Action Research OnlineFirst, published on September 16, 2009 as doi:10.

1177/1476750309335041

Action Research
118
Copyright 2009 SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC
www.sagepublications.com
DOI: 10.1177/1476750309335041

Article

Developing a practice-theory
model in pre-service teacher
education in Greece
The implications of action-research: A case
study
Vassilis Tsafos
University of Athens, Greece

Abstract

Key words
action

research

higher

education

This paper deals with the use of action research in a postgraduate teacher education programme. The first part of the
article presents the initial education of secondary teachers in
Greece, as well as a postgraduate university programme that
could be viewed as an alternative pre-service teacher education
(PTE) programme, as implemented in a partnership between
a tertiary education institution and certain secondary schools.
The second part of the article describes the research I conducted
during the programme, as an educator and researcher. It is a
case study, aiming at investigating how the school-based PTE
programme was experienced by its participants, including the
student-teachers and myself, as their supervisor and an educator from a tertiary education institution. Data were collected
from questionnaire surveys and interviews administered to the
student-teachers, as well as from my personal journal.

school-based

pre-service teacher
education
student-teachers

attitudes
universitiesschools

partnership

  Action Research

Pre-service education of Greek secondary teachers: Existing

conditions
Teacher education is a complicated multidimensional issue, relating to the educa
tional enterprise and the desired kind of teacher for the educational system. In
Greece, numerous factors prevent the creation of a reflexive environment, in which
appropriate and effective teacher pre- or in-service education could take place.
This is evident in literature regarding pre-service teacher education (PTE) of
secondary education student-teachers in Greece (Salteris, 2006). Dissatisfaction
with teacher education and training is considerable (Cassotakis, 1987).
Particularly stressed problems include the lack of systematic psycho-pedagogic
training and a general gap between pedagogical theory and educational practice
(Hopf & Xwhellis, 2003). Commentators and experts point out the correspond
ing university curriculum structure as the fundamental cause of PTE insufficiency
(Spanos, 2005).
Teacher professionalism in Greece is somewhere between the pro-professional
age, when teachers were virtually amateurs: they only needed to carry out the
directives of their more knowledgeable superiors (Hargreaves, 2000, p. 156) and
the age of the autonomous professional, when the spread of teacher pre-service
education in the universities and the growth of in-service education provided by
experts added weight to the claims to expertise on which the rights to autonomy
would rest (Hargreaves, 2000, p. 161).

The problem
What then should be the goal of Greek PTE? Pre-service teacher education
should be organized in a way that connects theory to practice, utilizing partner
ships between higher education institutions and secondary education schools a
worldwide accepted goal of teacher education. As Darling-Hammond mentions,
the enterprise of teacher education must venture out further and further from the
university and engage ever more closely with schools in a mutual transformation
agenda (2006, p. 302). And this mutual transformation agenda is indeed inno
vative for Greece, where pre-service teacher education has traditionally separated
theory and practice, with practice meaning attending model lessons in experi
mental schools and taking notes afterwards. Consequently student-teachers can
neither connect theory to practice nor see how each enriches and complements
the other.

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 

Theory and Practice of Teaching and Evaluation: A

postgraduate programme or an alternative approach to
pre-service teacher education
In this context, I viewed the postgraduate programme Theory and Practice of
Teaching and Evaluation as an alternative approach to PTE. Students go through
three stages:
First stage:

They attend academic seminars on various psycho-pedagogic sub

jects (theory of curriculum, evaluation, methods of educational
research, didactics ...).
Second stage: They are called to relate pedagogical theory to educational prac
tice by: (i) observing a classroom for a minimum of two months,
in collaboration with mentor school teachers, who model and dis
cuss expert practice; and (ii) preparing and implementing teaching
sessions in collaboration with teacher supervisors (university edu
cators who supervise their coursework).
Third stage: They conduct research for their dissertation, supervised by one of
the programmes educators.
We could consider this programme as an alternative PTE programme because:

It provides student-teachers with basic instruction on teaching and essential

reflection tools.

It
bridges the theorypractice gap through collaboration between schools

and higher education institutions. At the same time, student teachers are
moved into the field, to interpret and experience the ideas encountered during
their academic study. Mentored by experienced teachers, they can examine
and apply, even reform, concepts learned in theoretical seminars and model
teaching sessions.
It introduces student-teachers to practical educational research, demonstrat
ing how educational research develops the theorypractice link and ensures
life-long professional development.
I have participated in this programme for the past five years, teaching Didactics
of Ancient Greek. My contribution consisted of:
(a) Lectures on the teaching of Ancient Greek language and literature, which
progressively evolved into open discussion seminars focused on the courses
main issues: its role in the modern world, the goals of this approach, tradi
tional and alternative methods of teaching Ancient Greek (Tsafos, 2004).
(b) Follow-up observations of model teaching sessions in schools, collaborating
with the University. The observations included critical assessment of teaching

  Action Research

sessions, discussion with teachers on their choices and assumptions, evalua

tion and reflection on methods of teaching.
(c) Supervision of the postgraduate students who planned and conducted two
teaching sessions in schools.
(d) Supervision of postgraduate dissertations.

