The aim of this study is to clarify the effects and influence factors of in-service training under the University-School partnership in China, and to examine how these factors affect the effects of such an in-service training.
Because of the impacts of global trends in teacher education and the request for basic education innovation, the University-School partnership is experiencing a rapid development in China. Accordingly, a new teacher education model based on the partnership, which focuses on the relationship between the university and schools, is being developed. This study is especially concerned with in-service training under the new teacher education model. Related researches concerning the collaboration tactics and significance of the University-School partnership are reported by papers in recent years. However, there is little research focusing on the effects and the influence factors of the in-service training under the University-School partnership.
In light of this reason, this study designed an analytical model that can be used to analyze the effects and determinants. Then the effects and influence factors were discussed by using this analytical model and date from three cases of University-School partnership. The results of this study can be summarized as follows.
First, the in-service training under the University-School partnership has a critical effect on the reaction of in-service training, as well as the learning of knowledge and skills, the change of thought and manners, and behaviors changing. However, the effect of applying theories to practice is low. And there are four determinants of effect, which are the contents, time, management, and guidance of the university teacher respectively, are revealed.
Second, the communication among university teachers, student teachers, and in-service teachers could influence the effect of in-service training.
Third, the power of schools has a great influence on effect of in-service training. However, there are two problems in the three cases which include lack of guidance for practice and less support for the selection and proactive decision of in-service teachers.
View full abstract