Teacher Education
"Simply put, it is reasonable to assume that quality teacher preparation depends on quality teacher educators. Yet, almost nowhere is attention being paid to what teacher educators should know and be able to do" (Goodwin & Kosnik, 2013, p. 334)
For the purpose of this research, teacher education programs are referenced as faculties of education (FoE). These are departments in higher education institutions, usually universities in Canadian contexts, providing a course of study in the discipline of education. Courses in the FoE are designed and delivered to preservice teachers, also referenced as teacher candidates in some literature, who are in the undergraduate program and will graduate to become licensed teachers, usually working within the K-12 sector of education. FoE programs should not be confused with professional development courses, instructional design departments, or higher education centers for teaching and learning, that also provide teaching and learning opportunities and support teacher development without the full range of courses or subject matter found in a FoE.
Since education in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction, FoE develops programs with limited national oversight. An undergraduate degree followed by a course of study in the education department is the most common design of FoE in Canada (Russell & Dillon, 2015). Some universities offer a concurrent education program whereby education related courses are incorporated into the undergraduate course of study. A subsequent master level of study should not be confused with preservice teacher education or professional-years study. For the purpose of this research, the focus will be on the professional years of study.
Globally, teacher education programs face the challenge of managing the ‘theory-practice’ tension. In Canada, this is a major consideration in FoE reform initiatives (Russell & Dillon, 2015). Program design traditionally includes the what and the how of teaching practice:
A secondary issue is the highly transient nature of those who teach in FoE (Kosnik et al., 2015). The term teacher educator (TEds) describes those individuals tasked with teaching in the teacher education programs, seen as gatekeepers and lynchpins to the teaching profession (Kosnik et al., 2015; Voithofer et al., 2019). These individuals frequently bring extensive practice in the field of education into their course designs. TEds can also be new to the discipline, coming through an academic and research stream of study. While teachers in the Ontario K-12 sector are licensed through the Ontario College of Teachers, this is not a requirement for employment or teaching in higher education sectors such as FoE. Although TEds are "at the core of good teacher education" they receive far less attention (Vloet & van Swet, 2010). TEds are often overlooked, invisible, and rarely researched within the field of education (Crawley, 2018; Izadinia, 2014; Kosnik et al., 2015; Voithofer et al., 2019; Woloshyn et al., 2017). Perception suggest that TEds:“The what includes such familiar elements as foundations, subject area methods, and some generic aspects of teaching (e.g., behaviour management and assessment), as well as more recently introduced topics (e.g., diverse learners, inclusive education, and differentiated instruction). The what may also include issues such as the sequencing of courses and practicum experiences and coherence across courses” (Russell & Dillon, 2015, p. 151).
With rapid changes in media and digital technologies impacting the preparation of teachers in FoE, there are increasing demands on teacher educators to improve outcomes (Buss et al., 2018). Research and change efforts in FoE include: a) self-study (Kosnik et al., 2015); b) the infusion of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) frameworks (Jaipal-Jamani et al., 2018; Voithofer et al., 2019); c) the application of participatory teaching (West-Puckett et al., 2018); d) networking teaching and learning (Lohnes Watulak, 2018; Oddone, 2019); e) digital literacies and digital citizenship (Choi et al., 2018; Nascimbeni, 2018); and f) open educational practices (Albion et al., 2017; Kim, 2018). Some of these changes are politically driven, as seen from the US Department of Educational Technology 2016 release of the Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief (Stokes-Beverley & Simoy, 2016) and the European Union Practical Guidelines for Open Education for Academics documents (Inamorato dos Santos, 2019)."should be able to handle themselves in their practice, to act in an effective way, to take care for themselves and to be physically, emotionally and cognitively balanced. They should have a realistic self-concept, concerning who they are, what they are able to do and how they want to develop themselves, especially when coping with educational innovations. ... They should have insight into their personal experiences, feelings, values and motives, and gain self-knowledge about processes of their identity development, construction of meaning and their professional development" (Vloet & van Swet, 2010, p. 150).
Focusing on these changes, specifically related to digital teaching and learning, Foulger et al. (2017) researched the technological practices of teacher educators. The development of the Teacher Educator Technology Competencies established a foundational set of skills and attributes which can support self-reflection and professional development. Research is beginning to examine these competencies in practice (Thomas et al., 2019) but explicit connections to MDL within OEPr of TEds in FoE have not yet been made. My research will focus on the nexus between MDL and OEPr found in teacher educators in FoE in Canadian contexts, so a deeper awareness of research foci with TEds is essential.