Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740

Student teachers eliciting mentors practical knowledge and

comparing it to their own beliefs
Anneke Zanting
a,
*, Nico Verloop
a
, Jan D. Vermunt
b
a
ICLON, Graduate School of Education, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9555, 2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands
b
Department of Educational Development and Research, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
Received 13 July 2000; received in revised form 9 February 2001; accepted 6 March 2001
Abstract
Student teachers have at their disposal various information sources concerning teaching: their own beliefs, their
mentors practical knowledge, and theory. Because practical knowledge often remains implicit, the aim of the present
study was to explore the appropriateness of two techniques for its articulation: concept mapping and completing
sentences. The criterion used was that these should not only elicit descriptions of how to teach, but also the cognitions
underlying teaching, i.e., practical knowledge. Thirty-ve student teachers and their mentors at a postgraduate teacher-
training institute in the Netherlands used both techniques, concerning the subject of order. Subsequently, the students
summarized their own beliefs, their mentors practical knowledge, and theory and compared these to each other. The
student teachers reports showed that they, in general, had been able to elicit partially their mentors practical
knowledge. It was concluded that the use of the techniques involved seemed valuable for student teachers learning
processes. r 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Student teachers; Beliefs; Practical knowledge; Concept mapping; Sentence completion
1. Introduction
Student teachers attending a teacher-training
course come into contact with various information
sources. At the teacher-training institute, they are
informed about educational theories and teaching
methods. At the practice schools, mentors super-
vise them. These mentors have developed their
own teaching knowledge and beliefs, derived from
or accommodated by teaching practice. This is
often called practical knowledge (Eraut, 1994).
Student teachers also possess themselves various
beliefs about teaching based on their own experi-
ences as pupils (Richardson, 1996).
The knowledge and beliefs of the three informa-
tion sources, teacher training, mentors, and
student teachers do not always correspond to
each other. Well-known is the gap between theory
and practice reported by student teachers. They
frequently experience diculties in relating the-
ories acquired at the teacher training institute to
their teaching experiences and their mentors
feedback (Elliott & Calderhead, 1994). Further-
more, student teachers own beliefs about teaching
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +31-71-527-71-74/70; fax:
+31-71-527-71-81.
E-mail address: zanting@iclon.leidenuniv.nl (A. Zanting).
0742-051X/01/$ - see front matter r 2001 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
PII: S 0 7 4 2 - 0 5 1 X( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 2 6 - 9
may dier from the assumptions of teacher
trainers or mentors. Student teachers beliefs
inuence the way they approach university and
mentor teachers, interpret the information given,
and what they learn from this (Oosterheert &
Vermunt, 2001; Richardson, 1996; Tillema, 1994).
Beliefs are, actually, the lters through which new
knowledge, ideas, and experiences are perceived.
Meeting a teaching situation in which student
teachers cannot hold on to these beliefs is a
starting-point for possible change and professional
development. An essential aspect of teacher train-
ing, therefore, is thinking critically or reecting
about current beliefs of ones own (Kagan, 1992).
Before being able to reect on their beliefs about
teaching, student teachers must become aware of
these. These beliefs are often implicit and not
articulated, just like the practical knowledge of
their mentors (Carter, 1990; Francis, 1995). There-
fore, the main question of the study was how
student and mentor teachers beliefs could be made
explicit.
1.1. Student teachers beliefs and mentors
practical knowledge
Student teachers beliefs may include several
teaching aspects, e.g., what learning is, what a
teachers tasks are, how a teacher can manage a
class, etc. These beliefs are personal and based on
ones own experiences, for example, as a pupil, as a
beginning teacher, or as a listener to friends or
relatives who teach (Richardson, 1996).
Experienced teachers, like mentors, possess
practical knowledge (Carter, 1990; Fensterma-
cher, 1994; Meijer, 1999). This knowledge is
personal and has been developed during or
accommodated by lengthy teaching experience.
We dened practical knowledge as an amalgam of
all teachers cognitions, such as declarative and
procedural knowledge, beliefs, and values, which
inuences their preactive, interactive, and post-
active teaching activities. This means that it also
includes reasons underlying teaching, considera-
tions, arguments, personal motives, and zeal.
Because knowledge and beliefs are often hard to
separate (Pajares, 1992) both are indicated as parts
of practical knowledge and are not distinguished.
It is assumed that mentors should articulate
their practical knowledge in the presence of their
student teachers (Brown & McIntyre, 1995). The
reasons for this are described in the next section.
1.2. The value of explicated mentors practical
knowledge
Why should mentors explicate their practical
knowledge and student teachers access it? It is
commonly accepted that beginners can learn from
members of their own profession, like, in this case,
from experienced mentor teachers (see Wilson &
Pirrie, 1999). Having access to the practical
knowledge of mentors can fulll various functions
in learning to teach.
Firstly, practical knowledge contains experien-
tial knowledge that is mostly undocumented, but
of immediate importance for student teachers
teaching practice. Originating from or adjusted by
experience, it reects the complexity of teaching,
its contextual character, and meets the need for
immediate action (Carter, 1990; Olson & Carter,
1989). When this knowledge is not articulated, the
wheels of teaching have to be reinvented by each
new generation (Brown & McIntyre, 1995, p. 14).
Secondly, articulated practical knowledge
makes the mentors lessons more understandable.
If only observing them, student teachers do not
nd out about the mentors knowledge, beliefs,
and reasons that may clarify their actions and
decisions. Gonzalez and Carter (1996), for exam-
ple, found that student teachers, in some cases,
interpret classroom situations totally dierently
from their mentors. The explication of the cogni-
tions underlying a mentors lesson can, then, be
clarifying. Furthermore, student teachers can
better understand their mentors feedback on their
lessons when they are aware of the mentors
knowledge, beliefs, and values (Edwards &
Collison, 1995; Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann,
1987). These inuence a mentors interpretation
of good teaching and, consequently, a mentors
evaluation of a student teachers lessons.
