Teacher training: between hope and anxiety On July 1, to be held in Villeurbanne, a “preparatory seminar to launch the Graduate School of the Teaching and Education” (ESPE).

Teacher training: between hope and anxiety On July 1, to be held in Villeurbanne, a "preparatory seminar to launch the Graduate School of the Teaching and Education" (ESPE). This will certainly be an opportunity for ministers to communicate on what is an important aspect of policy and programming law on rebuilding the school, which, in turn, will be definitively adopted at second reading Senate during the week. This is an opportunity here to take stock of this complex issue and which the media and public opinion and teacher have little interest. I tried to identify difficulties in the implementation of these species in a post titled "The hope rancid …" on my blog. I must say also that the fears I expressed in this post have unfortunately verified. Since then, a forum is also published on the website of Pedagogical Notebooks where us to make "Concerns" on the future of teacher training. Training teachers explained to my colleagues … When I meet colleagues in my school where I work timeshare (the other part of the time at the IUFM), they sometimes ask me about the training of teachers . For years, the recurring question was IUFMs "then it still exist? I thought it was deleted? ". Proving that Sarkozy’s propaganda worked well. Today the question has changed, "then it seems that it is changing its name? "" But is it going to change much? ". Sometimes, it is still interested in the fate of the trainees, especially also when it comes to host the facility. It’s thinking about all these issues I suggest you do a little dot on it. It is only then that I will propose my analysis. Recall that even when the Ministry of Education in its efforts to offers explanation on its website ESPE presentation pages and contests and MEEF masters. They are a good way to enter the provisions of this reform. Status – The Graduate School of the Teaching and Education (ESPE) created by several articles of the framework law, have no special status. The law gives the choice to two provisions: to be an integrated part of a university (as are already today IUFMs) or be a component of a center for research and higher education (PRES), which includes today ‘ hui several universities and schools across a territory. There will be a hope for academy. They will be accredited by the Minister of Higher Education and Research (M.E.S.R.) and the Minister of National Education (MEN) on the basis of specifications drawn up by the two ministries. There will be a director appointed by the Cabinet for each species. They have no independent status but did not specifically signposted autonomous budget. Their funding depends on the contributions of each host university masters for training teachers. So we can say that species will be a kind of "agents" designed to coordinate and consolidate the training and preparation for competitions. Competition – The competition will be placed bac + 4 at the end of M1 (for oral). The model of these competitions has been renovated but the "zero issues" are not yet out [addition of 07/08 they were published]. The assumption that is made is that the competition will influence downstream upstream training. This one will be in M1 and M2 (bac + 5) in the Masters MEEF (teaching careers, education and training) organized in universities but will include common areas for teachers of different disciplines different levels. ESPE will be responsible for the initial training but also training for teachers. This means that the structure must integrate not only academic in charge of the training, "former IUFM" but also stakeholders teachers in continuing education in the education authorities. Master MEEF – These courses are one of the great innovations of the reform of the formation. There will be a master MEEF discipline and school teachers in each academy. This is the construction of models that proved difficult in a number of regions. For those requires a new joint development by universities and stakeholders in the IUFM. Training must be both disciplinary teaching and learning, and integrate alternating courses in classes. It is the gathering of these masters in an academy that is in the end the model of future hope. A year of transition All this should be put in place progressively. The 2013 results exceptionally two recruitment competitions. The first contest of this year (2013-1) is still working under the old system. The second competition offers written in 2013 and an oral in 2014. At the 2013 school year, so there will be many types of people in the future hope. – the FSTG (probationers) from the contest "2013-1", they hold a Master and have passed the competition. They will be trained in almost identical terms to those of the year 2012-2013. These are students that will ensure a virtually full service training and more. This status will disappear in 2014. – The Master 2 students who have passed the written contest (contest "2013-2"). Among them, the M2 contract "that will qualify will be offered a contract for a third time (eg CAPES paid 6am 9am). In the jargon of the limitless educnat they are called "CAD 2" (eligible contract 2) – those who already hold a master but that prepare oral competition will be offered a contract for a part-time . – M1 students who prepare the 2014 contest that will make placements in institutions – there must be added the particular case of "future teacher jobs" (EAP) scholarship students who are at the license and paid for make accompaniment in institutions. They will be entitled