A critical approach to the postgraduate/pre-service teacher

education programme
After five years in the programme, I decided to collect data for a case study. The
aim was to investigate how the school-based PTE programme was being expe
rienced by its participants, including the student-teachers and myself, as their
supervisor and an educator from a tertiary education institution. It was virtually
impossible to collect data from mentor school teachers, as they had been random
ly chosen and participated unsystematically, simply accepting student-teachers in
their classroom and allowing them to conduct their educational research.
I therefore collected data by:
(a) observing student-teachers during the preparation and actual implementa
tion of teaching sessions, and during the reflective critical evaluation after
wards;
(b) recording my experiences in a journal throughout the programmes duration;
and
(c) administering questionnaire surveys and semi-structured interviews to the
student-teachers who had selected me as their dissertation supervisor.
During this fifth year, three out of fifteen student-teachers selected me to super
vise their educational research. This limited number does not allow for a plurality
of voices, yet it does offer the possibility to investigate the aptitudes, values and
interests of a team of student-teachers who agreed on the priority of practice in
the educational process.

The educators point of view

Theoretical framework
As an educator, two issues concerned me: (1) the partnership between universities
and schools, and (2) school-based teacher education.
(1) The term partnership refers to various models of collaboration and
co-operation implemented between higher education institutions and schools, to
provide student-teachers with quality pre-service teacher training experiences.

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 

This is no authentic partnership, as school and university agents do not act as

equal partners. The university determined and prescribed the programmes aims
and structure, demanding the experienced teachers collaboration. On the con
trary, in an authentic partnership their ultimate goals are to institutionalise the
partnership in their respective settings, create an inter-institutional structure that
will permit change and improvement to occur at both levels (Catelli, Padovano,
& Costello, 2000, p. 227).
(2) In school-based teacher education, student-teachers gain actual school
experience by participating in the educational process. Teachers are not tech
nicians called to assimilate a body of theoretical knowledge, but professionals
called to reflect on their work and take conscious decisions. Therefore, schoolbased teacher education refers to an actual on-going development, throughout
the teachers professional life (Day, 1999). This kind of professional development
opens teachers to new ideas and strategies. Because if participation is to con
tribute to teachers professional development, it must be rendered as richly as
possible as experience ... as something which engages our interest and curi
osity ... as something to which we are sufficiently receptive that we allow to
modify our assumptions (Bridges, 1993, p. 61).
In this context, pre-service teacher education is based on:

The relationship between theory and practice; practice does not derive
from the theoretical understanding of educational values or principles, nor
do student-teachers develop skills simply to apply them in practice. This
is embedded in the rational approach to teacher education, which aims at
the development of autonomous professionals (Elliott, 1993). Theory does
not guide, confirm and legalize practice; instead theory and practice com
plement each other. Following Elliotts situational understanding, prac
tice is grounded in interpretations of particular situations as a whole and
cannot be improved without improving these interpretations (1993, p. 18).
Consequently, teacher education must develop student-teachers ability to
reach situational understanding, helping them judge and take decisions in
any educational situation. It is the practical science model of teacher educa
tion and professional performance (Elliott, 1993).
The relationship between student-teachers and experienced teachers; inex
perienced student teachers necessarily depend on ideas from sources outside
their experience (McIntyre, 1993). Their representations of the educational
process are in fact students representations. Their students point of view
should progressively turn into a teachers point of view, as learning to
teach requires that new teachers come to understand teaching in ways quite
different from their own experience as students (Darling-Hammond, 2006,
p. 305). This perspective opens through the collaboration with experienced
teachers, who participate by providing a body of educational knowledge and

  Action Research

offering student-teachers the evidence and the opportunity to reflect on edu

cational practice.
There is so much to be read, to be discussed, to be found in the practice of experi
enced teachers, which merits examination and mental trial but which it will not be
possible for the individual student teacher to test in his or her own practice, because
of constraints of time, opportunity or expertise. (McIntyre, 1993, p. 47)

