Coteaching in Counselor Education: Preparing Doctoral Students for Future Teaching

Abstract

This phenomenological study explored 10 counselor education doctoral students' coteaching experiences with faculty members. Three coteaching structures identified from the data were relational, operational, and developmental. A definition of coteaching supported by the findings is presented. Implications for counselor education programs, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

The Impact of Teaching Preparation Practices on Self‐Efficacy Toward Teaching

“…48) higher than those who received any other frequency of supervision. This supports the CACREP (2015) doctoral teaching standard of weekly supervision, as well as findings from Orr et al (2008) and Baltrinic et al (2016) that weekly supervision of teaching is an important training component for strengthening students’ development as teachers. Finally, satisfaction with supervision was a significant predictor of self‐efficacy toward teaching, explaining the greatest proportion of variability in SETI scores at 56%.…”

“…First, SETI scores did not differ significantly between those who did and did not receive supervision of their teaching; although on average, those who received supervision reported slightly higher scores. These findings are surprising given the reported importance of supervision of teaching for fostering teaching knowledge and skill in CES doctoral students (Baltrinic et al, 2016; Orr et al, 2008), but may suggest the presence or absence of supervision alone is not enough for strengthening student’s confidence in their teaching. Those who received weekly supervision of their teaching had significantly higher self‐efficacy scores, though it was unclear whether participants attributed this to weekly group or individual supervision as the questionnaire item did not distinguish between modalities.…”

“…Supervision or mentoring of teaching includes the provision of feedback and support by a counselor education faculty member to a CES doctoral student for the purpose of strengthening the student’s competency in teaching (Baltrinic, Moate, Hinkle, Jencius, & Taylor, 2018; Suddeath, 2018). Research in CES also supports the use of this aspect of teacher preparation for fostering CES doctoral students’ development of teaching skills (Baltrinic et al, 2016; Orr et al, 2008) and teacher identity (Waalkes et al, 2018).…”

“…Fieldwork can be formal or informal and can vary greatly in the amount of teaching responsibility the student assumes (Orr, Hall, & Hulse‐Killacky, 2008). CES research suggests that engaging in actual teaching through instructor of record or coteaching experiences strengthens doctoral students’ confidence and competence in teaching (Baltrinic, Jencius, & McGlothlin, 2016; Orr et al, 2008), as well as their perceptions of their preparedness to teach (Hall & Hulse, 2010). Junior counselor education faculty members have identified their supervised teaching experiences as the most valuable in strengthening their identity as counselor educators (Waalkes et al, 2018).…”

“…There is a lack of research on what experiences most effectively prepare CES doctoral students to teach (Barrio Minton, Wachter Morris, & Bruner, 2018). Current literature regarding the training of CES doctoral students to teach consists primarily of descriptive or qualitative studies (e.g., Baltrinic et al, 2016; Barrio Minton & Price, 2015; Hunt & Weber‐Gilmore, 2011; Orr et al, 2008; Waalkes et al, 2018) with a dearth of quantitative research on the topic. The few existing quantitative studies have addressed the influence of teaching preparation on CES doctoral students’ self‐efficacy toward teaching (Olguin, 2004; Tollerud, 1990) and counselor educators’ self‐reported preparedness to teach given their doctoral‐level teacher training experiences (Hall & Hulse, 2010).…”