Thirdly, access to practical knowledge can help
to bridge theory, acquired at the teacher-training
institute, and practice, experienced at the schools
(Bengtsson, 1993). When making explicit mentors
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 726
practical knowledge and student teachers beliefs,
students can start thinking critically about these
and compare them to educational theories.
Leinhardt, McCarthy Young, and Merriman
(1995) claimed that in order to integrate theory
and practice, there is a need for theorizing
practice and particularizing theory. The articu-
lation of a mentors practical knowledge, then, is a
precondition for this integration.
Eventually, student teachers should develop
their own beliefs about teaching and a personal
teaching style, based on critical reection on
several information sources: their own experiences,
their mentors practical knowledge, and theory
(Black & Halliwell, 2000). Critical reection is
required when comparing these three sources
because there are likely to be both similarities
and dierences. It is even possible that student
teachers become aware of dierences between
mentors explicated practical knowledge and
mentors lessons. The literature shows that
teachers knowledge and beliefs and their practice
do not always correspond (Calderhead, 1996).
Even then, the articulation of practical knowledge
remains important. Student teachers have to
reect on the views of others, including possibly
inconsistent and conicting information.
1.3. Access to a mentors practical knowledge
Mentors are not inclined to articulate practical
knowledge, and student teachers are not trying
consciously to access it, e.g., by asking questions
after a mentors lessons (Brown & McIntyre, 1995;
Penny, Harley, & Jessop, 1996; Zanting, Verloop,
& Vermunt, 2001b). Therefore, it seems that
student teachers should be stimulated to access
practical knowledge, but how? Several instruments
and techniques have been used in the research on
teacher knowledge and beliefs: journal keeping,
concept maps, stimulated recall, interviews, prac-
tical arguments, short-answer tests, repertory
grids, metaphors, the drawing of pictures or
story-lines, or conversations (Beijaard, Van Driel,
& Verloop, 1999; Black & Halliwell, 2000; Kagan,
1990; Martin & Kompf, 1996; Meijer, Verloop, &
Beijaard, 1999; Solas, 1992). In the present study,
two instruments were examined as tools for
accessing practical knowledge by student teachers:
concept mapping and completing sentences.
Both instruments were chosen because they can
provide a lot of information in a relatively short
time, without requiring intensive training or
expensive material equipment.
1.4. Research questions
The main research question to be addressed was
whether concept mapping and completing sen-
tences were manageable and eective instruments
to stimulate student teachers to explicate their own
beliefs about teaching and to access their mentors
practical knowledge.
This question was divided into three sub-
questions: (a) what is the nature of the explicated
beliefs of the student teachers and of the elicited
practical knowledge of mentors (e.g., just descrip-
tions of a mentors statements, or descriptions of a
mentors statements including underlying cogni-
tions and reasoning), (b) what do the student
teachers conclude after having compared their
own beliefs about teaching to the mentors elicited
practical knowledge and the theory? And (c) how
do the student teachers evaluate concept mapping
and completing sentences for accessing their
mentors practical knowledge and explicating their
own beliefs about teaching?
The rst research question examined concept
mapping and completing sentences as elicitation
techniques of reasons underlying teaching. The
second one focused on learning experiences that,
according to the student teachers, resulted from
comparing their own explicated beliefs to the
elicited practical knowledge and to the theory.
This comparison was meant to stimulate mean-
ingful learning. Student teachers have to elaborate
this knowledge and these beliefs by relating the
three information sources and thinking critically
about them. These learning activities are intended
to promote deep or meaningful learning
(Vermunt, 1998; Vermunt & Verloop, 1999).
It was assumed that student teachers would
become motivated if they could connect explicated
practical knowledge to their own beliefs about
teaching. Involving ones own beliefs is a sensible
starting point for exploring theories and others
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 727
beliefs (Kagan, 1992). To investigate the student
teachers evaluation of both instruments, the third
research question was formulated.
2. Method
2.1. Context
The study was conducted at the postgraduate
teacher training institute of Leiden University in
the Netherlands. The 1-year course comprised,
alternately, 50% classes in teaching methods,
educational theory, and professional development,
and 50% practical training at schools. The student
teachers were being trained to teach at the high
school level (pupils age 1518) in one specic
language (Dutch, English, German, French, or
Classics), science (mathematics, biology, physics,
and chemistry), or social science (history, art
history, and social studies).
2.2. Participants
The whole 19981999 cohort, 35 student tea-
chers, participated in this study: 16 (46%) were
men and 19 (54%) were women. Sixteen of them
were social science teachers, 13 were language
teachers, and six were science teachers. One subject
teacher, their mentor, supervised every student
teacher. The teaching experience of the mentors,
25 men and 10 women, ranged from ve to 31
years. Their experience with mentoring was also
very diverse, ranging from zero to 25 years.
2.3. The student teacher assignment
The assignment included obtaining information
from three information sources: the student
teacher him/herself, the mentor, and theory. This
was done by the student teachers by: (1) explicat-
ing their own beliefs about order by concept
mapping and completing sentences, (2) eliciting the
mentors practical knowledge about order in the
same way, (3) studying literature about order,
and (4) comparing their own beliefs, the mentors
practical knowledge, and theory.
The assignment was incorporated in the teacher-
training program to test whether it really could be
applied in an educational setting. Therefore, the
criterion for selecting instruments were that (1) an
instrument could be used easily by large numbers
of student teachers, for example, tens or hundreds,
and (2) an instrument could be used by student
teachers without the need for extensive training.
The criteria implied that some instruments that
seem suitable for the elicitation of practical
knowledge were not used, for example, stimulated
recall which is rather complex, time-consuming
and requires technical supplies (see Calderhead,
1981; Meijer, 1999).
