Preparing pre-service physical education teachers as practitioner researchers

ABSTRACT

Background

There is continual support for teacher educators to play a more significant role in equipping teachers with the skills necessary to undertake practitioner research (Ellis, N., and T. Loughland. 2016. “The Challenges of Practitioner Research: A Comparative Study of Singapore and NSW.” The Australian Journal of Teacher Education 41 (2): 122–136). However, there is noticeably less literature reporting the means through which pre-service teachers (PSTs) are introduced, and provided the opportunity, to experience practitioner research with a view to becoming practitioner researchers once they become qualified teachers.

Purpose

The focus for this paper is on considering the perceptions to which a chosen enactment of practitioner research in a Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) programme prepares PSTs to understand, appreciate and experience practitioner research. The paper shares how one specific PETE practitioner-research module scaffolds learning and associated assessment tasks that align with PSTs’ school placement block.

Method

Four focus groups (17 PSTs) were conducted to capture the PSTs’ understanding, appreciation, and experience of practitioner research.

Findings

The findings highlighted how the module had extended PSTs’ understanding of research through the process of accessing, interpreting, and seeking assistance with conducting research. The pedagogical practices employed allowed PSTs to understand research, how research informs practice and, in turn, the expected role of the practitioner researcher. Challenges identified by the PSTs included: (i) a lack of time outside of the module to further engage with practitioner research; (ii) accessing relevant research; and (iii) readability of some research. Interestingly, the PSTs shared some hesitancy in the feasibility of enacting a strong practitioner researcher persona when the time came for them to enter teaching as qualified beginning teachers.

Conclusion

This paper highlights one-way PSTs can be encouraged and supported to apply research to their work as teachers and immediately in the planning priorities for school placement. Such an infrastructure supports the importance of integrating research and teaching, with PSTs provided a daily opportunity throughout the school placement block to understand, change and improve their practice in a principled and informed way.

KEYWORDS:

• Physical education teacher education
• practitioner research
• research to practice

Introduction

The phrase ‘practitioner research’ is commonly used to capture the means through which teachers, teacher educators and education researchers research and improve their own practice (Carr and Kemmis 2005), ideally for the benefit of their work context / the people they work with or for. That is, it is ‘related to their [practitioner’s] everyday life and directly concerns their context or environment’ (Campbell, McNamara, and Gilroy 2004, 80). Practitioner research remains closely associated with research done by teachers and for teachers, usually with the intention of helping teachers understand and change their practice in a principled and informed way. The focus for this paper is on considering the perceptions to which a chosen enactment of practitioner research in a Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) programme prepares pre-service teachers (PSTs) to understand, appreciate, and experience practitioner research. The intention is that they undertake practitioner research, and in association become practitioner researchers, as qualified physical education teachers. Similar to previous publications in Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy (e.g. Fletcher 2016; Hordvik et al. 2021; MacPhail 2011; MacPhail et al. 2021), our intention is to share PETE practices with the PETE community so that they can consider (alternative) approaches of enacting practitioner research.

Practitioner research for teachers has been positioned as a form of effective professional learning (Campbell and McNamara 2009; Ellis and Armstrong 2014), usually involving collaboration among teachers in the same school for the purpose of understanding, changing and improving education practice. In exploring the process of professional development through practitioner research, Hills and Swithenby (2010, 877) concluded that ‘the professional development opportunities provided by practitioner research are, in part, determined by the role that the individual practitioner researcher occupies in the ‘outside world’ of practice’. That is, the importance that the role of the individual practitioner in the ‘real world’ may have on the nature of their professional development.

There is growing evidence of teacher educators and educational researchers working in collaboration with each other and/or with teachers in schools (Carmichael and Miller 2006; Dadds 2014). Indeed, there is continual support for teacher educators to play a more significant role equipping teachers with the skills necessary to undertake practitioner research (Ellis and Loughland 2016) as well as contribute to an ecosystem for research-engaged schools (Godfrey and Brown 2019). However, there is noticeably less literature reporting the means through which PSTs are introduced, and provided an opportunity, to experience practitioner research with a view to becoming practitioner researchers as qualified teachers.

