What are the implications of this for the teacher trainer?

discussion revealed that the trainee did indeed have very limited experience of teaching except for individual tuition .

[p]rovide opportunities to gain more experience, do more practice, via, e. g. peer teaching, but not forget such is just a trial on the student’s side

The author agrees with trainees that [h]e/she [the trainer] should involve practice as much as possible into the classes as well as practical advice etc, particularly when, for example, trainees complain about the number of more theoretical courses as weighed against the time spent doing teaching practice.

In practical terms for the trainee increasing the teaching opportunities on a Methodology Foundation equates with the provision of peer teaching in class: [t]hey[the trainer] will have to provide opportunities for students to peer teach. The trainees are therefore very much aware aware that [p]eer teaching is necessary and useful as it offers trainees the chance to listen to others’ experiences and therefore [p]eer-teaching session have to be organised The trainer is therefore obliged to give the opportunity to the students for teaching. (e.g. peer teaching).

It will come as no surprise that there is no call for more provision of theory from the data given here. However, there is a call to balance theory with practice, that is the trainer should involve more practical stuff, peer teaching for instance in order to meet the [n]eed to balance theory and practice.

Moreover, as well as asking for more peer teaching and practice teaching, it is encouraging that students make requests for the chance to observe others’ teaching or make visits to schools: [o]rganise ... observations or go to a secondary school to visit classes.

While the data call for more opportunities for trainees to gain more experience, they also reveal that trainers’ experience and expertise could be utilised given the potential dearth of teaching experience within a seminar group of trainees. A number of responses referred to

the use of problem-solving tasks and simulations as a means of students gaining experience of (classroom) teaching:

[t]hey should bring in problem-solving tasks to initiate certain situations. E.g. a text → [student]s have to think how they would use it in a classroom. The trainer has to create life-like situations (misbehaving students etc.).

However, the danger inherent in such an approach is that the trainee may see problems unrealistically because they have no experience. Consequently, they can only imagine possible problems and possible solutions but it’s very theoretical, [they] have no real experience of these problems or opportunities to test solutions.

Such a response lends support to the teacher trainer who decides to use their own experience in class: the trainer clearly has increased recourse to a range of activities that can realistically provide trainees with more experience. However, as already discussed in the previous section, [t]he teacher trainer should also emphasize the difficulties that might come up in less ideal situations. This demonstrates a heightened awareness on the part of trainees as to the nature of experience and how it can be created or won within the confines of the Methodology Foundation seminar room.

While the data call for more opportunities for trainees to gain experience, they also reveal that trainees can gain valuable knowledge by utilising trainers’ experience and expertise and so corroborate data already presented. One response lends support to the teacher trainer who decides to use their own experience in class in that trainees should [b]elieve those with experience. Furthermore, learning from the trainer has clear pragmatic benefits given the enormity of the task facing the trainee:

[…the trainer] can help the trainees by sharing the knowledge he has gained through years of teaching, therefore sparing them time and effort.

However, the next set of responses give pause for the teacher trainer in as much that they reveal a potential gulf in perceptions between the trainee teacher and the teacher trainer. Teacher trainers delivering the seminars described in Chapter 1 are working under considerable pressure to cover a set number of topics in a certain time. As a result, unfortunately, the trainer may well be, or become, oblivious of the feelings and concerns of trainees:

(s)he [the trainer] should not expect us to give the perfect/right answers (there is no perfect answer, after all) for something that we haven’t experienced, yet.

This set of data is a distinct call for teacher trainers to recognise the true nature of the trainee' situation, namely that the trainer should be aware of the fact that not all members of the class have taught so far. Consequently the trainer:

shouldn’t take for granted that I know what he knows. Sometimes more basic explanation is needed

Such recognition may range from being aware that students may be fully ignorant of the teacher’s job and so uncertain of themselves and their future role, through to the need for trainers to empathise with trainees and adopt the trainees’ view wherever possible. In addition, the trainer needs to be, and certainly needs to be seen to be, patient & helping, and

wherever possible the trainer should [t]ry to motivate and encourage their trainees. Trainees appear very much aware of the notion that teachers make use of a certain amount of jargon, as is also well illustrated by the observation that trainees [d]on’t have teacherly answers ready since they have ‘no teaching experience’ to give ‘teacherish’ answers to all the questions.

