from the other two program types in the area of 'Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community'.
Round 3 results show that graduates who completed a graduate or postgraduate diploma feel less prepared than those with a bachelor’s degree in 'Know students and how they learn' and 'Know the content and how to teach it'. It also shows that graduates who completed a masters teacher education program felt better prepared than those from the other two program types in 'Know the content and how to teach it' and ‘Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning’.
Graduate teachers’ preparedness in the professional standards – by program area
A one-way between subjects ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of program area on preparation in the seven professional standards. The results are shown in Table 77.
Table 77. Comparison of mean for preparation in the professional standards – by program area
|
Early Childhood
|
EC/Prim
|
Primary
|
Prim/Sec
|
Secondary
|
Significance
|
Preparation in NPST
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Mean
|
SD
|
p
|
Round 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students
|
4.09
|
0.653
|
4.01
|
0.622
|
3.87
|
0.785
|
3.88
|
0.725
|
3.76
|
0.802
|
0.000
|
Know the content
|
3.77
|
0.902
|
3.54
|
0.929
|
3.57
|
0.968
|
3.48
|
1.038
|
3.53
|
1.023
|
0.250
|
Plan and implement
|
4.06
|
0.713
|
3.73
|
0.91
|
3.78
|
0.859
|
3.88
|
0.753
|
3.81
|
0.849
|
0.033
|
Create and maintain
|
4.13
|
0.656
|
3.91
|
0.844
|
3.84
|
0.894
|
3.88
|
0.858
|
3.78
|
0.856
|
0.009
|
Assess, report
|
3.65
|
0.929
|
3.38
|
1.032
|
3.27
|
1.098
|
3.25
|
1.118
|
3.41
|
1.071
|
0.008
|
Professional learning
|
4.14
|
0.683
|
3.67
|
0.962
|
3.71
|
1.000
|
3.76
|
0.925
|
3.65
|
0.996
|
0.001
|
Engage with parents
|
3.78
|
0.805
|
3.26
|
1.002
|
3.03
|
1.124
|
3.05
|
1.101
|
2.81
|
1.078
|
0.000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students
|
3.97
|
0.758
|
3.83
|
0.658
|
3.79
|
0.798
|
3.77
|
0.767
|
3.66
|
0.869
|
0.008
|
Know the content
|
3.42
|
0.944
|
3.35
|
0.967
|
3.47
|
0.963
|
3.36
|
1.086
|
3.42
|
1.122
|
0.497
|
Plan and implement
|
3.75
|
0.876
|
3.74
|
0.727
|
3.72
|
0.899
|
3.72
|
0.925
|
3.72
|
0.927
|
0.990
|
Create and maintain
|
3.98
|
0.792
|
3.83
|
0.785
|
3.79
|
0.894
|
3.82
|
0.817
|
3.70
|
0.958
|
0.163
|
Assess, report
|
3.38
|
0.846
|
3.29
|
0.946
|
3.29
|
1.040
|
3.34
|
1.119
|
3.32
|
1.092
|
0.655
|
Professional learning
|
4.00
|
0.689
|
3.56
|
0.813
|
3.7
|
0.954
|
3.60
|
1.014
|
3.55
|
1.067
|
0.004
|
Engage with parents
|
3.58
|
0.720
|
3.24
|
1.005
|
3.04
|
1.082
|
3.07
|
1.118
|
2.78
|
1.111
|
0.000
|
Note: Round 2: Early Childhood n=77, EC/Prim n=112, Primary n=756, Prim/Sec n=197, Secondary n=866; Round 3: Early Childhood n=60, EC/Prim n=103, Primary n=608, Prim/Sec n=151, Secondary n=677 p<0.05
There was a significant effect for program area on graduate teacher preparedness at the p<0.05 level in six of the seven professional standards in Round 2:
-
Know students and how they learn
-
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
-
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
-
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
-
Engage in professional learning
-
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
In Round 3, significant effects for program area could be seen in only three key professional standards:
-
Know students and how they learn
-
Engage in professional learning
-
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
A post hoc test was conducted on all these areas, and the significant differences are shown in Table 78.