to as a tutor. For M1 who return to the Masters to prepare for the competition, training will be fully in universities and the hope of the Academy therefore serve as an "agency" to centralize a number of qualified training "common culture". But on the other hand, all will require tutors with different terms depending on the category. So there is a high demand for teachers assume these functions. There is talk of transition year because the minister says there will be an adjustment that will be done after one year … The urgency and the temporary (lasting) Currently, models of future species that gather models of MEEF Masters (with the collaboration of universities and IUFM are being validated at the level of project managers and education authorities. Based on the dates of various academies, if it happens not too shabby in places or there was good cooperation between the IUFM and the only university in the academy, it seems that in many places, there are strong tensions and a real difficulty to bring together universities and former IUFM. Minister himself recently acknowledged that several projects (3 or 4?) were retoques considered as non-compliant with the specifications. territory struggles are exacerbated when there is a context of scarcity. The tension is its maximum in many IUFMs and many staff are on the verge of "burnout". For, meanwhile, the return in 2013 approaches. And we are only beginning to prepare in IUFMs in an emergency when the personal are accustomed. But this return is crucial. A complex back to manage (see above) with unreadable structures that deserved more serenity. There is also concern that, as regards the MEEF masters, the solutions found in the emergency will persist over the difficulty and the weak will to put them back yard. Go to question a course given to a university after a year … So the risk is great to see the "provisional" announced become permanent. This is a classic of Education. This transitional year may also have another function: to hide the eviction of a number of provisions and staff who will be maintained during this transition but then quietly disappear. The transition year will lead us to a kind of "support end of life" for some trainers (especially those time-sharing) will be "quietly." This combination of emergency and DIY that could last led some to demand a moratorium on the reform of the formation. This is the case of GRFDE who referred this request in a letter to Francois Hollande. Given the current state of the work and the date is this demand, there is little chance that this application succeeds. However, it is essential to strongly assert a true waypoint ( "clause revoyure") after one year. The prescribed and real As we wrote in the notepad of June 17 to 22 "The ministerial speech if it is to say in which direction to go, should not turn into performative speech and self-persuasion obscuring difficulties. "Now this is the feeling that one can have when Vincent Peillon, at the same meeting to" current issues in government "Thursday, June 20, 2013 meets Marie-Christine Blandin on the state of preparations for the training of teachers for the start of 2013. After announcing a big launch event in Lyon on 1 July, the Minister said: "I say this clearly: the higher schools of the teaching and education constitute a break with university institutes teacher training. Finally, we will have a professional training necessary to the work of teachers. Furthermore, all professionals must be involved: academic, of course, with regard to the content of education, the disciplinary requirements, didactics, but also field practitioners, who must continue to teach in their class and at the same time benefit from landfills to be associated with the work of the college, and not participate in full-time, as you mentioned, senator. Do not forget the people who work in a number of associations, particularly peri-educational associations, which have built our education system. ". But at the same time the Minister recognizes that the models of the future Masters ESPE must be reviewed in a number of universities "because, to date, the requirements of the Government were not met on two points. ". Vincent Peillon and adds: "If nothing is done, we reproduirions the same mistakes as in the past." The difference between the rhetoric and reality of the ground, between the prescribed and the real, known in the National Education .. . In a more general way, we can make concerns on a number of speech elements who do not seem to resist for the moment the test of reality: Place timeshare trainers. It says the new training should give them an important place. In fact, the construction of the masters has mainly led to rule out the benefit of university and IUFM teachers full time (I know something …). What guarantee for this type of training? Place of training: the bill has renounced the "training obligation" of teachers yet articulated by Francois Hollande during his speech at the Sorbonne. Instead, the text states that "teachers are encouraged to form." What place for continuing education in the ESPE? How to rebuild a real training? Place additional educational associations and movements in a context of scarcity, "places of struggle" between universities and IUFM leaves little space for new players. How to ensure a place for these organizations pedagogical expertise goes with innovation? The recruitment of new teachers: it depends, of course advertised posts but also the will of selection boards to provide or not these positions. We know that in past years, some of the posts has not been provided as well. The case of the outbreak of zeros this year