This article was downloaded by: [University of Auckland Library]On: 19 October 2014, At: 18:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Teacher EducatorPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utte20

Outcomes of an urban field experience for ruralpreservice teachersSylvia Stalker aa Associate professor at Clarion University , Clarion, PennsylvaniaPublished online: 20 Jan 2010.

To cite this article: Sylvia Stalker (1994) Outcomes of an urban field experience for rural preservice teachers, The TeacherEducator, 29:3, 9-20, DOI: 10.1080/08878739409555058

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878739409555058

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

OUTCOMES OF AN URBAN FIELD EXPERIENCEFOR RURAL PRESERVICE TEACHERS

Sylvia Stalker

Spring break can be an opportunity to prepare preservice teachers forschools similar to the ones where they will most likely find their begin-ning jobs. Students in teacher education programs in rural areas oftenseek field experiences in classrooms different from the ones they at-tended as students. However, because they enroll in universities neartheir homes, the culture of the schools they visit for early field ex-periences and student teaching placements may already be familiar tothem. Constraints involving personnel, time, and budget can limit thediversity of opportunities a teacher education program regularly offersits students. Innovative and collaborative approaches are needed. AtClarion University of Pennsylvania, during the week many universitystudents play on Florida beaches, twenty teacher education studentsparticipated in a special topics course, Field Experience in Urban Class-rooms. They visited schools in four major cities in the eastern UnitedStates and had what one student described as "the best experience of mywhole four years in college."

Background

Field experiences are typically the most meaningful element of their un-dergraduate program for teacher education candidates, especially whencompared with traditional courses, and yet veterans of teacher prepara-tion maintain that they are the component most in need of improvement(2). Studies on the effects of field experiences indicate that we know verylittle about exactly what they do and don't do for students (1). Occur-ring anytime from a semester to three years before student teaching,early field experiences typically are composed of observation and a vary-ing amount of interaction between the education student and classroomteachers and students. Although intended to give preservice teachers adose of reality and contribute to the smooth transition from the role ofstudent teacher to that of a self-actualizing teacher, an early field expe-rience may simply reinforce their memories of their own past schoolexperiences.

Prospective teachers who participate in early field experiences,particularly observation, are likely to concentrate on maintaining order

Sylvia Stalker is an associate professor at Clarion University, Clarion, Pennsylvania.

9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

and keeping children attentive rather than focusing on the children"slearning (8). Thus, early field experiences generally contribute to thedevelopment of "utilitarian perspectives" of teaching (6). By uncriticallyaccepting the practices they observe in the schools, university studentsmay learn that teaching is primarily management. They may focus onthe "hows" of teaching, rather than on the "what" or "why." Their defi-nitions of the role of teacher are not likely to include creative problemsolver, curriculum developer, evaluator, and, as John Dewey sought,active inquirer and student of education (3).

Field experiences may contribute to what Tabachnick identifies asthe hidden curriculum of teacher education (10: 135). Without includ-ing a critique and analysis of what students experience, teacher educa-tors, he writes, are entering upon one more "quiet arrangement toprevent change" and support the status quo in public schools. He callsfor the development of professional perspectives through field ex-periences that would encourage empathy with children, the analysis ofdecisions made in classrooms and in schools, and the understanding ofteaching techniques. If students are not analytic and reflective aboutteaching, they will probably become teachers who are bureaucratic ari'dcustodial-oriented. They may not recognize the need for change inschools and classrooms, and they probably will not see themselves asessential actors of that change.

John Goodlad compares the ills of schooling today to the problemsof air pollution and soil erosion (5: 41) and writes that it is urgent thatbeginning teachers see themselves as change agents with the knowledgeand skills needed to redesign schools. It is essential, then, that teachereducation programs provide appropriate opportunities for theirstudents.

A clear call for active, reflective, and analytical preservice teacherscomes from Liston and Zeichner (9). They urge us to help teacher edu-cation students look beyond the classroom to the institutional and socie-tal contexts, especially when those contexts differ from their ownbackgrounds and experiences. Ostrich-like responses to the work ofteaching have existed for too long in teacher education programs, theywrite. When education students do not understand the realities ofschools, their response to their beginning jobs may be accommodationand acceptance of current situations, cynicism, despair, andwithdrawal.