More recently, there has been a few studies which have explored the role of research in PSTs’ learning. In investigating the perceived and actual value of ‘PST research’ in the PSTs’ journey of becoming a teacher, Van Katwijk and colleagues (2021) argue there is value in PST research in developing skills and research literacy to conduct inquiry-based work as the PSTs progress to be qualified teachers. PST research can take different forms in the development of research literacy. For example, introducing PSTs to the notion of action research in their school placement. In exploring this, Ulvik and Riese (2016) concluded the need for extended time and space for PST reflection and collaboration with others, and to balance the workload for PSTs between school and university. While these studies focused on PST research through different forms, this paper sets out to share and consider the perceptions to which a chosen enactment of practitioner research in a PETE programme prepares PSTs to understand, appreciate, and experience practitioner research. We believe the introduction to, and the preparation for, practitioner research to be key in the PST’s journey to becoming practitioner researchers as qualified physical education teachers. The authors acknowledge that the opportunity to invest PSTs’ time in practitioner research was heightened by local nuances. This included the national teacher accreditation agency noting practitioner research as a core condition of teachers being recognised as suitably qualified as well as the flexibility allowed by teacher education programmes in determining how best to do this. These nuances will be now discussed and explored.

Teacher as practitioner researcher

Numerous issues have surfaced when teachers are introduced to the notion of engaging with research. Deem and Lucas (2006) question whether teachers are interested in, or alternatively reluctant to explore, inquiry to impact and influence their work. Reluctance to access and utilise research may be due to numerous issues that have been posed by teachers and scholars. It has been suggested that while research is not typically written for teachers, published research often uses academic language that is difficult for teachers to interpret or provides a lack of applied examples that clarify results and model application (MacLellan 2016). Other barriers to teachers engaging with research include time, energy, and commitment. Teachers identify limited time to engage in research or the space to apply various innovations in their own settings, difficulty accessing the research literature and a hesitancy to read research when they do not know if it will hold relevance for them and their teaching (Hattie and Timperley 2007). Perhaps as a result of these barriers, there is a gap between educational research findings and teachers’ use of those findings in practice (MacLellan 2016).

Teachers are encouraged to develop their professional learning from their own professional experiences (Stenhouse 1975; Zeichner and Tabachnick 2001). In keeping with these sentiments, and related specifically to the study reported here, the PST acts as a researcher who not only applies what they have learned but also conveys their knowledge to teacher educators to strengthen discussions and arguments regarding teaching philosophies. Stenhouse (1975) encourages teachers not to be passive about what they are teaching but rather to assess what they are teaching critically. By being critical the teacher (and in this study, the PST) is taking a research stance that provides meaningful professional development opportunities for them. While for some time numerous texts have discussed and provided examples of action / practitioner research and ‘teacher as researcher’ (Carr and Kemmis 1986; Mitchell, Weber, and O’Reilly-Scanlon 2005; Noffke and Somekh 2009), a persistent challenge is how best to introduce, and provide the opportunity for, PSTs to experience practitioner research with a view to becoming practitioner researchers once they are qualified teachers.

Encouraging and supporting teacher as practitioner researcher

Robertson and Bond (2001) highlight a link between research and teaching, suggesting that they share a mutually beneficial relationship within a learning environment. Setting up a discourse with, and among, practitioners to enable them to see this link and appreciate the impact research has for their practice is crucial. Enabling teachers to recognise that research will enhance their awareness of student learning, nuances in the complexity of the classroom, and their role in the teaching and learning process (Chant, Heafner, and Bennett 2004; Rock and Levin 2002) is vital to teacher development and ownership of that development. Effective teachers spend time reflecting on their practice, trying new and innovative strategies, and consider ways to overcome problems that stifle their practice (Goodson 1997).

Preparation of PSTs as practitioner researchers

Many teacher education programmes include practitioner research in their coursework. The intent is not to make PSTs into researchers (Ross 1987) but to assist them in becoming inquisitive lifelong learners who, as practitioners, can use their understanding of the literature, or their own research, to influence and improve their practice (Krokfors et al. 2011). Engaging with the research process, whether accessing, reading, interpreting, applying or conducting their own inquiry can assist PSTs in becoming critical consumers of research and assist in developing their own understanding of the implications research may have for their own teaching.

Preparing teachers to engage with, and implement, practitioner research can take a variety of formats; experiential, practical, critical, and reflective (Harrington and Booth 2003). However, there appears to be agreement that practical and reflective are viewed as most critical if teachers are to learn from their own practice to improve their teaching and the learning of their students (Putnam and Borko 2000). The personal nature of a teacher’s environment is thought to encourage critical reflection on practice allowing it to be understood, critiqued, and adapted (Dall’Alba and Sandberg 2006). Pennycook (1995) goes so far as to suggest that if teachers do not gain the skills for researching their own practice, they will be less able to question and explore how others’ research might best inform their own practice. Examining how research skills are introduced and practiced during PETE is worth exploring in order to inform future endeavours. Metz (2001) encourages finding ways where teacher educators and PSTs can learn about research in a collaborative way rather than putting ‘beginning researchers’ into an experience where they might feel inhibited. In their research, Robertson and Bond (2001) concluded that regardless of teaching levels or discipline, most teachers preferred integrating teaching and research rather than focusing exclusively on one or the other.

