A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators

Abstract

This article reports the results of an empirical study exploring the discourses of physics teacher educators. We ask how the expressed understandings of a physics teacher education programme in the talk of teacher educators potentially support the identity construction of new teachers. Nine teacher educators from different sections of a physics teacher programme in Sweden were interviewed. The concept of discourse models was used to operationalise how the discourses of the teacher education programme potentially enable the performance of different physics teacher identities. The analysis resulted in the construction of four discourse models that could be seen to be both enabling and limiting the kinds of identity performances trainee physics teachers can enact. Knowledge of the models thus potentially empowers trainee physics teachers to understand the different goals of their educational programme and from there make informed choices about their own particular approach to becoming a professional physics teacher. We also suggest that for teacher educators, knowledge of the discourse models could facilitate making conscious, informed decisions about their own teaching practice.

Swimming against the Tide: Five Assumptions about Physics Teacher Education Sustained by the Culture of Physics Departments

“…The study reported in this paper is based on eleven interviews with physics lecturers who work with trainee physics teachers at four separate universities in Sweden. Building on the findings of our earlier work (Larsson et al, 2020) we return to our original three interviews with physics lecturers and combine these with a further eight interviews with physics lecturers who teach physics to trainee teachers at three additional Swedish universities of varying size and research orientation.…”

“…] promote teaching as an intellectually challenging endeavor" (T-TEP, 2012, p. 23). In our earlier work, we focused on the Swedish system of physics teacher education (Larsson et al, 2020) and examined the differences in how educators working in the different parts of an educational program, (physics department, education department and school), expressed what they saw as valued and important in their practices. Analysis resulted in the construction of four discourse models-tacit, default positions about the overarching goal of the program adopted by the training staff interviewed.…”

The Making of Contemporary Physicists: Figured Worlds in the University Quantum Mechanics Classroom

“…While the quantum mechanics course does not include the teaching and learning of physics as a course content, what is explicitly and implicitly communicated about teaching and learning is highly relevant for the future physics teachers. This is particularly interesting as previous research show that physics teacher education is often fragmented, as different departments are responsible for different parts of the education (Larsson et al 2018). It is in the light of the need to create a better continuity across different part of the physics teacher education (Sandifer and Brewe 2015) we discuss the potential consequences of our findings for teacher education.…”

“…Thus, what is communicated about the teaching and learning of physics in the course is highly relevant for these teacher trainees, even if physics teaching methods are not an explicit part of the course content. Previous research has noted that physics teacher education is often fragmented, given that the content courses are taught by physics departments and the pedagogical courses by departments of education, something that is considered problematic (Larsson et al 2018). A factor that has been suggested as important for high-quality physics teacher education is the collaboration between physics departments and education departments (Sandifer and Brewe 2015, p. 3).…”

“…The inclusion of an explicit treatment of physics teaching and learning in a physics content course during the teacher education has a potential to mitigate the fragmentation that physics teacher educations often has been criticized for (Larsson et al 2018). However, in doing so, it is important to coordinate how theories of learning are treated within the different parts of the physics teacher education, both in terms of which theories are introduced and in terms of their ontological status (e.g.…”