Longitudinal Teacher Education and Workforce Study (ltews) Final Report

4.5.1 The nature of the practicum and graduates’ decisions about whether or not to seek teaching employment.

In the surveys, graduate teachers were asked about the ways in which their teacher education practicum was structured. Respondents to the surveys were asked if the practicum component of their teacher education program included:

• 
  1-2 days a week in schools over an extended period of time
  
• 
  Five days a week over one or more weeks (Block)
  
• 
  An internship
  

The responses, as shown in the table below, indicate that the most common type of practicum is a block, where pre-service teachers are in a school for five days a week for a number of weeks.

Table 94. Graduate teachers – by the structure of the practicum in their teacher education program

The structure of the practicum in your program ...	Round 1		Round 2		Round 3
	n	%	n	%	n	%
1-2 days a week over an extended period	337	24.5	513	24.9	557	29.4
5 days a week over 1 or more weeks (Block)	1,246	90.6	1,882	91.2	1,583	83.4
Internship	360	26.2	576	27.9	670	35.4

Note: 1. Round 1 n=1,375; Round 2 n=2,063; Round 3 n=1,895

2. Graduates could indicate that they took part in more than one form of practicum component, and therefore the responses do not add to 100 per cent.

To formulate an answer to the question: ‘Does nature of teacher practice incorporated into teacher preparation programs appear to influence graduates in deciding whether or not to seek teaching employment?’ – two questions from the datasets were analysed in relation to the structure of the practicum in order to examine the employment patterns for graduates who undertook different practicum structures:

• 
  Are you currently employed as a teacher?
  
• 
  Are you currently seeking work as a teacher?
  

The first question was asked of all graduates in each survey round. When cross-tabulated with the practicum structures, the results suggest that graduates who participated in an internship had a higher percentage in teaching employment in Round 1 than did those whose practicum was composed of 1 to 2 days a week or a block of time. This result must be regarded with caution, as it was not repeated across the subsequent rounds, suggesting the high possibility of extraneous variables such as the institution where these internships were organised, institutional and/or program relationships with schools, and the states or territory in which these programs were located.

The second question was asked of those who did not have a teaching position in a school. When cross-tabulated with the practicum structures, the results show there is no relationship between practicum structures and the likelihood of unemployed graduates seeking work as a teacher.

Table 95. Graduates’ practicum structures – by employment as a teacher and seeking work as a teacher

The structure of the practicum in the teacher education program ...	Round 1		Round 2		Round 3
	n	%	n	%	N	%
Currently employed as a teacher
1-2 days a week over an extended period	256	76.2	430	87.0	469	85.4
5 days a week over 1 or more weeks	914	73.7	1,545	84.3	1,297	83.1
Internship	290	80.6*	460	82.1	563	85.0
Total	1,324	74.0	2,618	84.7	1,866	83.6
Currently seeking work as a teacher
1-2 days a week over an extended period	68	81.0	42	65.6	52	65.0
5 days a week over 1 or more weeks	293	84.0	200	69.4	171	64.8
Internship	61	81.3	69	69.0	63	63.6
Total	371	83.6	402	68.4	309	63.1

Note: 1. Graduates could indicate that they took part in more than one form of practicum component therefore the number of responses is not equal to the total.

2. *Round 1, those with an internship who are currently teaching is statistically significant (p<0.005).

Overall, these data show that the likelihood of graduates having a teaching position in a school, or the likelihood of seeking or not seeking teaching employment for graduates who are not employed as teachers, have no relationship to the structure of the practicum incorporated in their teacher education program.