So while there seems to be agreement on practitioner research being an integral part of PETE, there is less agreement on, or reporting of, what that might look like. A few attempts to share this gap in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) can be noted. For example, to enrich PSTs’ practicum experiences, Kitchen and Stevens (2004) describe how they used action research to promote reflection, inquiry, and a sense of efficacy in PSTs during the practicum. Ultimately, they sought to empower their PSTs to become reflective action researchers interested in improving their own practice, student learning, and the curricula they taught. They employed Bullough and Gitlin’s (1995) three phase process of 1) identify a problem, collect baseline data, reform problem into a research question, 2) develop and implement an action plan and collect data, and 3) assess the plan in light of the data analysis; make recommendations for practice and further study. PSTs were provided with autonomy to direct and evaluate their own research endeavour. Findings confirmed that these PSTs perceived they were successful in implementing and learning from action research in their teaching practice. Cochran-Smith and colleagues (2009) describe a study in one teacher education programme that examined how and what PSTs learned when undertaking classroom inquiry focused on student learning outcomes. They report that the quality of PST research generally depended on the questions posed, the ways that they were conceptualised, how learning was assessed, and the PSTs’ understanding of the recursive nature of the research process.

In order for teacher educators to engage PSTs in research-informed reflection, study of their own practice as a means of applying what they learn in their teacher preparation to their own teaching guidance in how this might be achieved is critical. Kitchen and Stevens (2004) encourage initial teacher education to more explicitly promote this through action research, a form of practitioner research that emphasises reflection and inquiry for the purpose of taking positive action, systematic self-study, and application to practice.

Research and practice

In suggesting a conceptual framework to strengthen the weak ties between research and practice in education, and acknowledging that there is a renewed emphasis on bridging the gap between research-based knowledge and school practice, Farley-Ripple and colleagues (2018) state that characteristics of both the research and practice communities must be understood and addressed. They go on to explain the role of ‘research brokers’, a term given to intermediary organisations who link interaction between teachers and researcher given the lack of direct interaction between the two, and note research that has found that products and venues created by research brokers have greater value for reaching practitioners. The main focus for this paper is on considering the perceptions to which a chosen enactment of practitioner research in a PETE programme prepares PSTs to understand, appreciate and experience practitioner research, with the intention that they undertake practitioner research when they become qualified physical education teachers. Before introducing the programme and the subsequent module, the reader is provided with an insight into the national context in which the practitioner research construct resides in the teacher education continuum. This policy context has directed and framed the way in which our specific preparation of PSTs as practitioner researchers has developed in an Irish PETE programme.

National and programme context

National context on initiating practitioner research for PSTs

Teaching Council regulations have been a catalyst for many initial teacher education departments in Ireland to revise programmes, as well as expectations and work practices for initial teacher educators. Across the different reiterations of the standards for initial teacher education published by the Teaching Council (e.g. Teaching Council 2017), there is a heightened interest in ‘teachers as researchers’. Practitioner research is noted as one of six core conditions (along with Foundation Studies, Professional Studies, Irish Education Context, School Placement and Subject Content) in which Irish teachers are recognised as being suitably qualified. The Teaching Council introduce the centrality of ‘research in school placement’;

During school placement, the student teacher [PST] shall conduct research on their own practice that demonstrates the connection between the sites of practice (HEI [Higher Education Institute] and school) in discussion with the Treoraí [cooperating teacher] as ‘constructive friend’. This offers the student teacher the chance to investigate and learn from their practice and derive ideas and conclusions that enriches and advances their understanding of their practice, and enhance their teaching. (Teaching Council 2020, 24)

Table 1 denotes the instances in which (practitioner) research is noted in the Teaching Council’s (2020) graduate teacher standards, i.e. the skills, knowledge, understanding, and professional values expected of newly qualified teachers.

Table 1. Extracted graduate teacher standards (Teaching Council 2020).

Learning outcome	Element	By the end of the ITE programme, PSTs will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of:
Professional knowledge and understanding	Key Principles of Planning, Teaching, Learning, Assessment, Reflection and Evaluation	not just how to read and carry out research, but also how to think as researchers when working in or with schools, and why it matters
	Education and the Education System	educational research and its contribution to teaching, learning and assessment
Professional Skills and Practice	Integration and Application of Knowledge in relation to Planning, Teaching, Learning and Assessment Skills (in Complex and Unpredictable Educational Classroom and Settings)	conduct and apply relevant research as appropriate to his/her teaching context, identifying, critically analysing and integrating new knowledge regarding curriculum, pedagogy and assessment into their practice
	Analytical, Critical Thinking, Problem-solving, Reflection and evaluation Skills	engage in various forms of data gathering and critically analyse and evaluate relevant knowledge and research

