**4. Findings and discussion**

This section discusses the findings of the study with reference to the research question.

## **4.1 Student teacher experiences of the teacher educator assessment of their competencies during the teaching practicum**

The student teachers had varying perceptions of the teacher educator assessment of their competencies during the teaching practicum. Generally, the 10 student teachers in this study regarded evaluator visits as helpful for reflection, grading, nurturing, and a fair critique of their performance. Zeichner and Liston [50] accentuate the importance of student teacher reflection in the practicum component and other field-based activities of ITE programs. Supervisors expect certain competencies from student teachers in terms of the practicum when they visit for assessment [51], evaluating the student teachers' performance in practical teaching situations and monitoring their performance progress with feedback to the HEI and to the student teachers themselves.

#### *4.1.1 Nature of school-based assessment of competencies by teacher educators*

Student Teacher 8 indicated this about her assessment:

*They assessed me on competencies of research on topic, classroom management, time management, learner engagement.*

#### Student Teacher 3 added,

*My experiences with both of my evaluators were positive. They equally taught me valuable lessons and gave good criticism where needed … and conducted a fair evaluation.*

According to these two student teachers, assessment procedures went well with their teacher educators—assessment was fair, and feedback was given for areas requiring improvement.

However, Student Teacher 9 indicated that the number of assessor visits was not adequate for a fair arrival at a final grade.

#### *4.1.2 School-based practicum assessment: Mode*

Most student teachers were assessed at intervals as stipulated in ref. [28], although some mentors also valued the school-based mentorship evaluation as formative assessment and applied this rating regularly. The student teachers were assessed on

#### *Education Annual Volume 2023*

the expected norms and standards as stipulated in the manual, although not all educators conformed to standards, with some not abiding to the 48–hour rule notification and some observing student teacher lessons at incorrect times, affecting student teacher application of practice skills in the classroom. This was noted in the Student Teacher 1 interview:

*They wrote up an evaluation based on the details of my lesson and gave feedback on that. And then generated a mark based on that. There was no rubric involved.*

Student Teacher 10 added,

*They would sit at the back of the class and observe how I taught a specific lesson. They observed classroom management and learner involvement during the lesson, and … if l was able to think on my feet and handle it professionally.*

Another student teacher said,

*Performance was assessed by internal evaluators, one of which used the guidance of the mentor teacher and her feedback was given mainly by evaluators. Tutor teacher would provide oral feedback about areas to improve.*

During the lesson observation, the supervisor provided constructive comments about various aspects of the lesson. The CPUT Manual for Teaching Practicum contains a well-established assessment and scoring aggregate intended as a tool to guide lesson observation. However, analysis of the three lessons reveals an absence of evaluation forms and assessment rubrics, as none mentioned these tools.

#### *4.1.3 School-based practicum assessment: Cultivated competencies*

The areas most assessed by teacher educators during the practicum in the teaching schools were as follows: lesson plan preparation, time management, classroom management, dress code, and research on lesson topics. Numerous scholars have emphasized the role of assessment in determining a student teacher's readiness to teach and the achievement of expected graduate standards. It is anticipated that practicum assessment will comprise elements of supportive guidance for the student teachers, with evaluation of the achievement of the expected competencies [52].

According to Student Teacher 9,

*They were assessing our professionalism, lesson planning, attitude, initiative, work ethic, understanding of planning, teaching and learning resource development, learner involvement, class management, communication skills, time management and admin and organizational skills.*

#### Further, Student Teacher 3 indicated,

*The competencies that were of focus were: Do I plan with purpose, allow active participation from my learners, provide opportunities for meaningful knowledge? …. They also assessed if my teaching was inclusive, appropriate to their grade level and provides enjoyment in the learning process.*

*Student Teacher Experiences of the Teaching Practicum in an Initial Teacher Education Programme… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112306*

Coll et al. [53] explain that assessors should focus on areas of technical competencies rather than higher level teaching skills. Student teachers mentioned research on the topic, instructional strategies, organization and planning, classroom management, caring and inclusiveness, and communication and interpersonal skills as the areas most assessed by teacher educators during practicums.

## *4.1.4 School-based practicum assessment: Student teacher: Teacher educator relationship*

Practicum supervisor impact is classified into professional, personal, and procedural parameters. Different scholars have defined assessment in different ways [12, 24], for example, refer to assessment as a procedure of judgment about student teacher work through analysis of what they are capable of in the assessed domain: hence, what they know, value, or are capable of doing. The 10 student teachers in this study described the relationship with their school-based mentors as professional, assessing, mentoring, affirming, and providing feedback to facilitate their professional growth—people who, according to Student Teacher 6,

*Give feedback and advice as well as showing the ropes, how to go about a lesson if we struggle.*

In addition, Student Teacher 1 commented,

*I have a good relationship with them. But I think that is due to knowing them as lecturers for 4 years. They were always professional and kind to me during assessment. They never interrupted me … Never made me feel uncomfortable.*

As professionalism constitutes the backbone of the teaching process, teacher educators must avoid bias when affirming student teacher practice. It is expected, as suggested by student teachers, that judgment about student teachers is conducted positively, through analysis of what they are capable of in the assessed domain and thus what they know and value and can do.