Similarly, the trainer shouldn’t expect trainees to be ready to give ingenious ideas in class. While trainees advocate that the trainer provide opportunities to gain more experience, do more practice, via, e. g. peer teaching as described above, this is qualified by the request that the trainer should take into account that for trainees peer teaching is just a trial on the student’s side.

MN Emphasise the need to write appropriate lesson plans with a coherent linked set of activities around a clear teaching point or points with a stated aim to the session.

In the whole scheme of things last week's principal devil's advocate got their comeuppance today. The lesson was not a coherent whole and the lesson plan reflected this in its being A SET OF UNRELATED ACTIVITIES with none of the elements characteristic of a formal lesson plan. There was no build up, very little coherence and no clear language goals were stated, nor were they implied.

The trainee mentioned in a previous entry now gave their own peer teaching session and this revealed a very serious dearth of knowledge of what is required to plan and teach a short session and a clear lack of experience in teaching. This ought to prompt trainers to reconsider their approach to their trainees and teacher training and take time to reflect on what it means for a trainee to be in training. Part of this reflection should involve recognition that the trainees are not knowledgeable about what being a teacher entails.

In this case this is exemplified by the comment that:

[the trainer] mustn’t expect that st[udent]ts know anything about being a teacher. They only know it from the student’s point of view

An alternative perspective is supplied by trainees observing that trainers are prone to misread situations, assuming potentially negative attitudes on the part of students which could be all too easily changed for the better with more open discussion and consideration of the true reality of the situation. The data shows that [s]ome students have serious misconceptions about teaching and so it is imperative that trainers tackle these head on and address the discomfort trainees may feel about their lack of experience, real or perceived. This is necessary because the trainer may misread the situation and wrongly attribute attitudes to trainees. This is often manifested during Methodology seminars by trainees being unsure of themselves, their experience and their ideas:

[t]he teacher trainer may think that students are discouraged or they do not want to share ideas

Feeling embarrassed during peer-teaching, lacking confidence, or just being simply worried are characteristics of anyone embarking upon something new, they are not to be equated with ignoring the harsh realities of the classroom as they are wont to be misinterpreted by the trainer.

Before acquiring status as an experienced teacher, trainees need to be aware of the great benefit of knowledge won by and for themselves, yet by the same token a greater part

of experience involves coming to terms with the limitations of our knowledge. The trainer should help trainees improve the relevance and usefulness of their own resources, while at the same time, as the last comment shows, making them aware of where else to look for help with their teaching.

In view of some of the constituent parts of experience, students may find the task daunting and seek comfort in what they know, that is [r]ely on our own learning experience. Trainers, therefore, must be aware of students' default position: trainees can only use what they know and have experienced:

[i]n this case we have to rely on or learning experience and one-to-one teaching experience and believe those who have teaching practice.

As identified above, this may lead to the contradictory situation of students having to [r]ely on private 1:1 experience despite the view that it counts for little in the mind of many trainees.

Such reliance on one's own learning experience reflects my own situation described in Chapter 2 as a Language Assistant in the Federal Republic of Germany in the mid-1980s and later as a lector in the late 1980s and early 1990 in the German Democratic Republic where I fell back on the experience gained in the language classrooms where I had been a pupil and student. Similarly, my initial experience of teacher training during the early 2000s was one where I imitated people who had trained me rather than allow myself to develop my own approach.

Trainees are able to prove Lortie (1975) right in that they recognise that observing others teach does not constitute teaching experience per se. However, the idea of an apprenticeship of observation doeshave currency if recognised for what it is. Despite claims

to the contrary, there are potentially beneficial aspects of watching other teachers teach even though the data item below points to a lack of awareness amongst trainees of what Lortie described as 'the apprenticeship of observation' (p.61):

[s]tudents do not tend to consider their experience about their former teachers as teaching experience and also, much practice is needed during the training.

Trainers are well advised to bring this idea to the attention of their trainees, Lortie’s criticisms notwithstanding, since it allows trainees potential access to a wealth of experience, some of which they will view positively, some less so. Watching others teach is an example of a training resource, very largely untapped, available to all in every classroom. If for no other reason, watching others teach will emphasise the creativity that teaching involves.