In revisiting the PETE literature, occupational socialisation (i.e. the general socialisation of teachers in three phases – acculturation, professional socialisation and organisational socialisation) remains a popular framework that PETE colleagues use to explore PSTs’ perceptions of physical education (Baker 2022), their professional development (e.g. Ferry 2018) and their stereotypes and self-perceptions (Spittle et al. 2012). There are too many to mention more recent studies that continue to explore the different stances that PETE programmes take in preparing PETE PSTs (e.g. assessment in physical education (Walters, MacLaughlin, and Deakin 2022); student-centred models (Valério, Farias, and Mesquita 2021); negotiation of meaning (Valério et al. 2022)). We identified two studies within the PETE realm that complemented the focus of our study on preparing PETE PSTs as practitioner researchers.

In a bid to support the General Teaching Council for Scotland’s requirement to develop the core principals of practitioner enquiry, Coleman, Gray, and MacIsaac (2022) shares that he was encouraged throughout his PETE programme to engage with, and in, research with the aim of developing the skills and propensity for continuous learning. Coleman, Gray, and MacIsaac (2022) undertook a narrative inquiry as part of the lead author’s post-graduate master’s practitioner inquiry, designed to understand his experiences as an early-career physical education teacher–researcher navigating the professional and political landscape of physical education during the first two years of his career as a physical education teacher in Scotland. The findings reflect the capacity for growth inherent in a narrative understanding of experience and potential for sustaining PE teacher–researcher identities via research-based practitioner inquiry. Svendsen (2020) presents an exploratory study of perceived barriers to mobilising research literature into PETE as experienced by a group of Danish PE teacher educators, acknowledging that in Denmark only 10% of Danish teacher educators hold a research-based PhD. The study is framed around the three main characteristics of ‘research-based teacher education’ – (i) pre-service teachers obtain in-depth knowledge of current research in their field and they develop competencies to read and use scientific literature, (ii) pre-service teachers are qualified to base their pedagogical decisions on rational and up-to-date arguments and their practice is informed and substantiated by research, and iii) pre-service teachers develop an inquiring approach towards teaching and use basic research skills in their daily practices in school. Svendsen (2020) explains that in 2013 a new ministerial order for the Danish Teacher Education Programme emphasised that the University Colleges should create an academically strong teacher education programme, which should more consciously integrate research – and, by extension, research literature – into the curriculum. He concludes that there are both organisational issues and values that block the incorporation of research-informed teaching and teacher education in Denmark.

Incorporation of Practitioner Research in a Professional Master of Education Programme

The Professional Master of Education in physical education is a two-year four-semester full-time course of study designed to qualify post-primary teachers. Those entering the programme possess a relevant primary degree at honours level of higher (i.e. Level 8 – National Qualifications Authority of Ireland or equivalent). It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that their primary degree meets the requirements for the purposes of teaching their chosen school subject(s). The Professional Master of Education is an alternative pathway to the four-year undergraduate teacher education programme for qualifying as a post-primary teacher. The Professional Master of Education provides an opportunity for those who have, for varying reasons, not completed an undergraduate teacher education programme in a specific subject, to become post-primary teacher. There are therefore two pathways in the Irish system in which to qualify as a post-primary teacher. In the specific institute in which this study was conducted, both the undergraduate and Professional Master of Education options reside in the PETE programme. Pre-service teachers enter one of the two programmes and reside in that programme for the four (undergraduate) or two (Professional Master of Education) years. Included as an aim of the programme is to ensure that successful graduates conduct and apply research in a teaching context. The Professional Master of Education remains cognizant of the Teaching Council’s requirement of ‘teacher as researcher’. As well as research informing all elements of the programme, specific modules allow for a more intense exploration of research discourse and practice and include two research methods modules, a research and practice portfolio module and a reporting educational research module.

Each discipline area offers additional core modules specific to their discipline and this paper focusses on one of these additional core modules in the physical education discipline, ‘Applying Research to Practice in Physical Education 2’. This module builds directly from the ‘Applying Research to Practice in Physical Education 1’ module which focuses on facilitating PSTs’ growth as a prospective physical education teacher with specific attention to accessing pertinent research and reading and understanding that research in order to apply it in their own practice at the post-primary level. The learning outcomes for this module provide PSTs with the opportunity to interrogate how their own beliefs, values, and identity might impact their disposition towards research. The purpose of ‘Applying Research to Practice in Physical Education 2’ seeks to assist PSTs to access pertinent research to support their learning about and for their teaching of physical education in Irish post primary school contexts. Based on reading of selected research articles and discussions of relevant topics as an early career teacher, PSTs are expected to develop their own strategy on how best to use this research analysis process. A key aspect of this module is to provide a safe environment to explore research questions and/or research methodologies with the intent to impact PST practice and improve student learning. The learning intentions for the module are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Learning intentions for ‘Applying Research to Practice in Physical Education 2’.

