One of the observations was conducted in midmorning while the second one was observed in the afternoon. The two observations involved the same mentor meeting different preservice teachers. Using a flexible observation schedule helps disrupt participants’ unconscious biases in attention (Carspecken, 1996). Low level coding / inference.
Low level coding rule was adhered to when making observation notes during building of primary record and preliminary reconstructive analysis. This was to ensure that objectivity was kept high. Peer debriefing.
The researcher consulted a fellow doctoral student to find out if anything was left out of the recorded observations of the mentoring sessions. Non-leading interview questions.
The interview questions were created carefully so …show more content…
Some of the students get restless after sometime. Try to limit some of the steps, combine some as you said earlier. Try to get a little more excited, keep a little smile on my face. Not to concentrate so much on thinking what is coming next!” [OC: Preservice teacher seems excited, smiles, frowns].
Mentor: “Oh yeah?” [OC: Nods, smiles approval]
Preservice teacher: “I know that with more lessons the transitions will be easier for me so I don’t have to worry a lot as every step will be kind of automatic. So definitely… I want to keep my pacing down.”
Possible Objective Claims (on mentoring strategies used by mentor):
Foreground: My role as a mentor is to be actively engaged in listening and also encourage reflection among preservice teachers.
Background: In video-observation mentoring mentor’s role is to be supportive rather than supervisory.
Possible Subjective Claims:
Foreground: Preservice teachers should be given enough time to adequately assess and reflect on their teaching performance.
Background: Preservice teachers need more nudging to actually say what their areas of potential improvement