#### *4.1.5 School-based practicum assessment: Nature of support*

Student teachers listed several areas of focus in their practicum lesson performance as assessed by teacher educators, mentioning planning, research, and practice skills as the most developed during assessment. The collected practicum biographical data revealed the most developed competencies to be time management, classroom management, research on content areas, and learner involvement. Construction of portfolios has recently gained attention as a tool to promote reflection among student teachers [54]. During other in-class and outside-the-classroom activities, student teachers construct an educational portfolio [55] containing lesson plans, weekly summaries of lessons taught, class timetables, class learner lists, school policies, information on lesson content, and finally, CAPS documentation.

Student Teacher 3 spoke of her competencies:

*The competencies I developed was to teach with a purpose. Plan detailed lessons with a variety of learning styles and activities to allow meaningful engagement and knowledge construction…. I also developed a skill to adapt to any situation.*

Student Teacher 6 expressed her improvements:

*I became more aware of my surroundings and how I present myself, I have become more mature and a multitasker…. I am able to cope under pressure and my time management has improved tremendously.*

The assessors maintained a broad holistic focus on developing qualified teachers. They focused their plans on CAPS, appropriate teaching and learning methodologies, teaching and learning resources, capabilities in discharging duties based on school policies, abilities to develop education portfolios, and abilities to reflect on classroom practices.

#### *4.1.6 School-based practicum assessment: Opportunities and challenges of assessment*

When asked of opportunities gained from the practicum assessment, student teachers mentioned knowledge for improving lesson delivery and classroom management. They saw the evaluation visits as opportunities to converse with teacher educators on substantial issues pertaining to practice improvements.

Student Teacher 3 said,

*The opportunities that I took from my lecturers were that I asked them many questions as to how I could improve on my lessons for the future. They gave me good insight and advice in those areas.*

Student Teacher 9 added,

*There were many opportunities for growth in classroom management and planning adapted to the learners' needs. I also felt that I was assessed fairly.*

It is evident that teacher-educator assessment of student teachers is vital for their growth as capable, qualified educators. According to Atputhasamy [56], sharing practical experiences of expert teachers who observe student teacher lessons, receiving feedback, and practicing various teaching strategies at school are the most important factors in student teacher professional growth.

Student teachers mentioned several challenges affecting their performance: inadequate evaluation visits and lesson observations, poor timing of teacher educator evaluations, inconsistency of evaluations, and lack of uniformity in the assessment processes. A study conducted by Haigh and Ell [30] condones transparency in relation to the purpose and practice of practicum assessment, taking into consideration the problematic nature of a practicum and unfairness for student teachers. For example, evaluators had problems meeting the rules and regulations for assessing student teacher classes, which affected the classroom management of the student teachers.

Student Teacher 1 commented,

*A challenge… is that I wish they had observed more… because I do not feel that they could truly assess your ability to be a teacher in 45 minutes. In my case, I was lucky because I knew my evaluators for first year. And my final evaluator … was also my first evaluator in first year.*

In support, Student Teacher 2 said,

*Student Teacher Experiences of the Teaching Practicum in an Initial Teacher Education Programme… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112306*

*I felt like I was not assessed fairly as the two teacher educators who had visited me separately were not using the same criteria of assessment. I never saw any rubric…. It is frustrating as the grades which l got did not match my efforts.*

If the assessment aspect of the program is problematic, the outcome of the assessment is likely not a true reflection of student teacher performance. According to the student teachers, both school-based mentor and teacher educator formative assessments were crippled by a physical absence of classroom observations and a lack of mentor specialization, while the summative assessment was conducted inappropriately (not all teacher educators followed the recommended assessment procedures or used the correct assessment instrument), or the number of visits were inadequate to determine the actual performance of the student teachers [57–59], attribute assessment problems to bias, unreliability, and inconsistency, emphasizing that HEIs and teaching schools need to resolve these problems if the integrity of the assessment system and awarded qualification is to be protected and for the "public to have confidence in teacher educators as the gatekeepers to an initial teaching position" [59].

#### *4.1.7 School-based practicum assessment: Its value*

Student teachers used assessment to question evaluators on conflicting realities between theoretical training at HEIs and practical knowledge in teaching schools and to reflect on knowledge and skills gained from first to final year practicum experiences. Clarke and Collins [60] contend that assessment is a core component of schoolbased practicum for determining student teacher progress of readiness to qualify as competent teachers.