Learning Intentions

Knowledge Prospective teachers will; demonstrate an understanding of how to read research and apply that research to teaching practice. demonstrate how to gain insight from different vantage points (researcher, practitioner, teacher educator) and how to find common ground among them. demonstrate the relationship between theory and practice by interpreting what research is telling us about practice and find ways to adapt and revise it for your own practice. Attitudes/Values Prospective teachers will; demonstrate critical thinking through analysing various research studies for their implications for teaching practice and student learning. recognise the value of conducting research on your own teaching practice using findings to improve teaching practice and student learning.

While research findings in education do not provide assurance that something will always occur, in all settings and with all students, they can provide insight into how things might be adapted or revised to improve practice or learning. During this module, PSTs are challenged as to how their research reading can be applied to their work as a teacher and immediately in the planning priorities for school placement, given the module directly precedes their school placement block. The importance of this is captured in the scaffolded learning and associated assessment task that PSTs complete for the module.

Scaffolding practitioner research for PSTs

In scaffolding the learning experience for the PSTs, three steps to applying research to practice are embedded into the assessment components on the module. We work through these steps before sharing a PST’s assignment that captures each aligned step.

The first step, before embarking on their school placement, is for the PST to identify a specific area of interest that may have arisen in earlier experiences of working with school students or may be something they suspect might challenge them (e.g. classroom management, embedding assessment into their practice).

The second step is to engage with the research conducted on the PST’s identified area of interest and select six relevant research articles that have the potential to inform their practice surrounding their area of interest. For each research article, the PST identifies (i) the purpose of the research, (ii) three key findings, and (iii) for each key finding, discuss the implications for their practice and how they would plan for that practice. These three requirements are captured as an assessment task. The intent is to make the assessment task meaningful, relevant and worthwhile to the PST’s area of interest that they suspect will effect, to some extent, their teaching practice while undertaking school placement. It is also instilling a sense of proactiveness in the PST by encouraging them to engage with research on a specific area of research they suspect they are likely to experience on school placement.

The third step is to design an action plan on how the PST will use the research findings to impact their practice. The PST is encouraged to follow five key steps, (i) implement, the PST implements the action plan, (ii) take notes, the PST takes notes on what they do, how their students react, and the outcome of their tasks, (iii) reflect, the PST reflects on the notes and the overall experience of the action plan, (iv) share, the PST shares these experiences with their physical education colleagues to encourage a collaborative discussion and departmental approach to expanding the action plan, and (v) move forward, the PST considers how they might move forward with this application in their next teaching experience (Tannehill, Scanlon, and MacPhail 2020). The action plan contributes to the second assessment task for the module. This entails the PST presenting to their module peers on completion of the school placement block on the extent to which the action plan was successful in addressing their identified area of interest. A detailed example from a practicing teacher that maps these three steps is shared elsewhere to demonstrate how practicing teachers can also adopt and adapt these steps to their specific teaching and school context (Tannehill, Scanlon, and MacPhail 2020).

Methodology

Participants

The participants in this study are the full complement of the 17 PSTs who undertook the two core physical education modules, noted above, in the PSTs’ second semester of first year of the Professional Master of Education. Both modules are completed before PSTs embark on their first school placement and are specifically aligned to fulfilling the instances noted in Table 1 in which (practitioner) research is noted in the Teaching Council’s (2020) graduate teacher standards. Both modules are completed directly before PSTs embark on their first school placement in the second semester of first year. Participants were purposively sampled (Bryman 2012) and all 17 PSTs were emailed inviting them to be involved in the research. All 17 PSTs agreed to participate in the focus groups. Four focus groups (three group of hour PSTs and one group of five PSTs) were conducted to capture the PSTs’ understanding, appreciation, and experience of practitioner research on completion of ‘Applying Research to Practice in Physical Education 2’. The focus group encouraged PSTs to discuss questions under four main prompts, (i) understanding of ‘research to practice’ (e.g. Talk me through your understanding of research and its application to practice), (ii) research informing practice (e.g. How was the process of constructing an action plan informed by the research?), (iii) research and school placement (e.g. How reliant were you on the readings throughout your school placement?), and (iv) maintaining research activity (e.g. What structures do you think you would need in place as a qualified teacher to continue to be advocates of applying research to practice?). The focus groups lasted between 30 and 55 min and were conducted virtually by the second author who had not been involved in the delivery of the module. The focus groups took place after the PSTs had completed their school placement and had fulfilled all formal assessment components for the module.