Table 78. Comparison between groups of mean for preparation in the professional standards – by program area
|
Significance
p
|
Comparisons between program areas
|
Round 2
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.953
|
0.921
|
EC and Primary
|
0.109
|
0.610
|
EC and Primary/Secondary
|
0.245
|
0.642
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.003
|
0.058
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.363
|
0.996
|
EC/Primary and Prim/Secondary
|
0.610
|
0.993
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.013
|
0.315
|
Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
1.000
|
1.000
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.053
|
0.041
|
Primary/Sec and Secondary
|
0.318
|
0.603
|
|
|
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.059
|
1.000
|
EC and Primary
|
0.034
|
1.000
|
EC and Primary/Secondary
|
0.466
|
1.000
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.083
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.985
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.586
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.886
|
1.000
|
Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.557
|
1.000
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.926
|
1.000
|
Primary/Secondary and Secondary
|
0.848
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.425
|
0.893
|
EC and Primary
|
0.040
|
0.605
|
EC and Primary/Secondary
|
0.210
|
0.851
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.007
|
0.203
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.928
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.999
|
0.809
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.579
|
0.999
|
Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.971
|
0.999
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.674
|
0.571
|
Primary/Secondary and Secondary
|
0.581
|
0.711
|
|
|
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.423
|
0.995
|
EC and Primary
|
0.030
|
0.985
|
EC and Primary/Sec
|
0.046
|
1.000
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.316
|
0.998
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.887
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Primary/Sec
|
0.860
|
0.999
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.999
|
1.000
|
Primary and Primary/Sec
|
0.998
|
0.995
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.103
|
0.992
|
Primary/Sec and Secondary
|
0.352
|
1.000
|
|
|
|
Engage in professional learning
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.010
|
0.076
|
EC and Primary
|
0.002
|
0.224
|
EC and Primary/Secondary
|
0.031
|
0.095
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.000
|
0.009
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.997
|
0.796
|
EC/Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.933
|
1.000
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.999
|
1.000
|
Primary and Primary/Secondary
|
0.952
|
0.896
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.766
|
0.064
|
Primary/Secondary and Secondary
|
0.582
|
0.988
|
|
|
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
|
|
EC and EC/Primary
|
0.011
|
0.381
|
EC and Primary
|
0.000
|
0.003
|
EC and Primary/Secondary
|
0.000
|
0.022
|
EC and Secondary
|
0.000
|
0.000
|
EC/Primary and Primary
|
0.208
|
0.473
|
EC/Primary and Prim/Secondary
|
0.484
|
0.799
|
EC/Primary and Secondary
|
0.000
|
0.001
|
Primary and Primary/Sec
|
0.998
|
1.000
|
Primary and Secondary
|
0.001
|
0.000
|
Primary/Secondary and Secondary
|
0.046
|
0.038
|
|
|
|
In summary, post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for:
-
‘Know students and how they learn’ was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and secondary graduates in Round 2
-
Primary and secondary graduates in Round 3
suggesting that secondary graduates felt less well prepared in this area.
-
‘Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning’ it was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and primary in Round 2
-
‘Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments’ was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and primary graduates in Round 2
-
Early childhood and secondary graduates in Round 2
suggesting that early childhood graduates felt better prepared in this area in their first year of teaching.
-
‘Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning’ was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and primary graduates in Round 2
-
Early childhood and primary/secondary graduates in Round 2
suggesting that early childhood graduates felt better prepared in this area in their first year of teaching.
-
‘Engage in professional learning’ was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and all other four areas in Round 2
-
Early childhood and secondary graduates in Round 3
suggesting that early childhood graduates felt better prepared in this area in their first year but that by the second year of teaching, most differences in views on program preparation for teaching between graduate areas had diminished.