The experiential background of the typical preservice teacher con-tributes little to her or his professional readiness. Teacher education stu-dents in the United States are profiled as 75 percent white, 93 percentfemale, and 50 percent with a rural or small-town background (14).Most students in teacher education come from homes very near the cam-puses they attend, and residential and commuting students are approxi-

10

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

mately equal in proportions. In addition, their attitudes are shaped by asociety biased along lines of race, class, and gender. Born after the civilrights movement, students typically have only a textbook understandingof equality and justice. They have never had to take a stand. Althoughmotivated by a desire to help and to make a difference, a typical pre-service or beginning teacher is not prepared to deal with cultural differ-ences or with the most significant problems of urban areastoday—poverty and the resulting crime, despair, joblessness, andhunger. Carl Grant identifies the effective preparation of beginningteachers as one of the two major areas essential to the improvement ofthe quality of education for urban students (7).

The Course

At Clarion University, requests by students for an urban field experienceand faculty members' conviction of its potential value led to the devel-opment of the course, Special Topics in Education: Field Experience inUrban Classrooms. The course was designed to provide experiences inurban classrooms that would challenge stereotypical ideas of urban stu-dents and their teachers and encourage the development of reflectiveand analytical inquiry into the urban schools. Students were asked to ex-amine the background and cultures of the urban classroom and to at-tend to classroom dynamics that reflect the background of the learnersand the teacher. A further goal of the course was that students wouldlook beyond the image of teacher as manager and identify and wouldanalyze teaching behaviors that promoted student learning. Special em-phasis was placed on personal response to the experience and on seeingoneself as a teacher in these specific educational settings.

Recruitment for the course took place in classes in elementary edu-cation methods and in educational evaluation and basic teaching skills,typically composed of third-year students. Students taking these courseswould not yet be student teaching during the semester of the field expe-rience. Student teachers at Clarion follow the academic schedules of theschool districts in which they are assigned, rather than that of the uni-versity; therefore, they were ineligible for the course.

A maximum of twenty students was set for the course. Four stu-dents were on an alternate list, and they attended the first two meetingsof the group before accepting the probability that none of the otherswould relinquish their positions. In effect, the number was determinedby the vehicles used. Arrangements were made for one university van,which the instructor drove and which held thirteen students, and for theStudent Association station wagon, which held seven students andwhich they drove. Twenty seemed a manageable number when makingarrangements for classroom assignments and hotel accommodations.

11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

School districts were approached early during the fall semester be-fore the trip. Several of the selected districts regularly sent recruiters toClarion's spring job fair; they were recommended by the university'scareer services office and contacted personally. The Division of BasicEducation at the Pennsylvania Department of Education also assisted inrecommending school districts and people to contact in them. Only onedistrict refused the request for a visit, where proximity to three institu-tions of higher education had already created many requests for field ex-periences. School districts were selected to offer the teacher educationstudents a wide range of experiences in inner city schools with the aimof showing them the potential for success in these schools. Students typi-cally approached the field experience expecting to see the "real world"of an urban classroom, and the instructor hoped the visitation would ex-emplify what should and could be happening in urban schools.

The largest of the school districts we visited was also the most wel-coming, inviting Clarion students to spend several days in its classrooms.Their experience at this school covered two mid-week days and includedan inservice program and a visit to the district's professional develop-ment center. The elementary education majors would be in the sameclassroom for both days, and the secondary majors would have a day atboth the junior high and high school levels. The students visited threeother districts for one day each.

At the district level, schools were selected with principals whowould willingly accommodate observers. Similarly, principals either se-lected or solicited classroom teachers to participate The instructor senta class list of university students indicating their major areas of study,and placements were made accordingly. After one week of experience,the consensus was that students observed a wide range in the quality ofteachers, but that most teachers were judged good to outstanding.

The first of three evening meetings held prior to the field trip wasprimarily introductory. All students were somewhat acquainted with atleast several others in the group before the meeting. Sixteen of thetwenty students had been in at least one course with the instructor. Stu-dents introduced themselves and identified their major area of studyand academic level, their hometown, and their thoughts about the fieldexperience. They received a course syllabus that included a reading as-signment and course expectations and objectives. These were discussedand expanded upon. The instructor presented five focus areas: theurban school; the urban student; the urban teacher; racism, sexism, andclassism; and the America 2000 Goals for Education. She asked the stu-dents to indicate three of the five areas as choices for study, and she laterassigned each student to a focus group.