Data analysis

Three stages for data analysis involved data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing and verification (Miles and Huberman 1994). Data analysis took place after completion of all four focus groups using the elements of the practitioner researcher framework noted previously, i.e. preparing PSTs as practitioner researchers, and encouraging and supporting (pre-service) teachers as practitioner researchers. The focus group transcripts were read, and all the data was grouped and organised under the two elements of ‘preparing’ and ‘encouraging and supporting’. The transcripts were examined in their entirety, line by line, and key phrases that matched the elements of preparing and encouraging and supporting were highlighted manually. Phrases included ‘motivation’, ‘gaining confidence’, ‘becoming research active’, ‘access’ and ‘application’. Next, key phrases were examined and codes assigned (data reduction). These codes were examined and developed into themes (data display) using the practitioner researcher framework. The final phase of data analysis involved collapsing and synthesising all data. As a result, three categories were constructed.

Findings

1. Understanding research and the practitioner researcher role

In being prompted to consider the perceptions to which the module prepared PSTs to understand practitioner research, responses revolved around PSTs conveying their understanding of the research they were accessing as well as what they were being encouraged to understand in their role as a practitioner researcher. In the first instance, the pedagogical practices employed in the module were discussed. With respect to understanding the role of the practitioner researcher, PSTs were positively disposed to reading research if there was a clear link to how it could inform their practice. Challenges related to understanding the research and, by association, practitioner researcher were also shared.

Supportive and encouraging pedagogical practices

There was consensus that the module had extended PSTs’ understanding of research through the process of accessing, interpretating, and seeking assistance with conducting research. This was heightened by opportunities PSTs reported being afforded to share their understanding of specific research with one or two peers, and in turn hearing their peers’ perspectives, before contributing to discussion and decisions with the whole class:

‘Actually able to learn from each other as we all had different topics but most related to your own teaching’.

‘Even if two of us had similar topics they were done in different ways so listening to each other just gave you more ideas’.

Careful consideration by the teacher educators of ensuring that the level of investment required for engaging with the research tasks was manageable, and the research tasks linked to the PST’s interest, provided PSTs with space and motivation, ‘It was not information overload as it was easier to understand because it linked to you and your teaching’. This link to teaching appeared central to PSTs’ understanding of practitioner research.

The role of the practitioner researcher in informing practice

The pedagogical practices employed allowed PSTs to understand research, how research informs practice (‘importance to be realistic with research; being able to apply it to your own setting’) and, in turn, the expected role of the practitioner researcher. Reference was made to the effectiveness of a text used throughout the module that provided insight into how to use research to generate new ideas and improve teaching practice (Tannehill et al. 2014). In gaining knowledge on specific topics from a research perspective, PSTs admitted a heightened confidence in applying new ideas and practices to benefit their teaching, as well as assuring them that if something did not work the first time, they could try it again. There was also an appreciation that PSTs were not alone in using research to inform specific areas of interest and that they were, to some extent, part of an established community of peers new to research, ‘Makes you realise that you are not the only one who has looked at an area. Others have looked and studied it as well and there is advice to move forward’.

Challenges of engaging with research and its application

While acknowledging the advantages of engaging with research, the PSTs reported a number of challenges in such engagement. The PSTs identified a lack of time outside the module as a challenge whereby they could thoroughly engage and further understand practitioner research, ‘(…) having time to just sit down and suss out how to use the research was the challenge’. A common challenge for most of the PSTs was the issue of accessing relevant research and included commentary on: (i) having difficulty in locating research specific to their interest; (ii) there being so much research in the area of interest that it was difficult to distil; (iii) identifying a gap in the literature related to their area of interest that would allow them to be confident that they were making a valuable contribution as a practitioner researcher; (iv) and locating research references online that you are then unable to access virtually or through the university library. The readability of the research was another challenge for some PSTs, with some noting that, if they found specific research references too difficult to read, they were unable to engage. Others admitted that they would read through two or three times to ‘(…) try to understand the author’s style of writing’. In some instances where they were able to successfully engage with a reference, difficulties arose in its application:

‘I did find it pretty difficult in trying to understand how I would use it [research]; what would work and what wouldn’t’.

‘You can have all this theory/information but when trying to put it together for the dynamic of your classroom can be hard – comes with practice and experience I suppose’.

2. Appreciation of research and the practitioner researcher role

PSTs recognised that reading research to inform practice increased their interest and confidence in specific teaching-related topics. There was also a level of appreciation for the learning opportunities structured for them in the research-related tasks and specifically the way in which the required action plan prompted them to plan and reflect on their practitioner researcher role.