A pilot study with 20 student teachers of the
19971998 cohort had proved that, without train-
ing, the interview skills of the student teachers
were not always sucient. For example, student
teachers rarely prompted or they formulated only
a few, supercial questions. Despite this, the
interview proved to be suitable for eliciting a part
of a teachers practical knowledge (e.g., Meijer,
1999). Because in a regular natural teacher training
program there is no sucient time to practice
interview skills, the interview was transformed into
a sentence completion task. This task has
similarities with an interview but is more struc-
tured and is written.
The sentence completion task comprised eight
written sentences on the subject of order in the
classroom to be completed by both mentor and
student teacher. They had, for example, to
complete the sentences: Order in the classroom
means to me y or A precondition for establish-
ing order in the classroom is y Furthermore,
four problems concerning order in the classroom
were briey described, for example, All the pupils
are working except one. This pupil does not
disturb others but is not active at all. The mentor
or student teacher had to describe a solution for
this situation.
The task aimed at explicating beliefs regarding
the interpretation of order, the process of estab-
lishing and maintaining order, disciplinary mea-
sures, and the function of order. The sentences
were formulated in consultation with student
teachers of the 19971998 cohort. They judged
the sentences on being clear, unambiguous, and
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 728
valuable for practice and, if necessary, restated
them. Completing sentences was assumed to be
complementary to the more abstract information
elicited by concept mapping.
Concept mapping has been used in the research
on teacher knowledge and beliefs for capturing
and graphically representing concepts of teaching
and their internal relationships (e.g., Kagan, 1990;
Meijer et al., 1999; Winitzky, Kauchak, & Kelly,
1994). It has been proved to be a suitable
instrument for accessing mentors practical knowl-
edge by student teachers and can be applied by
them without intensive training (see Zanting,
Verloop, & Vermunt, 2001a).
Concept mapping can be carried out either in a
structured or in a non-structured way. In struc-
tured concept mapping, teachers are given a xed
list of concepts to use. In this way, comparisons
between the concept maps can be made (Meijer,
1999). In the non-structured way, only the main
concept is prescribed (Martin & Kompf, 1996). In
the present study, the mentor teachers made a non-
structured concept map because this left room for
the expression of individual concepts. They only
got the central concept order, associated concepts
that related to the main concept, wrote these on
paper and related the concepts to each other by
drawing lines. Examples of a student teachers
concept map and her mentors concept map can be
found in Appendices A and B, respectively.
Choosing the same subject under examination
intertwined interviewing and concept mapping. In
doing so, dierent information about order could
be obtained qualitatively. The subject of order
was chosen because maintaining order is one of the
main concerns of beginning student teachers
(Fuller in Eraut, 1994; Kagan, 1992; Oosterheert
& Vermunt, 2001). Eventually, to relate the
exploration of mentors practical knowledge more
strongly to actual teaching, it was preceded by
lesson observations.
These observations provided the student tea-
chers with a framework to understand their
mentors articulated practical knowledge. It can-
not be assumed that the elicited practical knowl-
edge related to these lessons. Concept mapping
and completing sentences can elicit teaching
knowledge, beliefs, and values that can be referred
to as knowledge-on-action (Sch. oon, 1987). Other
techniques, such as stimulated recall, are required
for the elicitation of knowledge-in-action or
interactive cognitions.
2.4. Procedure
The elicitation of practical knowledge was
integrated into the teacher-training program as a
part of the course in personal development for
teachers. The central question in this course was
what knowledge and abilities a teacher should
possess in order to function competently and
comfortably. The main learning goals were: the
student teacher is able (1) to reect on the teaching
of others (experienced teachers and fellow student
teachers), and (2) to infer conclusions regarding
his or her own teaching. Accessing practical
knowledge ts these goals because it reveals
mentors knowledge, beliefs, and values, and the
student teachers can then reect on these.
Furthermore, the student teachers in this study
reected on their own beliefs about teaching by
comparing them to the elicited practical know-
ledge and the theory presented as part of their
education.
The student teachers, rstly, made their own
concept maps about order and completed sen-
tences concerning this theme. Before they actually
carried out the assignment, two university teachers
introduced it, each in one group, exactly following
the procedure described in a scenario. This
introduction covered the goals of the assignment,
the procedure, and an explanation and illustration
of concept mapping and completing sentences.
During the class, student teachers made their
concept maps. There was a written instruction
for concept mapping and completing sentences
both for mentor and student teacher. The mentors
made and claried their concept maps and
completed sentences at the practice schools. At
home, the student teachers studied two chapters of
literature about order and skills for maintaining
order (ICLON, 1997). Then, they composed a
report comprising the following elements
*
the student teachers and mentors concept map
and completed sentences;
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 729
*
the student teachers main beliefs about order
based on his or her own concept map and
completed sentences;
*
a summary of the mentors explicated practical
knowledge of order based on his or her
concept map and completed sentences;
*
a summary of the main topics in the literature
about the subject order;
*
similarities and dierences between the student
teachers beliefs and the mentors practical
knowledge, these beliefs and the theory, and
the practical knowledge and the theory;
*
the student teachers conclusions based on the
comparisons mentioned above.
The student teachers reports were the basis for
data analyses. In addition to this, ten student
teachers were interviewed to gather more in-depth
information.
2.5. The interview
Ten student teachers, four men and six women,
were interviewed. An individual interview schedule
was previously created for each of these on the
basis of the individual reports. The aim of
interviewing was gathering additional information
and, if necessary, illuminating parts of the report.
The interviews focused on the student teachers
opinions about the function of the assignment and
the preference for concept mapping, completing
sentences, or both. The interviews lasted 45 min on
average, were all conducted by the same inter-
viewer, and were audiotaped.
2.6. Data-analysis
The student teachers reports were analyzed to
answer research questions a and b. The interviews
were used for additional information and, espe-
cially, for answering research question c.