They contribute by helping students articulate their thinking in practice,

teaching them how to reflect on their practice (Parsons & Stephenson,
2005). In this way, field experience serves as a laboratory for exploration
and examination, not as a model of best practice (ODonelle & Callegos,
2006). Consequently, school teachers should play a greater role in PTE, with
student-teachers spending more time in schools during their studies.
Reflecting on the educational process, defined as the systematic inquiry into
ones own practice, to improve that practice and to deepen ones understand
ing of it (Lucas in McIntyre, 1993, pp. 4243). In PTE, reflection means
much more; it entails reflecting on certain educational issues and at the
same time gaining new understandings of the skills and attitudes necessary
to engage in the reflective process. Student-teachers supervisors commit to
helping them develop the attitude and skills necessary to reflect on and study
their teaching (Zeichner, 1994). Moreover, student-teachers must conquer
three similar levels of reflection, posed by Zeichner and Liston (cited in
Elliott, 1993, p. 139):
(i) The unproblematic technical proficiency at achieving pre-determined
ends; the efficient and effective application of attaining ends which are
accepted as given, where neither the ends nor the institutional context
of classroom, school, community and society are treated as problem
atic.
(ii) The situational, theoretical and institutional assumptions and the effects
of teaching actions, goals and structures. Here the problem is explaining
and clarifying the assumptions and predispositions underlying practice,
and assessing an actions educational consequences.
(iii) The moral and ethical implications of pedagogy and of social structures
and concepts. Here both teaching (ends and means) and its surrounding
context are considered problematic.
As a researcher, my main preoccupation was to include practical educational
research, especially educational action research, in PTE.
Classroom research must be central to PTE programmes based on practical
educational research. PTE introduces student-teachers to reflecting on their prac
tice, helping them become professionals by improving both their practice and their
understanding of it. The ability to gain knowledge from experience is crucial for

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 

the student-teachers professional development, which can be further enhanced

by their engagement in practice-centered inquiry, which helps them assess and
respond to the needs of the children in their classrooms, an important aspect
of professional practice that does not come easily to novices (Carroll & YargerKane, 2000). All concepts of the teacher as a researcher movement (Stenhouse,
1975), the reflective practitioner (Schn, 1983), the action researcher (Carr &
Kemmis, 1986) and the creation of a living educational theory (Whitehead, 1989)
are based on this practical and reflective perception of professionalism (Aspald
& Brown, 1993).
As Christopher Day points out:
Learners must be active participants in their own learning. Successful professional
development is that which assumes that experiences and intuitions of practitioners,
their personal knowings gleaned from personal experiences are of prime value. It
consciously employs reflection, analysis and experimentation by providing active
opportunities for participants to move from intuition to the disciplined collection of
experienced knowledge. (1990, p. 236)

Educational action research, as a powerful tool for developing better new

teachers (Kosnik & Beck, 2000), helps student-teachers acquire the understand
ing and skills necessary for a teachers complex and demanding role. Furthermore,
the inclusion of action research in a PTE programme is an effective way of linking
theory and practice, both within the programme and in the minds of the student
teachers (Kosnik & Beck, 2000, p. 118). Finally, student-teachers view teaching
as a process integrally related to research, involving inquiry and experimentation
(Ross, 1987). Since action research views knowledge and action as tightly inter
woven, understanding and action are kept in constant interaction (Price & Valli,
2006), encouraging lifelong education and professional development. Studentteachers active role changes their attitude both of the educational process and of
training itself.
My contribution to the programme
Following this theoretical framework, I tried to give a more reflective tone to the
PTE programme under study. Specifically:

In the first stage, the seminars, I focused equally on what the students should
know and on how they might think, aiming to present student-teachers
with (a) the theoretical knowledge and (b) the reflective process they should
learn to engage in. Student-teachers were to cultivate their judgment skills
so as to accurately diagnose the teaching of Ancient Greek. We identified
the main problem: school students dislike Ancient Greek. The seminar thus
revolved around ways of dealing with this problem as teachers. Studentteachers entertained a variety of suggestions, and expressed some of their

  Action Research

assumptions on how Ancient Greek should be taught. By bringing forward

and discussing these assumptions, student-teachers addressed their mis
conceptions, which could otherwise distort or block any new information
presented to them in the PTE programme (Kubler LaBoskey, 1993). Tacit
knowledge was made explicit. Looking for new suggestions we would read
critically through the national curriculum, the provided guidelines and any
alternative curriculum proposed, and discuss reflectively on the objectives
of teaching Ancient Greek today, on practitioners alternative proposals, on
methodological problems, on empirical research findings, on teachers craft
knowledge ... Thus viewed, theory offers no concrete and precise guidelines
on how to teach. Student-teachers were provided with theoretical knowledge
that appeared as hypothetical and, armed with reflective skills, they would
approach the teaching process in the classroom critically.
Student-teachers were thus prepared for the second stage. Initially, they
would reflectively observe the teaching process in a real school setting.
Thanks to the preceding reflection sessions, they could focus on the concrete
consequences of teaching and discuss these with their mentor teachers or
peers. In touch with a classroom for a minimum of two months, they also
had the opportunity to identify the students needs and to suggest new ways
of teaching. Through field interaction theory is challenged, while practice is
constantly refined and reflected upon. Later on, they became teachers them
selves. As a teacher supervisor I tried to add depth to this process by asking
them to merge theory and practice in their first attempts to teach in the same
classroom they had observed. I urged them to try out new ideas, testing theo
retical suggestions in practice. During the subsequent group evaluation dis
cussions, I would address issues encountered in the seminars and new issues
emerging from their teaching. Student-teachers could reflect on the teaching
sessions they had observed and on their approaches to practice, before and
after their own teaching experience. They gained experience by observing,
discussing, reflecting, and teaching through conscious decisions.
In the third stage, I worked with the three student-teachers who selected
me as their dissertation supervisor, due to my experience in action research
projects and our common interest in issues regarding practice. I had previ
ously insisted on merging theory and practice, stressing the latters potential
to reform or even generate theory and on the contribution of action research
to theory. I invited them to see theory as a proposal, not a prescription; they
were to reflect on it, adjust it to their classroom and evaluate or even expand
it in the light of practice (Grundy, 1987, pp. 6873). Drawing from the prac
ticetheory model of teacher education, I urged them to carry out a small
scale action research project so as to explore alternative teaching methods
and/or produce and evaluate appropriate educational material. I was both
their dissertation supervisor and the facilitator of the action research they

