FACILITATION FOR INDONESIAN PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ LEARNING DURING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE PRACTICUM: WORK-INTEGRATED LEARNING PERSPECTIVES Rinjani Bonavidi

Work Integrated Learning (WIL) ============== In a teacher education program, Work integrated learning (WIL) involves pre-service teachers learning through school-related activities that are planned for and assessed, e.g Classroom observation in schools Micro-teaching Role-play in professional interactions Practicum

Stages in WIL ================ Following Billett (2009 & 2011), Before practicum (prepare PSTs for school immersion) During practicum (maximize the available opportunities in the practicum) After practicum (combine and reconcile both on- and off-campus experiences through reflection and encourage long life learning. (Billett 2009, 2011; Patrick et al. 2009; Brown 2010).

During practicum WIL ================ WIL helps maximize the available opportunities in the practicum – Providing opportunities for PSTs to fully integrate workplace activities into their learning to enrich them with practical, actual and authentic knowledge and skills for their future teaching (Billett 2011a, 2011b, 2011c, 2009a; Choy & Delahaye 2011; Huq & Gilbert 2009)Billett 2011a, 2011b, 2011c, 2009aChoy & Delahaye 2011Huq & Gilbert 2009

Focus of during practicum WIL ==================== a)direct guidance from more experienced practitioners b)sequenced and varied activities c)engagement in pedagogic activities or interactions d)effective peer interactions** e)engagement as learners in workplace setting (Billett 2009 & 2011)

Features of the practicum in the research context ================ One practicum only 8 weeks at start of fourth year (final year) Content area: English as an additional language (EAL) Advised by school teachers pre-service EAL teachers placed in one school (out of 30 PSTs)

Research questions ==================== In what ways does the school-based teaching practicum facilitate PSTs’ learning?” a)experienced practitioners b)sequenced and varied activities c)facilitation for pedagogical activities or interactions** d)facilitation for agentic learners

Research methodology =================== a qualitative case study participants – 29 PSTs – 4 university supervisors – 6 mentors data source – teaching practicum guidelines – assessment booklet

Research methodology =================== data collection methods – face to face group interviews (one interview for one participant) – written responses after the interview (questionnaire) data analysis  using categories from Billett (2009, 2011).(2009, 2011).

Research Findings WIL in the teaching practicum ==================== A.Experienced practitioners Mentors, school principal, counselling teachers, university supervisors Quantitatively insufficient ** Qualitatively insufficient Low task support Average emotional support **

WIL in the teaching practicum ==================== A.Experienced practitioners ** Quantitatively insufficient Mentor1:5School Principal 1:30 (PSTs from 4 different edu. dept.) Counselling Teachers 1:30 (PSTs from 4 different edu. dept.) Supervisors 1:30 (PSTs from 4 different edu. dept.)

WIL in the teaching practicum ====================== B.Sequenced and varied activities Sufficient types of activities for PSTs to learn to teach and function as a teacher orientation and observation teaching preparation teaching practice counselling services school administration and management Lacking of activities enactment No clear procedures to implement the intended activities No monitoring and evaluation in the practicum conduct

WIL in the teaching practicum ======================= C.Facilitation for pedagogical activities or interactions Pedagogical activities were not intentionally conducted discussion groups, student-led peer learning, group problem solving, seminars, reflective learning logs, and weekly meetings were not conducted Interactions Formal pedagogical interactions mostly between PST and mentor Informal pedagogical interactions mostly among peers However the interactions were not intentionally facilitated, monitored or evaluated

WIL in the teaching practicum ==================== D.Facilitation for agentic learners Since pedagogical activities were not intentionally conducted, and the quality of interactions were not monitored and facilitated, characteristics of being agentic learners were inadequately encouraged.

Conclusion ================= Sufficient types of core practicum activities were inadequately enacted, which in turn, affected PSTs’ experiences and learning during the practicum. Had pedagogical activities been intentionally conducted, characteristics of being agentic learners would have been effectively encouraged. Thus: a need for effective communication, mutual understanding and collaborative partnership between the schools and universities in designing and implementing the practicum for PSTs’ effective learning.

Comments and feedback are most welcome

THANK YOU