2.6.1. Qualitative analysis of the reported practical
knowledge, ones own beliefs, and theory
The descriptions of practical knowledge were
analyzed using pre-formulated categories. These
categories were based on distinctions of views on
knowledge developed by Baxter Magolda, Kuhn,
and Perry, described in Hofer and Pintrich (1997).
These authors reviewed Baxter Magoldas state-
ment that knowledge can be viewed as absolute
(authorities have the right answers) or as indivi-
dual (opinions of individuals are equally valid).
Kuhn (in Hofer & Pintrich, 1997) added that, in
the individual view, dierent opinions could be
compared and evaluated. Perry (in Hofer &
Pintrich, 1997) called the absolutist right-and-
wrong view dualism and the individual percep-
tion of knowledge relativism. Based on the works
of these authors, the rst distinction in the data
analysis was called: absolute versus situational.
This distinction is relevant, because there is not
just one way to teach. Experienced teachers
possess a variety of teaching skills that they can
tailor to the specic subject matter, pupils,
learning goal, or point in time. Practical knowl-
edge reects this complexity and specicity of
teaching, and is, therefore, situational (Carter,
1990).
The second distinction was derived from Tom-
linson (1995), who stressed the importance of a
student teachers understanding of not only the
how of teaching but also the why of teaching.
These reasons underlying teaching are often not
articulated by experienced (mentor) teachers
(Brown & McIntyre, 1995). Therefore, the second
distinction was practical knowledge as just facts
versus analyzing practical knowledge by involving
underlying reasoning and motives. This distinction
is directly related to the main research question:
are interviewing and completing sentences valu-
able ways for student teachers to access their
mentors practical knowledge? The practical
knowledge aimed at comprises the reasons for or
the why of teaching.
The two distinctions generated four categories,
which are described in Table 1: descriptive
absolute (DA), descriptivesituational (DS),
analyticalabsolute (AA), and analyticalsitua-
tional (AS). The descriptions of the theory, the
student teachers beliefs, and the mentors prac-
tical knowledge were labeled with these categories,
including the descriptions of the comparisons
between the three information sources.
The reports were divided into coding units on
the basis of their content. When a student teacher
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 730
started to write about a new item, a new unit
began. Two independent raters on the basis of
130 coding units determined the interrater relia-
bility as 0.79.
2.6.2. Quantitative analysis of the reported
practical knowledge, ones own beliefs, and theory
In order to examine what parts of the assign-
ment elicited the most analytical statements, a
Table 1
Matrix for analyzing restated practical knowledge based on two distinctions: (1) absolute versus situational, and (2) descriptive
versus analytical
Absolute Example Situational Example
Descriptive dening teaching or
order as a state instead of
a process;
There is order when the
pupils do what I tell
them.
dening teaching or
order as a relative
and/or situational state;
Order means something dier-
ent for every person.
describing a teaching activ-
ity or disciplinary measure
without reasons behind it;
Exceptionally, I send pu-
pils out of the classroom.
describing teaching or
disciplinary measures in
a specic situation;
When the pupils have just had
a hard test, I tolerate more
noise.
describing several teaching
or disciplinary measures
without indicating situa-
tion-specicity;
ycall a pupil to order,
giving guidelines, sepa-
rate pupils, having a con-
versation with a pupil.
describing several teach-
ing or disciplinary mea-
sures tailored to specic
situations without rea-
sons behind these;
On Tuesday morning my les-
sons are more intensive for the
pupils than during the last
class on Friday afternoon.
describing practical tips and
concrete advice without rea-
sons behind it;
Sending pupils out of the
classroom does not work.
describing practical tips
and concrete advice for
dierent situations with-
out reasons behind
them;
When pupils are noisy, you can
raise the lesson tempo. At
least, in pre-university classes.
Dont do this in junior general
secondary classes.
Analytical describing abstract state-
ments without explicating
underlying process or me-
chanism.
Order originates in the
interplay between teacher
and pupils.
describing abstract si-
tuation-specic state-
ments without under-
lying mechanism.
You adapt your communica-
tion style to the individual
pupil.
dening teaching or
order as a process includ-
ing the explication of the
underlying mechanism;
To me, order means a
precondition for pupils to
come to learn. They need
a certain amount of rest
and concentration to
achieve learning goals.
dening teaching or
order as a situation-
specic process includ-
ing the explication of
the underlying mechan-
ism;
When I am explaining new
subject matter, it must be
totally silent. Otherwise, they
will not understand it. When
they are practicing together,
the pupils deliberate. Then, it
is not silent: there is a working
order.
describing teaching activ-
ities/disciplinary measures
including the explication of
the reasons behind it;
Only sent pupil out of the
classroom very excep-
tionally. Otherwise, they
think you are powerless
because the deputy head
has to handle your order
problems.
describing teaching ac-
tivities/disciplinary mea-
sures in a specic
situation including the
explication of the rea-
sons behind it;
I dont punish the pupils in the
nal year. I think it is their
own responsibility to learn and
to pass their exam.
explicating relations within
and inuences on teaching
or order with explanation
of the underlying process.
When you are not in a
good mood, pupils sense
it and, you get the same
unpleasant behavior back.
explicating situational
relations within and in-
uences on teaching or
order including the ex-
planation of the func-
tioning.
One of the pupils has ADHD.
It makes no sense to discipline
him. This boy has a problem
himself. So, I just let him go
ahead. Fortunately, the other
pupils accept this.
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 731
quantitative analysis was conducted. It was
assumed that analytical codes were nearer to
the explications of practical knowledge than
descriptive ones. Therefore, the relative fre-
quency of analytical categories was determined
for every part of the report by dividing the
frequencies by the total number of coding units
of a report. There were six parts: three summaries,
viz., of the beliefs, practical knowledge, and
theory, and three descriptions of similarities and
dierences between these. In order to determine
which part of the assignment had elicited most
analytical statements, the relative frequencies of
analytical codes were compared between the parts
mentioned above. Because the data were not
normally distributed, the Wilcoxon Signed Rank
Test was applied.