-
‘Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community’ was significantly different between:
-
Early childhood and all other four areas in Round 2
-
Early childhood and primary, primary/secondary and secondary in Round 3
-
Secondary and carly childhood/primary, primary, and primary/secondary and in Round 3
suggesting that early childhood graduates felt better prepared than others, and secondary graduates felt least well prepared in this area.
Graduate teachers’ effectiveness in key teaching areas – the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers
This section examines the graduate teachers’ perceptions of their effectiveness in key areas of teaching. In Rounds 2 and 3, respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale their level of agreement on their effectiveness on the seven statements on the Professional Standards. Table 79 shows the results. These questions were only asked of those respondents who were currently teaching.
Table 79. Graduate teachers – by effectiveness in the professional standards
|
Strongly disagree
|
Disagree
|
Neither agree nor disagree
|
Agree
|
Strongly agree
|
Effective in:
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
Round 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
0.0
|
0.9
|
7.3
|
65.0
|
26.8
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
0.1
|
1.8
|
10.2
|
63.1
|
24.8
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
0.1
|
1.5
|
8.9
|
66.2
|
23.2
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
0.1
|
0.9
|
7.6
|
57.5
|
33.9
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
0.3
|
4.5
|
16.5
|
59.4
|
19.4
|
Engage in professional learning
|
0.3
|
1.8
|
10.9
|
52.5
|
34.6
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
0.3
|
3.1
|
16.0
|
57.4
|
23.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Round 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know students and how they learn
|
0.1
|
0.6
|
6.4
|
65.1
|
27.9
|
Know the content and how to teach it
|
0.1
|
1.4
|
8.3
|
63.9
|
26.3
|
Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning
|
0.1
|
1.3
|
7.4
|
66.3
|
25.0
|
Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments
|
0.1
|
0.8
|
6.8
|
57.8
|
34.6
|
Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning
|
0.3
|
2.8
|
13.3
|
62.5
|
21.0
|
Engage in professional learning
|
0.2
|
2.2
|
9.8
|
54.1
|
33.7
|
Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community
|
0.3
|
2.8
|
14.7
|
55.1
|
27.0
|
The following Figure shows the mean score for the items measuring effectiveness in the seven key areas.
Figure . Graduate teachers – by the mean of their effectiveness in the professional standards
Note: Round 2 n=2,099; Round 3 n=1,727
Generally, graduate teachers perceived themselves as effective in both rounds, with more than 80 per cent of graduate teachers agreeing they were effective in most teaching areas. The graduate teachers rated themselves as highly effective (>90 per cent) in the areas of:
-
‘Know students and how they learn’ in both rounds
-
‘Know the content and how to teach’ it in Round 3
-
‘Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning’ in Round 3
-
‘Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments’ in both rounds
This is with the exception for 'Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning' in Round 2 (with 78.8 per cent). The area with the highest proportion who disagreed they were effective was 'Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning' but this was still only 4.8 per cent in Round 2 and 3.1 per cent in Round 3 compared to the other areas.
Overall, agreement on effectiveness remained fairly constant from Round 2 to Round 3. The area that showed the highest mean score for effectiveness was 'Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments' in Round 3. The areas that showed the lowest mean score for effectiveness was 'Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning' in Round 2.
Interestingly, the survey results revealed that graduate teachers felt more effective in the seven areas of teaching than in feeling they were prepared. The key areas with the largest difference between perceptions of being prepared and perceptions of being effective were 'Engage professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community' in Rounds 2 and 3, and 'Know the content and how to teach it' in Round 3.
This disconnect reflects graduate teachers’ feelings of growing efficacy in teaching over time but also highlights the importance of thinking about learning to teach as a continuum of professional learning, learning that occurs in varying degrees at different times in universities, in schools and in communities. In the interviews, graduate teachers spoke about the importance of the professional learning setting of the school and also the need for teacher education to make explicit linkages between theory and practice.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