Before the second meeting, students were asked to view the video-tape Stand and Deliver, the story of Jamie Escalante and his

12

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

mathematics students in a Los Angeles high school. The film was selec-ted because of its realistic portrayal of an inner city school and commu-nity, and its strong statement on the effects of racism. The high schoolstudents' characters were developed sufficiently to generate empathy inviewers, and yet the focus of the movie was the teacher. The film wasunanimously acclaimed by the teacher education students, who wereenthusiastic admirers of Mr. Escalante. The students, working in smallfocus groups, discussed among themselves and then with the entiregroup the meaning of the film for their focus area. All students partici-pated in discussions at both levels, although at different levels ofinvolvement.

Most of the second meeting was spent in specific questions and an-swers about the field trip. Students revealed their expectations of thetrip more openly than during the first meeting. "I am anxious, nervous,and excited," said one, who also said that the trip would give her "an op-portunity to experience city schools that I would not otherwise have."Most of the students from rural areas reported that they had nevervisited a school outside of the county in which they grew up, and theywanted to have the opportunity to visit an urban school.

Some of the students were more enthusiastic than others. Oneyoung woman had always wanted to teach in an inner city. "I want tomake a difference. I want to go on the trip to actually see if I would beable to make my dream come true." This student had questions about in-ner city teaching. She had heard "horror stories like guns, drugs, andchild abuse." She needed to see if these things were true, and if so,whether she would be able to deal with them.

Two of the eighteen students openly questioned whether or not theywould teach, and specifically whether or not they would teach in an ur-ban school. Their backgrounds were rural.

Another young woman was quite clear in stating her questions. Shesaid she knew that it took a special kind of person to be able to teach inurban surroundings, and she wanted to know if she was capable of do-ing it. She wanted to make a change in the lives of children. She ex-pressed concern that she would not be able to maintain control or tomotivate students to learn.

Students read Small Victories (4) for the third meeting. The discus-sion, first in the small groups and then as a whole, began by consideringthe book's implications for each of the five focus areas. Students won-dered if they would see schools in neighborhoods like the one describedin the book. They began to identify characteristics of Jessica Siegel andher colleagues that stood out as essential for successful urban teaching:dedication to the job, concern for individual students, subject areaknowledge, and lots of energy.

13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Students also viewed and discussed two segments of the PBS spe-cial, Crisis in Urban Education, and they worked in the small groups todevelop questions based on their knowledge and expectations of urbanteaching. One woman expressed her skepticism about the behavior of ateacher shown in the video. "She's a fake," she said. "Hugging each childlike thatl Kids can't think that's real. I could never do that." The stu-dents discussed teachers who use hugs or other physical displays of affec-tion in their classrooms, and several others said that they weren't certainhow comfortable they would be with "all that touching." They were pre-pared to watch for it, however, and to assess such behaviors and theirreactions to them as they observed more classroom settings first hand.

The Students

By major areas of study, the twenty students were nine in ElementaryEducation; four in Elementary Education/Early Childhood; one inEarly Childhood Education; one in Elementary Education/SpecialEducation; one in Early Childhood/Special Education; three in Second-ary Education/Math; and one in Secondary Education/Social Studies.Their backgrounds were seven rural; six suburban; and two urban. Onlyone student did not self-identify as white; her mother was from Viet-nam. They were nineteen women and one man.

Outline of a Day

Arrangements had been made for the teacher education students to ob-serve in classrooms for each of the five days. Students majoring inElementary Education, Early Childhood, Special Education, or a com-bination of these typically spent an entire school day in one teacher'sclassroom, often in pairs. The Secondary Education students experi-enced a nearly equal balance between student shadowing and stayingwith one teacher for an entire day. Teachers had been told that the uni-versity students were teaching candidates who had not yet completed asemester of student teaching. Some of them had very little classroom ex-perience, and although they could not be expected to teach a lesson, theywere eager to help out when they could. Typically, they observed fromthe back or the side of the room for a part of each day, worked with in-dividuals or small groups of children, or assisted the classroom teacherin constructing bulletin boards, checking papers, and other tasks.

Each day began and ended with meetings in the school district of-fice or the office of a building principal. Students were typically givenapplications for employment and encouraged to consider the districtwhen they began looking for their first teaching jobs. They were some-what reserved during these meetings on the first day or two, but muchless so as the week progressed. Most of the districts had sent brochures

14

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

and recruitment packages prior to the field trip, and so students used in-formation from the printed materials and their day's experiences to for-mulate their questions. They asked what qualities the districtrepresentatives were looking for in teacher candidates. They wanted toknow how building and grade assignments were determined and whatsupport systems existed for beginning teachers. Most of the studentswould begin applying for jobs within a year of the field trip, and theysaid that they greatly appreciated talking with school district personnel.