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 

conducted. As a research facilitator, I attempted to help student-teachers

work towards a norm that redefines teaching by including reflection, inquiry
and attitudes of continual change (Richardson, 1994). I encouraged them
to articulate, discuss and defend their views on the goals and roles of the
Ancient Greek classroom, so they would realize the powerful influence of
pre-existing knowledge, beliefs and prior experiences. My intention was to
help them move towards a deeper understanding of teaching and learning.
Our discussions focused not only on research-related problems, but also on
various teaching-related issues emerging from their research, including con
tent and principles, curriculum design, the process of teaching and learning.
I tried to provide them with an overall research framework, by asking ques
tions to help them deepen their thinking on their practice, by assisting them
in forming and refining questions, by collecting and analysing data, and by
supporting them in the writing of their research report. In this context I
guided them towards a more practical kind of action research (Tichen &
Fellow, 1996), so they would understand both their practice and the educa
tional values embodied in it. They have striven to become more effective
(McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996, p. 128) by contributing their living
educational theories (Whitehead, 1989; Whitehead & McNiff, 2006) so as
to interpret their educational influences, based on their enquiries on learning
enhancement (Whitehead, 1993).

Problems and difficulties

Various important problems appeared. Initially, the prescribed partnership con
text allowed me no opportunity to intervene and create an authentic collaboration
with school teachers. Yet for PTE to be substantial, schools should participate
on equal terms. When experienced teachers are equal partners, they engage
in the whole process actively, eager to play their role as mentors, collaborat
ing with both students and supervisors. These clinical experiences need to be
carefully planned as any other [...] university course (Zeichner, 2006, p. 334).
The circumstances called for a different, more reflective cooperative framework,
allowing inexperienced student-teachers to reflect on educational practice. Yet
my collaboration with the school teachers in question remained officious, while
the student-teachers cooperation with their mentors was less organized and fruit
ful than intended.
Since I was an educator of the postgraduate programme and an evaluator
of their teaching attempts, student-teachers found it hard to see me as a coordina
tor-supervisor or a research facilitator. When planning and carrying out teaching
sessions, most students would opt for trying methods they thought I approved,
based on the theoretical seminars. In this way they may have failed to engage
in fruitful reflection on and experimentation with their own ideas. During the

 10 Action Research

research, they turned to me for guidance, not advice. This attitude often forced
me to intervene, so they would not be discouraged, even though facilitators should
avoid such interventions (Brown, Henry, Henry, & McTaggart, 1988). This would
sometimes make their research temporarily more technical; eventually, I always
guided them back to the reflective process on the issues under study.
For example, they initially decided to research the effectiveness of the teach
ing strategies I presented as more appropriate to an alternative approach of ancient
Greek literature. To help them make informed choices, I invited all three tp a team
meeting. As a critical friend I asked them (a) to present their criteria for choosing
the strategies under research, (b) to compare these strategies with the routines and
to point out the elements that make the difference, and (c) to indicate points to
be revised in later planning. They had to reflect on specific educational circum
stances, thus becoming more flexible. Furthermore, as they had to present, justify
and collectively consider their choices in a team meeting, but also to explain why
these strategies are opposite to the unexamined existing repertoires of practice,
they became less dogmatic and more reflexive. They should question their taken
for granted values as well as those of the mentor, school teachers, a process that
introduces them to a critical reflection, what Francis calls labour, a strenu
ous activity that involves difficulty and persistent effort which usually affords no
pleasure in the early stages (Frrancis & Ingram-Starrs, 2005, p. 543).
The students views on my role were noteworthy. On the one hand, they
were aware of my consultative and supportive role (He offered support and
advice from the beginning of the research down to the writing of the final report
AP; Whats important is that the facilitator encouraged frequent communication
and supported me throughout the research GP). They realized I was trying to
provide them with feedback (With his scientific interventions and timely obser
vations, he enlarged my reflective scope, mainly by offering feedback PP). They
pointed out that I did not try to restrain them (He did not discourage me from
any innovation I wished to try out AP), nor to intervene (He did not attempt to
impose his views on me AP).
On the other hand, all three attributed importance to the guidance I was
forced to offer:
The research facilitator adopted a role of guidance. In my opinion, it was not simply
a consultative role, because my inexperience regarding both the text-centred method
and the way action research is conducted could have led me away from my research
goals. (GP)
He helped me substantially in the production of educational material, not only
because of his significant proposals or observations, but also in terms of seeking
new educational material. (AP)
His objections and alternatives led me to new scientific explorations. [...] He
adopted the role of a coordinator, a teacher, and a friend. (PP)