is there to prove that there can be a significant gap between the announced job creations and actual positions filled. What guarantees does the government can give facing panels that are "sovereign"? Place guardians: as we have seen, the reform of the training will be characterized by the proliferation of training situations. Between the EAP, M1, M2, the FSTG … that will first teachers in schools that are new people with different statuses and it will accommodate. But this raises the question of guardians. Will there be enough workers to support and train these new teachers? Especially as this trainer status is low paid and can put off teachers who feel they do not want to get into a situation that requires some questioned. And the other question that comes is also the training of these tutors: like a good football player is not necessarily a good coach, the school counselor posture implies a real training and specific skills. How did we get here ? If so many people are surprised that I’m still working at the IUFM, it is because in the previous five years, training has almost disappeared. Recall that, for purely accounting reasons, we removed the dual training year just after the contest. There are still four years, students, contest holders were part-time to students and half training before being validated at the end of course. Delete this training where we had paid full time to train half the time has saved 13,000 full-time equivalent positions. At the same time, they sold us the "mastering" as progress, whereas it was only a smokescreen to hide the bad shot. The other element that has significantly changed the training is the integration of IUFMs universities. These have become so integrated schools with limited means. In the debate for the presidential, education has become a central theme on which the election is Played. But training in the subject was not the most important point though everyone or almost fitting that "teaching is a craft that is learned" and advocated the restoration of true education. Consultation and Bill have materialized this commitment through the creation of ESPE. Although some of the choices that were made during this phase are carriers of many perverse effects. As I expressed in my previous posts, the main difficulty is the excessive weight of a narrow conception of the university in the construction of the training. The "original sin" is that it has two ministers in equal parts: MEN and the MoR. And that arbitration that can therefore be at the level of the Prime Minister has always been unfavorable to the MEN. Despite official rhetoric that remains voluntary, the Minister of Education has recognized this imbalance since has continued to launch calls to MPs and senators to improve this segment of the law. Without success. and can also interpret its appeal to the inspectors to invest in training. The other "original sin" is the choice to place the contest in late M1. Initially during the consultation, two positions clashed: the supporters of a late contest L3 and those who advocated keeping the competition at the end of Master 2 (see my previous post). In wanting to arbitrate by choosing a middle position, the Minister finally chose a solution that satisfied person who accumulates handicaps. First, because the first year of the Master remains a year of cramming to prepare concours.Combine refusal to give autonomous status to the species (and even real signs budget) this also leads to what training is structured essentially at universities without there actually is a dedicated training structure. The hope then will be "agencies" to be used to gather training organized elsewhere. For example, the "common culture" which is supposed to be a cross, and common training for all teachers risk, given the complexity of schedules, from being proposed only one discipline at a time. Although not necessarily in a single place. We currently manufacture both "factories" and empty shells … A new training to meet the challenges? Times of change are always prone to anxiety. It should also be recalled that in just five years, this is the fourth time in the IUFM, housing is reset all the training. There is reason to be distrustful, skeptical and a little tired. However, the success of reform depends on the commitment of its actors. But the main question of course is whether this reform will help improve training my homework
and if it meets the challenges of the rebuilding of the school. Does it will be more training? Does it will be more professional? Does it help to upgrade the teaching profession? More training? One might say that it is easy to respond positively to the first question as the training was affected in the previous period. Trainees secondary eg only had 3 hours of training at the IUFM each week in addition to a full service (or reduced from three hours last year). Another part of the training was supposed to do in their establishment with their tutor. The urgency in which were trainees greatly hampered the decline taking necessary training. What will happen tomorrow? In fact most of the training will be done in M1 and M2 and more after. The year M1, as we have seen, will prepare the competition and to train for his future profession through internships and educational and teaching sessions in preparation for the contest. The M2, meanwhile, will be alternated with practical sessions accompanied either a contract, the choice of the student. The student will validate its master and its admission to the competition. In the competition "2013-2", the position taken will be done in September 2014, with 5/6 and 1/6 service training. The following