Each evening in the hotel the group met again to discuss their ex-periences among themselves. The instructor and students agreed thateveryone should participate, although no one should feel pressured bythe others to speak. The meeting held on the first evening, from seven toeleven P.M., was by far the longest of the five sessions, and the most un-focused. The students were excited by what they had seen and they wereenthusiastic about seeing more. Two central themes of the first meetingwere the teachers and the school climate. Students were critical ofteachers' behaviors which they thought humiliated children, and theygenerally considered the teachers too strict. Comments included, "Theteacher we observed didn't let her kids get away with anything, but theygot a lot done," and "Our teacher seemed to yell at the kids a lot. I'm notsure it was all necessary." Questions were raised about the relationship ofa teacher's strictness to the order maintained in the classroom and, inturn, to the extent of learning taking place. This issue remained centralto discussions after observations all during the week.

The teacher education students were at first made uncomfortableby bars on the windows of schools, guards at the doors, and the bleakphysical surrounding of urban settings. These conditions were majorpoints of discussion on the first day of observation. On the fifth day,however, one student said, "I think we've learned to look beyond thephysical surroundings of these schools to the people. Are they active,safe, and involved in learning? The surroundings are unfortunate, butthat's the way it is."

Students kept journals of their observations and participation inclassrooms each day. The instructor asked them to review their journalsbefore each evening meeting. The purpose was to use the written recordto find meaning for the five focus areas and, individually, to considertheir personal reactions to what they had seen. The students noticedthat their responses to teachers' behaviors or to classroom events weredifferent later on in the week, even though they saw similar practices.For example, they reported that they continued to notice interruptionsof a lesson, but after several days they seemed to be less bothered bythem. They observed teachers' responses to other teachers at the door orcalls from the office, and they saw how the teachers quickly drew theirstudents' attention back to the lesson. The university students began to

15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

regard strict teaching styles less critically, and some students offered ex-cuses for a teacher who often raised her voice. They seemed to change infocus from individual students whose behaviors caused a teacher's strictreactions to the teacher's ability to maintain order and involvement inthe entire classroom. Several had been shocked by some of the languagethey heard at the beginning of the week, and by the fact that mostteachers seemed to ignore it, but they generally agreed that-there werehigher priorities to consider. The opportunity to reflect on differentclassrooms for five successive days seems to have increased their empathyfor urban teachers, their tolerance for distraction, and their ability toanalyze classroom interactions.

An illustration of the university students' shifting reaction to class-room events involves classroom wanderers, children who spend much oftheir time out of their seats. At first, they saw teachers' responses towanderers—whether reprimanding or ignoring the child—as a need tocontrol behaviors or as a teacher not seeing or caring about the child.Later on in the week, other possibilities were suggested. "I think theteacher was more concerned with the other children who were on task.""She let the child know she was watching him, that there were limits,but she didn't want to call everyone else's attention to him." Another stu-dent considered the fact that they saw only one day of the child's behav-ior. "This teacher knows what she's doing. For all we know, the boycould have been a screaming terror in September, or at least very differ-ent from what we saw. I think they had worked out an arrangement."

Follow-up

Just over a week after returning from the urban field experience, stu-dents and the instructor held their last formal meeting. Students hadmet in the small groups to plan for the meeting, and each small groupwas prepared to direct the discussion on their area of focus.

Students concluded that the characteristics that made a good ur-ban teacher were those same qualities identified in most of their coursesin education, but to a greater extent. A successful teacher in urbanschools was almost a "super teacher." They agreed that the goodteachers whom they had observed had been excellent. They were notdiscouraged about their own abilities to try to teach in urban schools; infact, they felt challenged and excited by the idea. They were concernedwith teacher burnout and wondered openly about ways to prevent it inthemselves. One inadequacy which many of the students felt after thefield trip was their inability to speak Spanish. One woman recalled herfrustration at her experience when a six-year-old child asked her to reada book, and because it was in Spanish, she couldn't. "I felt so dumb!" shesaid. "I wish I had taken Spanish, but when I began my program inelementary education, I just didn't know."