2.6.3. The student teachers conclusions
After comparing their own beliefs, their men-
tors practical knowledge, and the theory, the
student teachers wrote down their conclusions.
Various categories of these conclusions were
derived in interaction with the data. Therefore,
contrary to the categories in Table 1, there were no
pre-formulated categories.
2.6.4. Analysis of the student teachers evaluations
of the instruments
The interviews were analyzed by reviewing the
tape and making notes. The focus of the analysis
was on (1) the cognitive activities initiated by the
assignment, and (2) the preference for concept
mapping, completing sentences, or combining
both. Various categories were derived in interac-
tion with the data.
3. Results
3.1. Reported own beliefs, practical knowledge and
theory
The student teachers reports were analyzed
with the categories described in Table 1. Excerpts
of the reports will illustrate the four categories.
3.1.1. Descriptiveabsolute (DA)
This category includes concrete statements
about order, like measures that work or do
not work, without explication of underlying
mechanism. For example, one student teacher
restated the theory studied as: Gordon stated
that, as a teacher, you had better not say you
should know better to a pupil (Student Teacher
22: ST22). In so doing, she indicated a principle,
but she did not describe the reason for it. There-
fore, the unit was coded as descriptive. Further-
more, she did not relate the principle to a specic
situation. It was stated as a general truth and,
thus, coded as absolute.
3.1.2. Descriptive-situational (DS)
Other statements of the students own beliefs,
the elicited practical knowledge, or theory
comprised statements about the situationspeci-
city of teaching. These statements were also
descriptive because there were no explications of
underlying reasoning. For example: Every teacher
has his or her own way of teaching and therefore
also his or her own way of maintaining order.
According to my mentor, it is important to remain
who you are (ST23). This student teacher
indicated the personal way of teaching, but did
not elaborate on what exactly makes the dierence
between teachers and what will happen if a student
teacher imitates a way of teaching that does not t
his or her personality. This relativity of teaching
was also described without further explanation for
the students own teaching: What really is order?
In my lessons, pupils are allowed to consult each
other, and order will dier from lesson to lesson
(ST25).
3.1.3. Analyticalabsolute (AA)
This category comprised reasons underlying
teaching without indicating situation specicity,
such as: In the chapters of the syllabus, conversa-
tions with pupils were emphasized, because these
can elicit the reasons for conicts (ST17). Another
student teacher related the content of the chapters
to her personal teaching experiences.
During one of my lessons, I noticed that a
group of four pupils remained chatting. This
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 732
was very disturbing to me, because I was not
able to concentrate on the questions of other
pupils in the classroom. I tried to ignore them,
at rst, but this did not solve anything. So, I
accepted the responsibility for my own feelings
and told the students honestly and clearly that
this could not continue during these lessons and
that their behavior irritated me. This appeared
to be very eective. In the syllabus, this is
referred to as explicating what eect the
situation has on yourself (ST18).
3.1.4. Analyticalsituational (AS)
The student teachers could also write in a way
that comprised reasons underlying teaching or a
description of underlying mechanism in dierent
situations. The timing of the lesson inuences the
atmosphere in the classroom. When the pupils just
have had their physical education class, some of
them will arrive too late and, then, the order is
already disturbed. The pupils also have to relax for
a moment, with their ushed faces, before being
able to concentrate (ST22).
3.2. Frequencies of the categories in the student
teachers reports
In the student teachers reports, there were more
absolute (AD & AA, P 91%) statements than
situational (SD & SA, P 9%) ones (z 4:85;
po0:001). This pattern of more absolute cate-
gories than situational was not due to one specic
part of the reports. It appeared in the reports of
the students own beliefs, elicited practical knowl-
edge, and theory, and in the mutual comparisons.
This meant that most statements were rather
general and not focusing on specic pupils or
situations. In the further analysis, the distinction
between absolute versus situational was not used.
The second distinction, descriptive versus ana-
lytical, was examined.
Overall, there was no signicant dierence
between the number of descriptive (P 46%)
and analytical statements (P 54%). However,
in the summary of students own beliefs, the
elicited practical knowledge, and the theory, there
were more analytical statements than descriptive
ones (z 2:54; po0:05). This was not the case for
the written comparisons between the three sources.
In a separate examination of the summaries of the
three sources, only those of the student teachers
own beliefs included more analytical than descrip-
tive categories (z 2:43; po0:05).
3.3. Dierences between the student teachers
In order to examine possible patterns in the
student teachers reports, the group was divided
into a low analyzing group (LA) and a high
analyzing group (HA). The percentages of the
analytical codes were computed. The mean of this
score was 0.56 and the median 0.54. The line of
demarcation for the HA group was put at 0.55, the
average of mean and median. Student teachers
with a relative proportion of analyzing statements
lower than 0.55 belonged to the LA group, the
others to the HA group.
Subsequently, dierences in scoring patterns
between the LA and HA groups were examined.
It appeared that the relatively higher proportions
of analyzing categories could be traced back to
more analytical statements of the students own
beliefs by the HA group (z 2:24; po0:05). There
were no dierences in the statements of the elicited
practical knowledge and the theory.
3.4. The student teachers conclusions
After comparing the mentors explicated prac-
tical knowledge with their own beliefs about
teaching and the theory, the student teachers
drew conclusions regarding their own beliefs.
Three types of conclusions were derived from the
reports. These conclusions reect new ideas or
intentions as perceived by the student teachers in
response to the assignment. This does not mean
that these conclusions can be translated directly
into the student teachers actual teaching.