Recognition of an ongoing research process

There was a recognition that once PSTs began locating research in a topic of interest, it confirmed the identification of that topic as an area of interest and increased their appetite to know more. Consequently, there was an admittance that this put what they were learning from the research into perspective and increased their confidence in the specific area they were researching. There was an acknowledgment that, while teachers who had been teaching in schools for a significant number of years may not have been exposed to research in a similar way, there was no excuse for these PSTs to not be practitioner researchers, hinting at the potential advocacy role these PSTs might play:

‘We have plenty of training and upskilling to do research. There is no excuse for us not to do it. There may not be a lot of motivation for some teachers to do it but we have been more than equipped to do it (…) Most teachers should be interested in research as it can help improve teaching and it offers solutions’.

‘We need to share [with teachers] what research to your practice is most useful as this insight can help others’.

There was also an acknowledgement of the link between identifying six readings to provide a research base and them informing the action plan, appreciating that the first activity informed the second (both assessed for the module) and subsequently assessments that captured ‘worthwhile and actual learning’ as they moved through the process of reading and then application. The level of ownership PSTs conveyed with respect to identifying their area of research interest and the associated assessment tasks, along with the sense that what they were doing was a personal call, were noted as heightening the importance of the module.

Importance of research to interrogating teaching practice

PSTs were grateful that, through involvement in the module, they realised that research is something they will be able to use to prepare them for, and inform, their teaching as well as challenge them to reflect on their teaching:

‘(..) trying to relate what we learned to practice [asking myself] ‘If I was to do this again [relate what we learned to practice], what would I do differently? What could I do better? I was not aware of this [level of reflection] before about my teaching’.

PSTs were appreciative of the opportunity for sharing, learning, and growing from their reflections that were captured in presenting their action plan (informed by their six identified readings) and listening to those of their peers on return from school placement:

‘I enjoyed designing the action plan. It helped me recognise how I could improve my teaching and then I knew when going into my own teaching how I could deal with things’.

‘[Action plan] was a good reflective piece, ‘Oh, that is why we did that and this is how it helped me learn’. It was kind of like a flipped classroom where you had to highlight what you had learned’.

‘It [Action plan] was the most authentic reflection we have done, especially on school placement. It changed the way we were teaching’.

3. Experience of research and the practitioner researcher role

PSTs’ main opportunity to enact the role of practitioner researcher arose through their six-week school placement (that took place directly following the scheduled module classes) when they were encouraged to enact their pre-prepared action plan on how they intended to use the research findings to impact their practice in a specific area of interest. All PSTs welcomed the opportunity to apply their research-informed action plan during school placement.

In some instances, PSTs reported supportive interactions with school colleagues and students with respect to what they were trying to enforce as a practitioner researcher, allowing them to continue to deliver their pre-prepared action plan. There were instances where PSTs shared that they had valued talking an issue through with the cooperating teacher rather than being reliant on revisiting the research literature to consider what to do in certain situations. While cooperating teachers were in general supportive of PSTs during school placement, many of the PSTs experienced cooperating teachers who were not interested in the research-informed action plan. Others experienced cooperating teachers who requested that what the PST proposed to do be changed to address the cooperating teachers’ needs. In instances where PSTs had an action plan that primarily focussed on their application to practice (and not on the reliance of the students or cooperating teacher), there was a stronger sense of safety, and in turn achievement, in applying the research to practice.

The PSTs shared some hesitancy in the feasibility of enacting a strong practitioner researcher persona when the time came for them to enter teaching as qualified beginning teachers. Such hesitancy arose through wishing to prioritise getting to know the staff and students, becoming familiar with enacting all the new school curricula in the subject area and locating someone (or a group) in the school who would support the use of research to improve practice and/or push them to try new initiatives.

Discussion

As discussed earlier on in the paper, many barriers exist for PSTs/teachers in accessing and engaging with the research. These include: (i) The need for extended time and space for PST reflection and collaboration with others; (ii) Balancing the workload for PSTs between school and university; (iii) Published research using academic language that is difficult to interpret and / or lacks applied examples / relevance; and (iv) Teachers’ time, energy, and commitment (Hattie and Timperley 2007; MacLellan 2016). Our findings add weight to these barriers. The PSTs in this study advocated for more time and space to access, understand and engage with the research. We believe an effective way to address the likelihood of published research being used in practice is to utilise pedagogical strategies that encourage PSTs to share their understanding of research in a safe space learning from their peers with alternative interpretations and implications for practice. There was an appreciation from PSTs that the module allocated such a space during scheduled classes while not relying solely on PSTs finding time outside of the scheduled time to engage with peers. Having scheduled time that allowed PSTs to share how their research-informed action plans that led to successful practice during school placement was specifically welcomed. It afforded PSTs to report on the extent to which the research they accessed had been relevant to the school setting. By listening to their peers sharing their experiences, PSTs also learned about other instances of research and teaching sharing a mutually beneficial relationship within different learning environments (Robertson and Bond 2001). This time, space, and collaboration over comes a number of barriers listed above as it provides the wanted space, supports different interpretations and relevance through collaborative dialogue and understanding, and builds capacity and confidence (which may assist in overcoming the barrier of time, energy and commitment).