16

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

The urban public school student was defined by the university stu-dents as being "just like kids everywhere, only with a higher concentra-tion of problems and greater physical needs." The classroom teachershad often identified problems of individual children for the visitors.There seemed to be an overwhelming number of children whose situa-tions at home were very difficult, and the university students wonderedwhat learning could possibly take place when children come to schoolwith such problems. They were concerned whether enough counselorsand community agencies were available to help the children.

A member of one small group addressing the issue of urban schoolsfirst spoke about school climate, including the neighborhoods theschools were in. They agreed that while the areas around the schoolswere often quite grim, the classrooms and corridors were cheerful andfriendly. They mentioned building principals and assistant principalswho had welcomed them, sometimes taking them personally to theclassrooms they would observe. They thought that the presence of theprincipals contributed a feeling of support and caring for both the class-room teachers and the children. Some of the students were concernedabout a lack of materials in classrooms, but the items they mentionedwere primarily noninstructional, such as tissues. The size of several ofthe secondary schools was rather intimidating to the rural students, butthey acknowledged that teaching teams and academic departmentsseemed to provide a sense of belonging for the teachers.

The group also addressed school districts as a whole. For example,one of the districts had recently chosen to eliminate physical educationat the elementary level in order to save money. Administrators in the dis-trict thought that the children participated in physical activities in theirneighborhoods, whereas they typically did not receive instruction inmusic or fine arts outside of school. Teachers were encouraged to takechildren to the schools' playgrounds and to use physical activities intheir classrooms. The university students, at first critical of the action,asked how the decision had been made, whether parents had been in-volved, how teachers managed playground time, and what happened tothe physical education teachers. When they learned that teachers andparents had been involved, and when they discussed the impact of thedecision with classroom teachers, they appreciated the issue'scomplexity.

Another district action which impressed the university students wasthe design for a new elementary school building; teachers had been in-vited to draw up the plan. One student said that she had always heardthat teaching was a lonely job and that teachers' opinions don't countvery much. This example showed that her image was not always true.

The group that had been assigned to consider the effects of racism,sexism, and classism on the students and the teachers had a more

17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

difficult task than the others. Although they could define these termsand identify some of their effects on teaching, they had difficulty in dis-cussing any related issues with the classroom teachers. An incident thatillustrates the difficulty they encountered occurred in the van one morn-ing before school. The instructor was driving, and a representative ofthe district accompanied the group, giving directions and taking stu-dents into different schools for their day of observing. The instructorasked how the district dealt with racial tension and whether or not spe-cial efforts had been made to promote positive intergroup relations."Oh, we don't have any problem here," was the answer, and the direc-tion of the conversation changed.

Students were able to discuss their own feelings about being inclassrooms where all students and the teacher were African-American."I felt so out of place at first. Then I seemed to get used to being differ-ent, and it didn't seem so unusual. But I'm part of the privileged group.I can't imagine how it would be if I were the one discriminated against."

At the end of one day, a central office administrator met with theuniversity students and talked about her feelings as an African-American woman beginning her teaching career in a primarily whiteschool district. She related her experience to the kinds of experiencesthey might have in urban schools. The students did not reveal their feel-ings at the time, but later they said that they appreciated her remarks.

The effects of sexism and classism that they were able to observewere additional topics for this group. Members were pleased to reportthat within classrooms they heard no sexist comments, but they ac-knowledged that most of the building and central office administratorsthey met were men. The only male student of the twenty had frequentlybeen given special attention by school district personnel, and thisprovided an opportunity for discussion of differential treatment basedon gender.

While most of the students' reactions to poverty in urban schoolsindicated that they were uncomfortable in examining their own classbias, one young woman was not. "Are we going to simply feel sorry forthese kids, which doesn't seem very useful, or are we going to be out-raged at the system which keeps them poor?"

Members of the last small group described the efforts they sawschools make in order to implement the America 2000 Goals. One dis-trict had provided pamphlets specifically addressing the goals, and asuperintendent in another district had mentioned them in a welcomingspeech. The students seemed skeptical about the feasibility of several ofthe goals, particularly those asking that all students enter school readyto learn and that 90 percent of all students complete high school. Somestudents said that while they had been ready to dismiss the goals asmerely a political gesture, they were impressed by the attention given to

18

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

the goals by the districts. They believed a drug-free and violence-freeschool environment is attainable and surely worth working for, anddrop-out rates and academic achievement can be measured. These goalsrepresent standards toward which school districts, schools, and individ-ual classroom teachers can strive.