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 11

These circumstances (the lack of substantial cooperation with experienced

teachers, the inequality of roles when conducting and evaluating teaching
sessions, and the supervisors interventions) restricted the breadth and depth of
the student-teachers reflection significantly. Fortunately, I was able to overcome
the goal of achieving pre-determined ends, and help student-teachers to view the
institutional context of classroom and school as problematic, to delve into the
assumptions and predispositions underlying practice, and to learn how to assess
the educational consequences of their actions. However, I was unable to engage
them in reflection on moral, ethical, social and more general speculations on the
teaching of Ancient Greek.

The student-teachers points of view

Of note are the student-teachers views on the programme, as emerged from their
questionnaire answers and the subsequent semi-structured interview. Of course,
my formal position as their dissertation supervisor with a certain amount of
power may have influenced the data. Being aware of this, I administered the
questionnaires and discussed with them only after the programme had been
completed and their work had already been evaluated, aiming to minimize the
conflict between my role as a researcher and that as a programme educator
(Owen, 2006).
All three student-teachers viewed the programme as of significant assist
ance, since it provided them with pedagogical knowledge and introduced them
to teaching practice, empowering them as educators and preparing them for their
future professional career. They confirmed their practice-oriented interest by
pointing out that their empowerment was brought on by their planning and con
ducting teaching sessions, and their involvement in practical educational research,
exploring issues that concerned them in practice. More specifically:
(a) In terms of their theoretical education: Student-teachers valued highly the
information on alternative teaching methods, which helped them realize that the
formalistic misconceptions they entertained on the teaching of Ancient Greek
originated from the view of teaching they had formed as school students, and
that their academic studies offered them no opportunity to modify their beliefs.
AP mentioned:
We came in contact with alternative methods of teaching Ancient Greek language
and literature, which will hopefully help us breathe new life into the specific sub
ject matter, since they are more experiential, and therefore more motivating for the
students.

Moreover, they were able to identify the theoretical framework of various

approaches to the teaching of Ancient Greek language and literature, and classify
the dispersed teaching techniques for this subject into organized bodies of theory

 12 Action Research

within specific philosophical and didactic contexts (GP). They did not refer to
our broader reflection on the subjects role in todays world. They focused mainly
on methods, viewing them as independent of the subjects philosophy and goalsetting; AP mentioned: Since I think the teaching of Ancient Greek language
and literature in high school is important, I perceive many problems, which are
mainly due to the adopted teaching approach. All three chose methodological
issues for their dissertation.
Despite initial reflection and research explorations on the subjects philoso
phy, student-teachers failed to delve into the broader teaching context that would
meet todays needs, expanding their speculations only to explore the experiential
approach. Was this due to their need for direct and specific ways of dealing with
the present situation in the teaching of Ancient Greek, or were they simply unable
to realize that any change relates to the developing culture of each subjects teach
ing and role in education?
(b) In terms of their contact with practice: Student-teachers agreed it formed the
programmes most important stage, making them more realistic and mature as
educators. It afforded them more time to acclimatize themselves to the schools
ethos, and gave them the opportunity to see how it functions. Reports from all
three students confirmed the above:
I feel more ready to stand in a classroom. As a new teacher I feel insecure, but this
has been somewhat reduced. (AP)
Through my involvement in school life and teaching, I had the opportunity to
experience a school units everyday reality, to see how real educators approached
specific teaching units, and to grasp the distance between the national curriculums
prescriptions and actual feasible results. (GP)
By observing and conducting teaching sessions I managed, to some extent, to merge
theory and practice. In this way I could study and evaluate the impact of teaching
practices, mine or other teachers, on the students. (PP)

They came to appreciate the impact of merging theory and practice on their pro
fessional development. Yet all three noted that the programmes second stage
could have been better organized, detecting the malfunctions in the partnership
between schools and university. For example, supervisor presence should be
stronger, fostering a climate of dialogue, in order to illuminate any issues on the
teaching of Ancient Greek that resulted from practice, issues which the seminars
may have left untouched (G). Furthermore, they believed they spent too much
time observing, which impeded the educational process without significant bene
fits, since the observation process was unplanned and insufficiently fruitful. Their
remarks confirm that experience-based learning is more effective under specific
conditions, and only after appropriate planning (Bridges, 1993; Zeichner, 2006).
The teaching experience was ranked as the most important programme