The rst type of conclusion, mentioned by 14
out of 35 student teachers, concerned the content
of order: its denition and the process of
establishing and maintaining it. For example:
Order is a precondition for creating a good
atmosphere in which pupils and teacher can
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 733
function well. Order facilitates, besides other
things, the instructional process . . . Preparing
your lessons thoroughly is also of great
importance for maintaining order. If you
master the subject matter, you have to concen-
trate less on it (ST23).
This conclusion was also stated as an intention for
their own teaching: prepare the lessons well, treat
the subject matter soundly, and structure the
lesson clearly (ST6).
The second type of conclusion comprised
linking the mentors practical knowledge and ideas
described in the literature to the students own
beliefs about teaching, leading to the extension of
these beliefs, critical thought about them or,
possibly, changing them. This conclusion was
reached by 11 student teachers, for example: The
mentor and both chapters provided me with a
reference frame to test my own beliefs, which, to a
not inconsiderable extent, have been molded by
my own educational experience as a pupil (ST6).
The student teacher explained that he was
confronted with several aspects of order I had
not the slightest notion of and that he could use
the ideas for developing a more extensive reper-
toire for maintaining order. This was described
more specically by another student teacher:
My conclusion is that my own beliefs about
order in the classroom were incomplete. Ac-
cording to me, what matters most importantly
was motivating the pupils and being self-
condent as a teacher. I did not realize the
importance of being explicit to the pupils,
structuring lessons, and showing your feelings
to the pupils. I was not familiar with the
numerous solutions to discipline problems that
can be applied before punishing (ST17).
A conclusion concerning the students own teach-
ing was described about taking into account the
background of the pupils: Possibly, my mentor
can help me, because he knows more about the
pupilsy. I will also try to nd some articles in
order to get a better picture about ways of dealing
with pupils backgrounds (ST20). Exploring ones
own teaching style was intended by a student
teacher who stated:
My mentor acts in a way that suits him, but that
does not suit, or only partly suits the theory
(that he knows). I have to discover what suits
me and feel comfortable with. I think it is useful
to look at the theory regularly and then, if
necessary, to change my practice (ST11).
The third type of conclusion, mentioned nine
times, stressed the student teachers individual
interpretation of order and the wish to develop a
personal teaching style.
In general, my mentor and I agree about
order. In practice, I tolerate more than my
mentory. I think this has to do with my own
former secondary school. Basically, it was
hardly ever quiet there. My mentor prefers the
pupils to be quiet, while I dont mind when the
kids talk quietly to each other. My mentor
already corrects when the kids talk quietly for a
moment, while I only do so when the chatting
of the other ones disturbs other pupils. This
example clearly illustrates the dierences be-
tween my mentor and me (ST30).
3.5. The student teachers learning experiences with
the instruments
The student teachers were asked what activities
had been initiated by the student teacher assign-
ment. These activities can be interpreted as
learning activities and can be described by the
following categories
*
becoming aware of ones own beliefs about
teaching ( f 5);
*
becoming aware that ones own beliefs are
situational and relative ( f 1);
*
structuring and relating ones own beliefs
( f 10);
*
eliciting beliefs of the mentor that were rst
unknown to the student teacher ( f 7);
*
structuring the beliefs of the mentor, listing all
the points, and getting an overview in one
moment ( f 2);
*
testing ones own beliefs about teaching against
those of the mentor ( f 1).
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 734
(The sum of the frequencies can exceed ten,
because an individual student teacher could have
mentioned more than one learning activity.)
Seven student teachers preferred the combina-
tion of concept mapping and completing sentences
because, according to them, both instruments
complemented each other. Completing sentences
yielded concrete, practical, and situation-specic
information, while concept mapping yielded more
abstract and general information. In this way,
the sentences concretized the concept map of the
mentor. One student teacher added that the
concept map was additional to the sentences,
because it forced both student and mentor teacher
to explicate their beliefs in a visual way.
One student teacher preferred the concept map
because she thought the sentences were too
restrictive. This has to do with the specicity of
the sentences, which was also indicated by the
other student teachers. Two student teachers
preferred completing sentences because they
thought this elicited more practical information.
4. Conclusions and discussion
Concept mapping and completing sentences
were evaluated as instruments that could be used
by student teachers as a means to explicate their
own beliefs about teaching and to access their
mentors practical knowledge. To this end, instru-
ments resembling those used by researchers on
teachers knowledge and beliefs were tested in an
educational context. This was done by answering
the rst research question: (a) what is the nature of
the explicated beliefs of the student teachers and of
the elicited practical knowledge of mentors (e.g.,
just descriptions of a mentors statements, includ-
ing underlying cognitions and reasoning)? In the
present study, beliefs and practical knowledge
focused on the subject order. The second research
question was aimed at comparing three
information sources: (b) what do the student
teachers conclude after having compared their
own beliefs about teaching to the mentors elicited
practical knowledge and to theory? Finally, the
student teachers perception of the assignment was
investigated in the third research question: (c) how
do the student teachers evaluate concept mapping
and completing sentences as a means to access a
part of their mentors practical knowledge and
explicating their own beliefs about teaching?
4.1. The nature of the reported practical knowledge,
own beliefs, and theory
Can student teachers explicate their own beliefs
about teaching and access their mentors practical
knowledge through concept mapping and com-
pleting sentences? The assumption was that, if they
could, they should not only reveal statements
about teaching performance, the how of teach-
ing, but also reasons underlying teaching, the
why of teaching. In other words, the reports
should include analytical statements reecting
underlying thinking and reasoning about teaching
instead of only descriptive ones (see Table 1).
Another distinction was that between absolute
and situational statements. Situational state-
ments recognize the situational, personal, and
relative character of teaching strategies.
