MANTENIMIENTO CORRECTIVO Y

The data from these interviews was coded in the form of incidents and then

subsequently this disparate data was placed into similar groups which might enable some patterns and themes to emerge. The data from all the interviews was studied. Appendix 6b illustrates the coding of the incidents into the main groups. There were seven conceptual groups of data gathered that was highlighted by the focus coding:

• Checking academic qualifications • Clarifying Subject knowledge

• Exploring their understanding of teaching • Discussing their school experiences

• Discussing careers and subject involvement • Dealing with administrative elements • Opportunity for questions

All the interviews had some elements of administration from collecting copies of certificates and checking them against entry requirements to collecting in the literacy exercise and subject specific forms from the potential teachers. All but one interview (D) did this within the first few minutes, many referring to ‘getting the

administration out of the way’. Subject Tutor D as mentioned earlier left these aspects until the end of the interview.

The next main topic that was discussed in all the interviews was that of subject knowledge. This was approached in different ways. Some subject tutors used a self assessment audit that the potential teacher had completed before the interview and went through this with them. Some (Potential Teacher C) hadn’t completed this yet

so the subject tutor talked about their degree experience and what aspects they were studying. Using the audit some subject tutors (Subject Tutors A, E and F) asked the potential teachers to reflect on their strengths and areas they will need to develop for their subject. To consolidate this, four subject tutors (Subject Tutors A, D, E and F) asked the potential teachers to undertake additional subject based tasks to elicit further their subject knowledge. Subject Tutor F informed the potential teacher that not many potential teachers get the questions right, but part of the rationale behind giving these questions is to hopefully highlight for them the need to be aware of specific subject knowledge for the classroom.

Most of the subject tutors (not Subject Tutors E and G) asked about the experience the potential teachers had with pupils, either referring back to their own school days (Subject Tutor D), or the visits they had made into schools (Subject Tutors A, B, C, D and F), or how their work in schools (Subject Tutor F) had given them insights into pupils. Subject Tutor G however asked them to discuss how the subject was taught in schools and through this it was apparent that the potential teacher had spent some time in school, the potential teacher in interview B1 explained the difficulty he had had arranging a visit into school.

Most of the subject tutors asked the potential teachers about teaching itself. Some asked the direct question, ‘why do you want to teach’ (Subject Tutors A, E, D and F)? Some asked why they wanted to teach that particular subject (Subject Tutors C and E), about the qualities of a good teacher (Subject Tutor A), or what they understood teaching to be about (Subject Tutors B, C and D). Linked to this five

subject tutors asked the potential teachers to describe how they would teach an element of their subject to a particular group (Subject Tutors A, B, D, E and G). They were given a clear remit ‘year 9’ or ‘mixed ability’, ‘topic’ or ‘introductory lesson’. Others were asked about extra curricular activities and citizenship in schools (Subject Tutors E and F). As many of the potential teachers were more mature they were asked to give a history of their career and how the subject related to the work they were doing or had done (Subject Tutors B, D and F), or how they maintained an involvement with the subject outside of work (Subject Tutor A).

There were additional aspects that were common across the interviews; most subject tutors gave the potential teachers the opportunity to ask questions which were very wide ranging. Some subject tutors talked about the logistics of the course, workload and school placements.

At the end of the interview many of the subject tutors explained that decisions would be made after consultation with the teachers and that any offer may involve

conditions and they gave some indications as to what these would be (Subject Tutors B, D and F). Other subject tutors just thanked the potential teacher for the interview.

It was interesting to note that there were no explicit references to the personal qualities apart from Subject Tutor A. All the subject tutors though were confident after this short time that they could make a decision as to whether they would offer the potential teacher a place on the course or not. Most subject tutors just wanted confirmation from the teacher that they felt the same. The subject tutors had been

able to satisfy themselves on whether the potential teacher displayed the necessary personal and academic qualities to make a teacher and therefore would have:

…qualities of honesty, courage, care, fairness and practical wisdom…a continuing demand for commitment, enthusiasm and integrity as well as a high level of craft knowledge and practical wisdom. (Day 2000 p.112) The subject tutors were:

…predicting the likelihood that candidates will have the passion, knowledge and personal qualities that will help them become professional educators. (McPherson 2002 p.1)

Coding had given the earlier conceptual groups; perhaps these are what the subject tutors are using to guide them to this decision? Some of these groups include

‘tangible’ data such as subject knowledge and understanding of teaching. However it also became apparent the level or degree of these varies. One potential teacher had several different experiences in schools and the opportunity to observe teaching; one had hardly any, but both were still both offered a place. General interview factors such as likeability (Keenan 1977; Delli and Vera 2003) could also be important. The subject tutor will be closely working with these potential teachers for a year?

Although communication skills were not referred to, it is one of the aspects they are asked to consider by the TDA when selecting teachers (TTA 2003 Requirement 1.8). Two potential teachers did communicate poorly in the interview, one was very nervous, the other did not come across as being nervous but was unable to articulate ideas very clearly. These observations highlighted further questions and areas that could be further studied in the future. However from these observations it appeared that the subject tutor aspect of the interview process had three key purposes:

• To confirm and record academic requirements for entry onto the course. • To consider the personal qualities of the potential teacher.

• To give the potential teacher the opportunity to ensure they have the information to make an informed decision about teaching and confirm that this institution is where to complete this course.

These aims mirror those which are given by the Institution to underpin the selection processes within individual departments (Appendix 6c) therefore it is encouraging that the evidence confirms that this is happening.

With refinement of the data it is suggested that there are six conceptual groups which have emerged as the subject tutors consider an applicant’s potential. They are:

• Personal qualities

• Subject knowledge for teaching • Enthusiasm for the subject

• Experiences of observing or working with pupils • Knowledge of schools settings

• Knowledge of the teaching profession

Additionally it emerged that the ‘amount’ of experience or knowledge within the conceptual groups a potential teacher exhibited varied. It seemed that there was no clear pattern as to how much of these were expected of the potential teachers.