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 13

component, and viewed as the programmes major strength. By planning, con

ducting, and evaluating teaching sessions, student-teachers were given the chance
to venture different teaching experiments and to become more familiar with the
teaching act, focusing on teaching problems and on the impact of teaching choices
on the school students (PP). They came to realize that theoretical knowledge does
not suffice, that practice has its own dynamics, that only by getting personally
involved in a process, can one actually understand it (AP). Thus, through their
involvement in the programme, they recognized the benefits of merging theory
and practice. They also learned how to observe a teaching session, focusing on
specific issues, and understood the importance of evaluation and reflection for the
improvement of the teaching act. As GP mentioned:
I will always remember the importance of the discussions after the teaching sessions.
I will not often have the chance to hear such comments and remarks on my teaching
in the future. Thats why I consider these discussions extremely valuable.

Moreover, student-teachers modified their attitude towards teaching in general,

ceasing to view it as a series of pre-designed repetitive phases. It was regarded
as a particularly complicated process (AP); as a composite work, influenced
by many factors, which may lead to results as unexpected as peoples different
reactions to common stimuli (GP). Only one student-teacher related teaching
choices to schools of theory, but even he did not proceed to their epistemological
implications, which define the teachers perspective and attitude towards educa
tion in general.
As one might expect, the student-teachers attitudes towards the subject
of Ancient Greek were significantly modified. As PP mentioned: I was given the
chance to disentangle myself from grammar and syntax formalism, by simultane
ously examining form and content, and by exploring the subjects experiential
and interdisciplinary dimensions. GP added: Through the theoretical seminars I
was informed on the subjects contemporary teaching principles, and through my
contact with practice I was able to put limits on the expectations and demands I
can have of my students. Importantly, all three agreed on the main problem in
the teaching of Ancient Greek: its formalistic, knowledge-centred approach, and
the lack of relating Ancient Greek language and literature to todays world.
(c) In terms of their involvement in practical educational research: the studentteachers recognized the importance of research for understanding and enhancing
the educational process. Through action research, they seem to have realized that
practitioners should play a leading role in this process.
I discovered the role of teachers as researchers who view teaching as a process of
continuous feedback [...] My involvement in the research was very creative, as I
formed and implemented strategic actions, which were then the object of observa
tion, critical comments, and change [...] By engaging in such a reflective process I
was able to interpret what takes place in the classroom and the school. (PP)

 14 Action Research

It is very important that, despite certain regressions and their persistent need for
guidance, they did not treat educational research technocratically. They recog
nized the value of reflection, which opens different perspectives on teaching,
throughout a teachers professional career. GP was quite clear on that:
I learned to evaluate my teaching behaviour and the students reactions to it, through
a process of assessment, self-assessment, and reflection.

Moreover, the student-teachers recognized the importance of relating teaching to

research, and underlined how much the former is aided by the latter (AP). In this
way, they adopted a different attitude towards their involvement in both research
and teaching, now regarded as directly interrelated. PPs views on successful
teachers were indicative of this attitude:
Successful teachers are reflective teachers, who form and modify their teaching and
research practice, according to the impact of their practice on their students. Their
involvement in research expands their reflective scope, and improves both their
scientific knowledge and their teaching practice.

This positive opinion on action research, the various forms of which are consid
ered more appropriate for researching the teaching act, is explained:
Action research is considered successful, because it aims at supporting educators in
dealing with the educational acts challenges and problems, and in implementing
innovation through reflection and discussion. Educators contribute to the improve
ment of school reality and practice, while they also expand their knowledge and
professional skills. Therefore, educators are able to develop and implement action
strategies for improvement, to evaluate the results of their efforts, and perhaps to
urge other educators to modify their own school practice. (PP)

Through their involvement, the three students recognized the importance and
dynamics of action research, and the benefits gained by becoming action research
ers. Yet at least two of them were unable to disentangle themselves from the
social studies dominant positivistic paradigm (Greenwood, 2007, p. 257), which
attributes reliability only to representational research with generalizable find
ings. Both GP and AP regarded the lack of representation as a key weakness. GP
mentions that educational research is successful when it can produce reliable find
ings, from a representative sample, with the right methodology. Both articulate
this explicitly, when asked about their future choices of research methodology:
I would choose a method that permits the generalization of findings, as I believe that
a case study, for instance, may produce reliable findings; it is however hard for these
findings to lead to sound conclusions. (AP)
It would perhaps be more fruitful to adopt a large scale research method, capable of
producing useful general conclusions on the impact of the teaching theories under
study on learning. (GP)

