Kurdish EFL Students Teachers’ Practicum Experience: Some Basic Challenges
Abstract—The present study highlights the main challenges faced by EFL student teachers (STs) of the Department of English - College of Basic Education - University of Sulaimani during their teaching practice. To investigate the challenges, a closed-ended questionnaire is designed which consists of 20 items focusing on a variety of relevant issues of practicum experience. The questionnaire is given to 50 EFL STs and the collected data is statistically analyzed. The study hypothesizes that EFL STs might have serious challenges in their teaching at basic schools, which could be related to the lack of motivation of basic school students, shortage of practicum period, supervisors’ evaluation, and lack of teaching technology. These challenges are proved true after the analysis of the data. Based on the conclusions of this current study, it is recommended that Kurdish EFL STs should be familiarized with different aspects of teaching profession. To this end, the university stakeholders should design a specialized program for ST practicum and create a strong link with basic school programs. The conclusions and recommendations could be taken into consideration by the STs, university teaching staff, and basic school principals to overcome the challenges and improve the practicum process. Thus, the study could have potentially significant implications for the senior administrators of the Department of English, College of Basic Education deanery, and the University of Sulaimani presidency for addressing the main challenges of practicum faced by EFL STs.
Bailey, K. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, K. (2009). Issues in language teacher evaluation. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds), The Handbook of language teaching (pp.706-725). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Beck, C. & Kosnik, C. (2002). Components of a good practicum placement: Student teacher perceptions. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 81-98.
Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice. New York: State University of New York Press.
Collinson, V., Kozina, E., Lin, Y., Ling, L., Matheson, I., Newcornbe, L. & Zogla, I. (2009). Professional development to teachers: A world of change. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(1), 3-19.
Farrell, Th. (2007). Failing the practicum: Narrowing the gap between expectations and reality with reflective practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 193-201.
Gebhard, J. (2006). Teaching English as a foreign or a second language: A teacher self-development and methodology guide. (2nd Edition). USA: The University of Michigan Press.
Handal, G., & Lauvas, P. (1987). Promoting reflective teaching. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
He, Y. (2009). Strength-based mentoring in pre-service teacher education: A literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 17(3), 263-275.
Hoben, G. & Brickell, G. (2006). Using diagrams as reflective tools to represent the dynamics of classroom interaction. In P. Aubusson & S. Schuck (Eds), Teacher learning and development: The minor maze (pp. 237-250). The Netherlands: Springer.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, K. (2009). Second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective. UK: Taylor & Francis.
No Item Agree Neutral Disagree
1 Basic school teachers have used L1 and I cannot use L2 most of the time
2 Basic school students prefer traditional methods of learning/teaching
3 The practicum period is short (i.e., 45 days are not enough).
4 The classes are large; 40 (and above) students are in each class.
5 Basic school students are motivated to learn English
6 I am able to write a lesson plan.
7 I am able to explain all topics since I have an idea about the textbook.
8 I am able to design questions for course exam.
9 I have enough information about practicum experience.
10 The principal treats student teachers as a school teacher.
11 I thought that student teachers are neglected by the school manager.
12 The principal observes student teachers’ class to evaluate their teaching style.
13 I am aware of the evaluation criteria.
14 The supervisor provides sufficient feedback (written and/or spoken) on student teachers’ teaching style.
15 The supervisor visits the student teacher regularly.
16 The supervisor stays for an entire lesson period during the evaluation process.
17 The schools provide student teachers with teaching aids (CD player, projector, etc.)
18 There is a special room for English (e.g., English zone).
19 All basic school students have the student book, activity book, and teacher book.
20 I am able to use English while teaching.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K., Mundry, S., Love, N. & Hewson, P. (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. (3rd Edition). California: Corwin.
Marais, P. & Meier, C. (2004). Hear our voices: Student teacher’s experience during practical teaching. Africa Education Review, 1(2), 220-233.
Mills, J. R. (1980). A guide to teaching systematic observation to student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 31(6), 5-9.
Ogonor, B. O. & Badmus, M. M. (2006). Reflective teaching practice among student teachers: The case in tertiary institution in Nigeria. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 1-11.
Peters, J. H. (2012). Are they ready? Final year pre-service teachers’ learning about managing student behaviour. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(9), 18-42
Prebble, T., Hargraves, H., Leach, L., Naidoo, K., Suddaby, G. & Zepke, N. (2004). Impact of student support services and academic development programmes on student outcomes in undergraduate tertiary study: A synthesis of the research (Report to the Ministry of Education). Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/7321/ugradstudentoutcomes.pdf (29 September 2018)
Richards, J. (2012). Competence and performance in language teaching. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds), The Cambridge guide to pedagogy and practice in second language teaching (pp. 46-59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ryan, G., Toohey, S., & Hughes, C. (1996). The purpose, value and structure of the practicum in higher education: A literature review. Higher Education, 31(3), 355-377.
Tarone, E. & Allwright, D. (2005). Second language teacher learning and student second language learning: Shaping the knowledge base. In D. J. Tedick (Ed), Second language teacher education: International perspectives (pp. 5-23). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Zeichner, K. (2006). Reflections of a university based teacher educator on the future of college and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 50(3), 326-340.b
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.