Staying true to the premise of ‘practitioner research’ being concerned with the practitioner’s context or environment (Campbell, McNamara, and Gilroy 2004), the PSTs reported that the positioning of the PSTs’ research experience reported here is strengthened by being aligned with PSTs’ school placement experience. In this instance, school placement was the ‘outside world’ of practice (Hills and Swithenby 2010), i.e. the ‘real world’ for PSTs. In this way, for those PSTs with supportive cooperating teachers, they were provided with the opportunity to understand, change, and improve their practice in a principled and informed way. This is preferable to PSTs being introduced to research as a separate entity to teaching by integrating teaching and research (Robertson and Bond 2001), with ‘research in school placement’ noted as a core condition of qualification for Irish teachers (Teaching Council 2020). The challenge remains for those PSTs who were not supported in schools to embrace the role of practitioner researcher to maintain an appreciation for the importance of using research to inform their practice. With a focus on a ‘Researcher-in-Residence’ model, Passy, Georgeson, and Gompertz (2018) sought to design a space that would allow and encourage collaboration and an equal sharing of knowledge among schools and university. The idea of a ‘third’ space was proposed and allowed schools and universities to become equal partners in collaborating on research projects while developing an understanding and appreciation of each other’s knowledge and work. What we have done in this paper aligns with the premise of ‘practitioner research’ as it aligns with the practitioner’s context/space (i.e. school placement experience). The PSTs were reading about research in their context/space, which is different to where they would enact something as a teacher and research that by looking at their own practice. This aspect of practitioner research is covered elsewhere in the teacher education programme. The module in which this paper is set can prepare them for that aspect of practitioner research while also building their capacity in practitioner research (i.e. reading and exploring research in practice in the school setting). Capacity building in practitioner research in modules supports the teacher education programme in totality in constructing a practitioner research disposition.

Therefore, one of the main challenges remains to assist PSTs in becoming inquisitive lifelong learners who, as practitioners, continue to use their understanding of the literature, or their own research, to influence and improve their practice (Krokfors et al. 2011). This could be addressed by ensuring that teacher educators are involved in supporting practitioner research collaboration across the education sector (Dadds 2014). This could be achieved through communities of practice that enhance the social dimension of learning, challenging PSTs/teachers to reflect on everyday practice, assisting PSTs/teachers in maintaining their engagement in practitioner research and critically analysing their own practices (Salter and Tett 2021).

Conclusion

The teacher educators involved in this initiative support the call for teacher educators to play a more significant role in supporting teachers/PSTs with the skills necessary to undertake practitioner research (Ellis and Loughland 2016) by positioning themselves as a ‘research broker’ (Farley-Ripple et al. 2018). This was not only evident in the time spent with PSTs on the delivery of the specific module but also in embedding a number of ‘check points’ across the module that allowed teacher educators to guide PSTs on how to adapt and apply research findings and innovations to their own school placement practice and learning environments. It is suggested that this investment of tracking PSTs engagement with practitioner research somewhat alleviates the reported challenge of reading research without knowing if it will hold relevance for the PSTs and their teaching (Hattie and Timperley 2007).

One limitation of this study is that it is dependent on the local nuances in which the opportunity to engage with, and support, practitioner research resides. Further studies conducted in other jurisdictions would heighten our understanding of the connections, similarities and differences between PETE programmes with respect to expectations for ‘teachers as researchers’ and how this is supported and enacted at programme and national level. Further research is necessary to explore and establish how the specific ways of enacting practitioner research in PETE are experienced by PSTs at the time and once they become qualified teachers. Given that there is evidence that PSTs expect to conduct research in their future jobs (van Katwijk et al. 2019), it is imperative that future research inform PETE programmes on the extent to which practices such as those reported here do instil a lifelong interest in practitioner research as well as consider how best to provide ongoing support to teachers for practitioner research activity. Establishing PSTs’ positive experiences (e.g. increased motivation, gaining confidence, ability to apply research to practice) as well as the ongoing challenges (e.g. time, lack of experience and access to research) of being introduced to practitioner research opportunities in PETE would allow teacher educators to accurately identify PETE infrastructures that instil a lifelong interest in practitioner research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).