Student Teacher 7 said,

*When you get assessed, it's like a direct reflection of what your lecturer thinks of your LR teaching capabilities, so the assessments hold a lot of value as you always try to push and do your best.*

#### Student Teacher 9 added,

*It informs you of loopholes in your own classroom and teaching practice that you might have failed to see. Thus, it makes you a better teacher, as you know your strengths and weaknesses and can work on them…. When you have your own classroom, you know which aspects you need to improve.*

Student teachers enter the teacher education program with re-established beliefs about teaching and learning derived from their own educational experiences [61]. Part of the role of teacher education and practicum is to encourage a transformation in which existing beliefs are challenged against theory and practice [62].

#### **4.2 Discussion of school-based assessment experiences**

Findings reveal variations in student teacher reflections on their experiences of the teaching practicum because of a teacher educator's assessment of their practice in the classroom. Even in the case of schools associated with universities to strengthen the teaching practice component of teacher education programs as stipulated in ref. [63], not all student teachers receive the expected school-based assessment

experience. The expectation is for collaborative efforts in modeling, observing, guiding, discussing, and reflecting with expertise to be drawn from both the university and the school [33, 64–66]. However, this was not the case with all assigned schools, as mismatches were evident in the expectations of the role of the teaching schools and the role of the universities. For instance, there was a particular case where one student teacher had the same person acting as both mentor and assessor, which, according to ref. [28], is not recommended. The role of summative assessment is assigned to teacher educators at HEIs who conduct the assessment and grading after an interval of mentorship sessions with student teachers and observations of lesson presentations in the classroom.

Darling-Hammond and Snyder [67] confirm that authentic assessment is enacted by multiple sources and involves more than one measure to assess student teachers with the intent of encouraging a broader acquisition of skills and competencies. Multiple data sources used to reach assessment decisions may include documentation of student teacher practices of achievements over time and in various situations. Contrary to this, in respect of the study findings, several student teachers felt that the way the formative and summative evaluation processes were conducted and the feedback received from the teacher educators based on only two visits were insufficient for a fair performance evaluation over the 8–12 weeks' time span of the school practicum.

Despite acknowledgment of the student teacher practicum as integral to assessment [30], several concerns have been raised about its validity and reliability: procedure seems to have been taken for granted in practice with little regard for formal observation processes.

Unlike the evaluation of school-based mentors who had no score aggregate on the performance of the student teacher, the assigned teacher educators from the university awarded the final marks of the Session 1 assessment. The grade was determined from the teacher educator's evaluation of the school-based mentor's sheet and their own evaluation of the student teacher's assessment. The expectation was that each teacher educator's assessment would be guided by the evaluation forms and assessment rubrics as per the recommended procedures of the school-university partnership. However, student teachers noted the absence of such documents, bringing into question the uniformity of assessment and the reliability and validity of their final grade.

Teacher educators' frequency of assessing a student teacher's readiness to teaching is determined by several factors, as stipulated by the HEI, namely: their position (whether appointed as external moderator or not) and the purpose of the assessment. Student teachers' responses on their practicum assessment frequency were determined by what they perceived as assessment and who they perceived as an assessor. At times, for example, student teachers would refer to the tutor teacher as the teacher educator, whilst others referred to the school-based mentor, a clear indication of displacement of assessment roles in certain schools. An analysis of student teacher responses found numerous false assumptions that student teachers are capable of automatically and smoothly transitioning from theoretical to practical teaching in the classroom as not all mentors availed themselves fully to uphold the expected standards of quality for delivering competent teachers.

## **5. Conclusion**

As a qualitative study, the research concentrated on one HEI offering a teaching practicum for combining theory and practice in each of the program's 4 years. Based *Student Teacher Experiences of the Teaching Practicum in an Initial Teacher Education Programme… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112306*

on the findings, the current teaching practicum model as implemented by the selected HEI faces challenges in meeting the expected school-based support, guidance, and advisory role as well as in yielding quality assessment results and, more importantly, in producing the expected quality of competent teachers.

This chapter highlighted how an HEI is implementing the teaching practicum component of its ITE program, noting the opportunities as well as the challenges. In so doing, it adds to the limited research on the implementation of the teaching practicum component in ITE programs in South Africa and globally.

## **Acknowledgements**

I hereby acknowledge and express my gratitude to the Centre for International Teacher Education (CITE), Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT), and the National Research Foundation (NRF) for the support that made this research possible. However, the chapter does not represent the views of CITE, the NRF, or any of their partners.

## **Conflict of interest**

The authors declare no conflict of interest.