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 15

Discussion and implications

The data collected and analysed above demonstrate that this alternative approach
to pre-service teacher education could, under specific conditions, prepare studentteachers for the complex role they have to play in todays schools. We must create
opportunities for universities and schools to establish new kinds of partnership,
where university and school agents act as equal partners. This is the only way to
develop both academic theory and educational practice in a mutually interactive
way. Of course, upgrading the role of the educational act and regarding practi
tioners as equal partners is a challenge, particularly in Greece, where theory exclu
sivity guarantees university status for academics and many educators. Moreover,
it is difficult to recreate the relationship between university experts and extrauniversity public, because of the complex scientific, technical, social and ethical
dilemmas that arise (Greenwood, 2007, p. 261).
In this context, the selection and involvement of mentor teachers should
be more systematic. As mentor teachers have to turn into clinical teachers, they
should be selected not simply because they are good teachers, but mainly because
they have the ability to help others become good teachers. The clinical teacher
is guide, model, counselor, adviser and supervisor as well as teacher of teachers
(Edelfelt & Coble, 2004, p. 450).
Equally important is that the student-teachers take an active role in their
own education, by participating in the teaching act and engaging in action
research. They engage in critical reflection on specific aspects of educational the
ory, seeing that participatory action research offers a form of knowledge different
from the experts dominant knowledge (Taylor & Petit, 2007, p. 237). Within
the framework of educational classroom action research they assume responsibil
ity for their own professional development as they become researchers and selfevaluators. Both stages lead to reflective practice; they reflect on specific issues,
become familiar with reflective skills, and realize the need for reflection through
out their educational action. Such a PTE programme nurtures their disposition to
continually seek answers to difficult problems of teaching and learning, develop
ing the skills to learn from practice (and their colleagues) as well as to learn for
practice (Darling-Hammond, 2006).
However, for this process to be effective, certain conditions must be met.
Firstly, student-teachers need to expand their de facto limited experience, so as
to bring forward their preconceptions, and expand their reflection on teaching,
their role as teachers, and the philosophy of the curriculum and specific subjects.
This can be achieved through cooperation with experienced educators. However,
the latter should be systematically involved in the process, being properly pre
pared for their participation in the programme, and having realized both their
obligation towards student-teachers and the benefits they stand to gain them
selves. Cooperation does not mean transfer of good practices from experienced to

 16 Action Research

inexperienced teachers, but exchange of views and reflective evaluation of teach

ing practices, their theoretical framework, and the subjects philosophy, in order
to comprehend and enhance the educational process. Practitioners realize that
student-teachers bring new ideas, which may form the basis for their in-service
education and help them to re-evaluate their practice; student-teachers are intro
duced to various practices, seeing how different theoretical proposals are tested
and modified in practice. Under these circumstances, the school functions as a
laboratory, rendering the student-teachers researchers, exploring and reflecting
on practices, attitudes and beliefs.
Secondly, the involvement of student-teachers in educational research
through action research is equally challenging, and must be properly managed
(Taylor & Petit, 2007, p. 241). To maximize their benefits from the research
process, student-teachers must gradually familiarize themselves with both the
teaching act and the research methodology. Classroom observation and gradual
transfer of teaching duties can be of assistance. In this way, both student-teachers
and school students become increasingly familiar with experimental teaching, as
the educators teaching choices are first planned and then evaluated. In such an
exploratory context, systematic action research does not seem alien. Moreover,
to enhance student-teachers involvement in such practical educational research,
universities must have a similar attitude towards qualitative research in general
and action research in particular, emphasizing that action research is real research
capable of making an important contribution to knowledge.

References
Aspald, R., & Brown, G. (1993). Keeping teaching professional. In D. Bridges & T.
Kerry (Eds.), Developing teachers professionally (pp. 622). London & New
York: Routledge.
Bridges, D. (1993). School-based teacher education. In D. Bridges & T. Kerry
(Eds.), Developing teachers professionally (pp. 5166). London & New York:
Routledge.
Brown, L., Henry, C., Henry, J., & McTaggart, R. (1988). Action research: Notes on
the national seminar. In S. Kemmis & R. McTaggart (Eds.), The action research
reader (pp. 343345). Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action
research. London: The Falmer Press.
Carroll, S., & Yarger-Kane, G. (2000). Designing projects to promote student teacher
inquiry: An evolutionary approach. Action in Teacher Education, 22(2), 9099.
Cassotakis, M. (1987). Le mouvement de rforme de la formation des enseignants
en Grce. In A. Kazamias & M. Kassotakis (Eds.), Teacher education in the
European Community (pp. 381406). Crete: University of Crete Press.
Catelli, L., Padovano, K., & Costello, J. (2000). Action research in the context of
a school-university partnership: Its value, problems, issues and benefits.
Educational Action Research, 8(2), 225242.