It was shown that the student teachers reports
included more absolute than situational state-
ments. This can be explained by the nature of
the professional knowledge of beginners or
novices and of more experienced mentors. We
know that experienced teachers knowledge is
more elaborate, event-based, and consists of
knowledge about typical behaviors, interactions,
and situations (Carter, 1990). It is remarkable that
the student teachers descriptions of the mentors
practical knowledge did not include more situa-
tional statements than did the descriptions of their
own beliefs. The latter would be expected when
reporting on mentors practical knowledge. Possi-
bly, the subject order is rather general and
principally elicited more absolute statements.
In the report, there was no dierence between the
number of descriptive and analytical statements.
When examining parts of the reports, it appeared
that the summaries of the student teachers beliefs,
the mentors practical knowledge, and the theory
included a greater number of analytical units,
which was not the case for the written comparisons
between these three sources. This can be explained
by the fact that the student teachers often referred
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 735
to the summaries when describing the compar-
isons. When comparing their own ideas, their
mentors, or the theory, they did not rehearse the
analytical descriptions mentioned earlier.
The reports with relatively high scores (HA)
were compared to those with low scores to check
which parts of the assignment had elicited the most
analytical statements. It appeared that the rela-
tively high analytical scores originated from the
descriptions of the student teachers own beliefs. It
is not clear whether the HA group could handle the
concept mapping and completing sentences better
or were better at reporting on their own reasoning.
Furthermore, the HA group did not dier in the
number of analytical statements when they re-
ported on mentors practical knowledge. Some
questions still remain: was the HA group better at
eliciting their own beliefs in an analytical way,
rather than their mentors practical knowledge? Or
were they better able at reporting on their own
beliefs rather than others practical knowledge?
These questions have to do with the complexity
of the student teacher assignment that appeals to
several skills, especially when exploring a mentors
practical knowledge: conversation, cognitive pro-
cessing, and writing skills. Conversation skills,
such as listening, continuing to ask questions, and
summarizing, are required when the concept map
is discussed with the mentor. Cognitive processing
skills, such as selecting, relating, structuring, and
critical thinking, are required for elaborating
meaningfully the mentors concept map and
completed sentences (see Vermunt, 1998). Writing
skills are required for reporting on the elicited
practical knowledge. What is more, the mentors
should also possess skills to verbalize their
practical knowledge. Thus, when student teachers
did not report on their mentors practical knowl-
edge, including the reasons underlying teaching, it
is not possible to indicate the immediate cause.
Conversely, when they did, it can be assumed that
they possessed the skills required for this task.
Further research should examine the partial
skills required for eliciting and comparing own
beliefs and mentors practical knowledge. This
means that the capacities and motivation of
mentor teachers for explicating their own practical
knowledge should also be investigated more
thoroughly. Other studies could focus on those
student teachers who were not able or not willing
to elicit their own beliefs and their mentors
practical knowledge. Thus, it can, for example,
be distinguished whether not supplying analytical
descriptions is due to a lack of elicitation skills, or
a lack of writing skills.
4.2. The student teachers conclusions
Having compared their own beliefs about
order, the elicited mentors practical knowledge,
and the theory, the student teachers wrote down
their conclusions. The three conclusions referred
to (a) the denition and process of establishing and
maintaining order, (b) linking the three informa-
tion sources to each other, and (c) developing their
own teaching style.
These conclusions t the main purposes of the
present study, namely the elicitation of student
teachers beliefs and mentors practical knowledge,
including the reasons underlying their teaching,
and linking their own beliefs, mentors practical
knowledge, and the theory.
The rst conclusion comprises the process of
establishing order, which means that inuencing
factors and their reciprocity, clarications, and
reasoning are involved. When they dened order,
the student teachers related it to process instead of
to a specic and indisputable state. The second
conclusion, based on linking and comparing their
own beliefs, practical knowledge, and the theory,
was the second purpose of the study. The third
conclusion, emphasizing the development of a
personal teaching style, follows the second. After
exploring the similarities and dierences, student
teachers can deliberately decide to teach in their
own way. Some indicated that they had broadened
their own beliefs on the basis of other sources such
as the mentor or the theory. Thus, the elicitation
assignment could also serve to test and broaden
own beliefs about teaching.
4.3. The student teachers evaluations of the
instruments
Preference for a particular instrument, concept
mapping or completing sentences was investigated
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 736
on a small scale to gain more insight into the
motivations for the student teachers preferences.
The interviews with ten of the 35 student teachers
showed that a combination of both instruments
was preferred because the two were regarded as
complementary. The interview elicits more con-
crete and practical information, while the concept
map elicits more abstract and general information.
These results contradict those of a previous study
by Zanting et al. (2001a) in which the interview
was greatly preferred. The small group that was
interviewed in the present study and which possibly
was not comparable to the group involved in the
former study may have caused this dierence.
Another explanation could be that concept map-
ping was evaluated positively in the present study
because the student teachers had also made their
own concept map. This made possible a compar-
ison between own beliefs, on the one hand, and
practical knowledge and theory, on the other.
4.4. Implications for teacher training and further
research
On the whole, the student teachers assignment
to elicit own beliefs and their mentors practical
knowledge, to study related theory, and to
compare these three sources met the purposes
of the present study. Firstly, the student teachers
were able to summarize and report on the views on
order of the three sources in a way that
comprised reasons underlying teaching. This
means that these statements did not only comprise
the way you can teach, but also the explanation of
and motivations for choices made.
Furthermore, the comparison between own
beliefs, a mentors practical knowledge, and the
theory induces learning activities like becoming
aware of, accommodating, or extending ones own
beliefs. It is recognized that because of its
restrictive scale this in-depth study cannot im-
mediately be generalized to the whole setting of
teacher training. Nevertheless, the study has
demonstrated that the assignment is worth in-
vestigating and using in an educational context.
The study also showed that student teachers
beliefs, mentors practical knowledge, and scien-
tic knowledge can be connected and elaborated
critically when the three sources are compared
intentionally and systematically. We recommend
that such systematic linking should become a
regular recurring activity in teacher education.