Conclusion

As outcomes of the urban field experience, twenty undergraduateteacher education students were able to describe the needs of students inurban schools and identify teaching strategies used by teachers in urbansettings. They defined racism, sexism, and classism, and described howthese attitudes affect students' learning and the teaching process.

Through the field experience, the students demonstrated that theywere able to interact comfortably with people of diverse cultural back-grounds and backgrounds dissimilar to their own. They examined andanalyzed stereotypes in the light of the experiences they had in theurban schools and demonstrated sensitivity toward the similaritiesand differences between themselves and people of other culturalbackgrounds.

Through their participation in the field experience and fulfillmentof the course requirements, the students demonstrated a personal com-mitment to improving education for people of color and of lower socio-economic backgrounds. They said that they wanted to learn more abouturban schools, and they believed they could be good teachers in class-rooms like the ones they saw. In addition, they demonstrated a commit-ment to examining and reflecting on their own beliefs and values as theyrelate to teaching. Several students said that they would continue tokeep journals of their classroom experiences, especially during studentteaching and their initial jobs. They appreciated the opportunity to dis-cuss each day's experiences with each other, and they looked forward tosimilar collegial interactions.

Plans for a second year of the urban field experience course are be-ing made with some revisions. Questions of integration and segregationwill replace the topics of racism, sexism, and classism as focus areas sothat students will be better able to observe and inquire into more tan-gible and less emotionally charged subjects. Because of the changes innational politics, school reform will replace the America 2000 Goals as afocus. Since many of the districts have strong mentor programs, empha-sis will be on the beginning teacher as part of the focus on the urbanteacher. Students who participated in the first field trip will attend in-troductory meetings of the group, and Clarion alumni and first-yearteachers who graduated from other universities in the Pennsylvaniastate system and are now teaching in the districts to be visited will meet

19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

with the university students during the evening meetings after their dayof observation.

The field experience afforded the opportunity for preserviceteachers to observe and interact in urban classrooms. In addition, the in-structor gained insight into the relationship of field experiences to otherparts of the program and the impact of field experiences on students.Because of the great differences between their own schooling and theclassrooms they visited, students used their past experiences for com-parison, rather than simply reinforcing their memories of the wayteaching is done. Intense preparation and continual, critical examina-tion of the practices they observed enabled students to see teachers asproblem solvers.

Students returned to campus with a new approach to their course-work. The experience helped them to understand the importance of try-ing new methods of teaching. "What I'm learning actually hasmeaning!" They seemed to take greater responsibility for their prepara-tion. Two weeks after the trip one student reported, "I understand moreof what to look for and how to prepare myself for teaching in the urbanschool. I listen for more information that will help me and look at ar-ticles that deal with urban school problems." With the wisdom of ex-perience and the optimism of youth, another student said, "I've seen theother side of the education world and I know what I can do to improveit."

References

1. Bennie, W. A. "Field-based Teacher Education: A Reconsideration." The TeacherEducator 17(4) (1982): 19-24.

2. Corrigan, D. C., and M. Haberman. "The Context of Teacher Education." In W. R.Houston, ed.. Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. New York: Mac-millan, 1990: 195-211.

3. Dewey, J. Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan, 1938.4. Freedman. S. C. Small Victories: The Real World of a Teacher. Her Students, and

Their High School. New York: Harper & Row, 1990.5. Goodlad, J. I. Teachers for our Nation's Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991.6. Goodman. J. "Making Early Field Experiences Meaningful: A Critical Approach."

Journal of Education for Teaching 12(2) (1986): 109-25.7. Grant. C. A. "Urban Teachers: Their New Colleagues and Curriculum." Phi Delta

Kappan 70(10) (1989): 764-70.8. Lanier, J. E.. and J. W. Little. "Research on Teacher Education." In M. C. Wittrock.

ed., Handbook jor Research on Teaching. 3rd ed. New York: Maemillan.527-69.

9. Liston, D. P., and K. M. Zeichner. Teacher Education and the Social Conditions ofSchooling rev. ed. New York: Routledge, 1991.

10. Tabachnick, B. R. "Intern-teacher Roles: illusion. Disillusion and Reality." Journal ofEducation 162(1) (1980): 122-37.

11. Zimpher, N. "The RATE Project: A Profile of Teacher Education Students." Journalof Teacher Education 40(6) (1989): 27-30.

20

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

18:

51 1

9 O

ctob

er 2

014