Tsafos A practice-theory model in teacher education 17

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal
of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300314.
Day, C. (1990). The development of teachers personal practical knowledge through
school-based curriculum development projects. In C. Day, M. Pope & P.
Denicolo (Eds.), Insight into teachers thinking and practice (pp. 213239).
London, New York, Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. London: The
Falmer Press.
Edelfelt, R., & Coble, C. (2004). University-school teacher education partnerships in
North Carolina. Journal of In-service Education, 30(3), 443462.
Elliott, J. (Ed.). (1993). Reconstructing teacher education: Teacher development.
London: The Falmer Press.
Francis, D., & Ingram-Starrs, L. (2005). The labour of learning to reflect. Teachers
and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(6), 541553.
Greenwood, D. (2007). Teaching/learning action research requires fundamental
reforms in public higher education. Action Research, 5(3), 249264.
Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or Praxis? London: Falmer.
Hargreaves, A. (2000). Professionalism and professional learning. Teachers and
Teaching, Theory and Practice, 6(2), 151182.
Hopf, D., & Xwhellis, P. (2003). Gymnasium and Lyceum in Greece [text in Greek].
Athens: Ellinika Grammata.
Kosnik, C., & Beck, C. (2000). The action research process as a means of helping stu
dent-teachers understand and fulfill the complex role of the teacher. Educational
Action Research, 8(1), 115136.
Kubler LaBoskey, V. (1993). A conceptual framework for reflection in preservice
teacher education. In J. Calderhead & P. Gates (Eds.), Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development (pp. 2338). London: The Falmer Press.
McIntyre, D. (1993). Theory, theorizing and reflection in initial teacher education. In
J. Calderhead & P. Gates (Eds.), Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development (pp. 3952). London: The Falmer Press.
McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (1996). You and your action research project.
London: Routledge.
McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2006). All you need to know about action research.
London: Sage.
ODonelle, J., & Callegos, R. (2006). Project Movemos: A universitypublic school
collaboration. Action in Teacher Education, 27(4), 1222.
Owen, M. (2006). Conflict and convergence: The ethics review of action research.
Journal of Academic Ethics, 4(14), 6175.
Parsons, M., & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student
teachers: Collaboration and critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching,
Theory and Practice, 11(1), 96116.
Price, J., & Valli, L. (2006). Preservice teachers becoming agents of change: Pedagogical
implications for action research. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 5772.
Richardson, V. (1994). Teacher inquiry as staff development. In S. Hollingsworth
& H. Sockett (Eds.), Teacher research and educational reform: 93rd NSSE
Yearbook, Part I (pp. 186203). Chicago: National Society for the Study of
Education, University of Chicago Press.
Ross, D. (1987). Action research for preservice teachers: A description of why and
how. Peabody Journal of Education, 64, 131150.

 18 Action Research
Salteris, N. (2006). Lifelong teacher education: Investigating the reflective practitioner
[text in Greek]. Athens: Taxideutis.
Schn, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Spanos, G. (2005). Curricula of universitiy departments, and pedagogical-psychological
training and instructive sufficiency of candidate teachers in classical studies. In
G. Spanos (Ed.), The philologist in the modern society: Studies possibilities
prospects [text in Greek] (pp. 1529). Athens: Metaixmio.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development.
London: Heineman.
Tsafos, V. (2004). The teaching of Ancient Greek literature and language: To an alternative approach of ancient world. Athens: Metaixmio.
Taylor, P., & Petit, J. (2007). Learning and teaching participation through action
research: Experiences from an innovative masters programme. Action Research,
5(3), 231247.
Tichen, A., & Fellow, R.D. (1996). Technical, practical and emancipatory research:
are the distinctions becoming blurred? Paper presented at the CARN Conference
on Interprofessional Learning through Action Research. Newcastle, 1820
October.
Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the
kind, How do I improve my practice?. Cambridge Journal of Education, 19,
4152.
Whitehead, J. (1993). The growth of educational knowledge: Creating your own living educational theories. Dorset: Hyde Publications.
Zeichner, K. (1994). Research on teacher thinking and different views of reflective
practice in teaching and teacher education. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal & S. Vaage
(Eds.), Teachers minds and actions (pp. 927). London: The Falmer Press.
Zeichner, K. (2006). Reflections of a university-based teacher educator on the future of
college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education,
57(3), 326340.

Vassilis Tsafos is a Lecturer in the Faculty of Early Childhood Education, University

of Athens, Greece. He has worked as a Deputy Councillor of the Pedagogical Institute
of Greece and as a teacher in schools of Secondary Education. His research and
writing is particularly informed by teaching theory, cultural and curriculum studies.
His current areas of research interest include topics about curriculum, methods of
teaching, educational research methods as well as pre-service and in-service teacher
education. He has written books and articles that try to define the main dimensions in the teaching process and methods of educational research, especially action
research. Address: University of Athens, Navarinou 13A, Athens 10680, Greece.
[Email: tsaf@otenet.gr]