Appendix A. A student teachers concept map
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 737
This could be achieved in various ways: assign-
ments like in the present study, teacher stories to
be studied by students under the supervision of an
institute teacher, institutionalized discussions be-
tween institute teachers, mentors, and student
teachers, etc.
With regard to the elicitation of practical
knowledge, further research is needed to investi-
gate student teachers who could not deal with the
assignment. It should be determined which of the
required skills, described earlier in this section,
were not sucient. Subsequently, practice and
coaching could be matched to an individual
student teacher. Furthermore, the reasons why
mentors are not willing or able to collaborate
should be investigated, in order to anticipate these.
Eventually, other ways of eliciting beliefs and
practical knowledge that are mentioned in the
introduction are worth investigating, including for
example, stimulated recall. Stimulated recall is
more directly linked to real teaching and class-
room activities and could possibly, therefore, be
useful to elicit more situation-specic practical
knowledge.
Appendix B. A mentor teachers concept map
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 738
References
Beijaard, D., Van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (1999). Evaluation of
story-line methodology in research on teachers practical
knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluations, 25, 4762.
Bengtsson, J. (1993). Theory and practice: Two fundamental
categories in the philosophy of teacher education. Educa-
tional Review, 45(3), 205211.
Black, A. L., & Halliwell, G. (2000). Accessing practical
knowledge: How? Why? Teaching and Teacher Education,
16(1), 103115.
Brown, S., & McIntyre, D. (1995). Making sense of teaching.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Calderhead, J. (1981). Stimulated recall: A method for research
on teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51,
211217.
Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D.
C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 709725). New York: Macmillan.
Carter, K. (1990). Teachers knowledge and learning to teach.
In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher
education (pp. 291310). New York: Macmillan.
Edwards, A., & Collison, J. (1995). What do teacher mentors
tell student teachers about pupil learning in infant
schools? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1(2),
265279.
Elliott, B., & Calderhead, J. (1994). Mentoring for teacher
development: Possibilities and caveats. In D. McIntyre, H.
Hagger, & M. Wilkin (Eds.), Mentoring: Perspectives on
school-based teacher education (pp. 166189). London:
Kogan Page.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and
competence. London: The Falmer Press.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student
teaching teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Educa-
tion, 3(4), 255273.
Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The
nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of
Research on Teaching, 20, 356.
Francis, D. (1995). The reective journal: A window to
preservice teachers practical knowledge. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 11(3), 229241.
Gonzalez, L. E., & Carter, K. (1996). Correspondence in
cooperating teachers and student teachers interpretations of
classroom events. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(1),
3947.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of
epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and
knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educa-
tional Research, 67(1), 88140.
ICLON. (1997). Persoonlijk Functioneren (Personal develop-
ment as a teacher). Unpublished workbook. Leiden, the
Netherlands: Leiden University.
Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition:
Inferences concerning the Goldilocks principle. Review of
Educational Research, 60(3), 419469.
Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice
and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research,
62(2), 129169.
Leinhardt, G., McCarthy Young, K., & Merriman, J. (1995).
Integrating professional knowledge: The theory of practice
and the practice of theory. Learning and Instruction, 5(4),
401408.
Martin, J. M., & Kompf, M. (1996). Teaching in inclusive
classroom settings: The use of journals and concept
mapping techniques. In M. Kompf, W. R. Bond, D.
Dworet, & R. T. Boak (Eds.), Changing research and
practice: Teachers professionalism, identities and knowledge
(pp. 90103). London: The Falmer Press.
Meijer, P. C. (1999). Teachers practical knowledge: Teaching
reading comprehension in secondary education. Doctoral
dissertation. Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden University.
Meijer, P. C., Verloop, N., & Beijaard, D. (1999). Exploring
language teachers practical knowledge about teaching
reading comprehension. Teaching and Teacher Education,
15(1), 5984.
Olson, P. M., & Carter, K. (1989). The capabilities of
cooperating teachers in USA schools for communicating
knowledge about teaching. Journal of Education for Teach-
ing, 15(2), 113131.
Oosterheert, I. E., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). Individual
dierences in learning to teach: Relating cognition, regula-
tion and aect. Learning and Instruction, 11(2), 133156.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational
research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of
Educational Research, 62(3), 307332.
Penny, A. J., Harley, K. L., & Jessop, T. S. (1996). Towards a
language of possibility: Critical reection and mentorship in
initial teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 2(1), 5769.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in
learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research
on teacher education (pp. 102119). New York: Macmillan.
Sch. oon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reective practitioner. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Solas, J. (1992). Investigating teacher and student thinking
about the process of teaching and learning using autobio-
graphy and repertory grid. Review of Educational Research,
62(2), 205225.
Tillema, H. H. (1994). Training and professional expertise:
Bridging the gap between new information and pre-existing
belief of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(6),
601615.
Tomlinson, P. (1995). Understanding mentoring: Reective
strategies for school-based teacher preparation. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Vermunt, J. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning
processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68,
149171.
Vermunt, J. D., & Verloop, N. (1999). Congruence and friction
between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9,
257280.
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 739
Wilson, V., & Pirrie, A. (1999). Developing professional
competence: Lessons from the emergency room. Studies in
Higher Education, 24(2), 211224.
Winitzky, N., Kauchak, D., & Kelly, M. (1994). Measuring
teachers structural knowledge. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 10(2), 125139.
Zanting, A., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J.D. (2001a).
Using interviews and concept maps to access mentor
teachers practical knowledge. Manuscript submitted for
publication.
Zanting, A., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J.D. (2001b). Student
teachers beliefs about mentoring and learning to teach
during teaching practice. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 71, 5780.
A. Zanting et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 17 (2001) 725740 740