contest, which will fill positions from the re-entry 2015, will be the contest "new format". Their layout and content of their events will differ from those competitions 2013 and 2014 and in particular contain a high professional dimension. The new competition will target mainly the students who start in September 2013, a Master "teaching careers, education and training" (MEEF) within a college of the teaching and education ( ESPE). They will take place in full (eligibility and admission) at the end of the first year of Master. Students admitted to the competition will be, in their second year of Master (they will accept), full-time paid employees as trainees and conduct an educational service to halftime. They take office as holders in September 2015. We must therefore pay attention to an optical illusion. The internship year as we knew it will eventually disappear. To say that there is "more (+) training" is therefore taken with caution. Instead be after the contest, it will be before two years (M1, M2) instead of three (M1, M2, internship year). But perhaps more structured. It is said so that one passes from a consecutive system (we recruited and after it is formed) to a simultaneous system (it is formed and is engaged at the same time). But some like Nathalie Mons speak of a "hybrid model": "straight" because students first follow an academic license, "simultaneous" because the masters will incorporate professional elements. The danger of a hybrid system is to stay in midstream and not to decide. Discipline vs. Pedagogy? It has often reduced the debate to this false opposition. A teacher must be a scholar in his field or an expert of learning? "Make Over" or "to class"? both of course! We agree that, so far, this is the first logic prevailed. How to change the design of the job? So this means that prepares upstream in the year of master. The models incorporate contests events that refer to a reflection on professional practice. But we are still waiting for "zero issues" that should give more specific guidance and structure upstream training. But competition remains a contest. And there are fears that it will lead to the recitation of an educational breviary in order to please the jury with little recoil. The challenge of the competition will prevail in the eyes of students, on the content of the training, and overshadow knowledge transmission issues. And urgency of preventing kicking back and question his practice is still there: cramming in M1, Master of validation in parallel with courses in M2 … In addition, training is mainly located in universities (except the "common culture") and these are structured around scholarly disciplines and delivered by teachers in higher education, it is doubtful that it allows to think first as "professor" before thinking in "historian", "philosopher" or "mathematician" … the commitment to discipline is likely to remain long, rightly or wrongly, the main motivation for entering the profession and lasting print the construction of professional identity . The disciplinary weight remains very strong in this training reform and is even strengthened by the progress arbitrations. The moments of encounter and exchange between teachers of different disciplines and different levels were a marker for the creation of IUFM (with limited success) here are good compromises. But one of the challenges of rebuilding the school and the fight against school failure seems to be the ability of teachers to work collectively and in partnership interdisciplinary and inter-levels. And it can be learned! Who will train the trainers? Like any profession of human relationship, the teaching profession can not be built in the analysis of his own practice. This reflection on the business can not be limited to a simple reciprocal observation of a tutor. So we ask teachers to change how has it been possible to base training in recent years on a reference to the "buddy" who was a model of preservation of traditions and routines? As the highest pointions, we will see an increase in internship situations and therefore education consultant status ( "guardians"). We can rejoice. To be seven years trainer timeshare, I have become convinced that to place trainer and observer status helps to be a better teacher himself. The ability to decentralize, to question his own practice, dialogue with colleagues all this is very favorable for the development of educational practices. I wish all teachers to become guardian and to welcome new teachers in their classroom! But being academic advisor can not be improvised. If we want to avoid falling into the prescriptive model of companionship, this requires a minimum of training. We should develop skills in observation, in the analysis of practices in the conduct of interviews … The challenge would be to build in the secondary stable body of academic advisors on the model of "master trainers" in the primary . Otherwise, training in institutions is likely to remain the domain of good intentions and circumstances. We will place a student in a particular place because there are hours to fill and not in training logic. And so we may encourage imitation than innovation. The other dimension of the training of trainers concerned that which will be practiced in the ESPE. Another belief gained during these years is that we teach as it was formed. If we want the teaching profession evolves, it is also necessary that the training sessions are changing not only in content but also in form. There is no point in doing a lecture on active methods! We must keep them alive so that future teachers to understand the meaning and above all see that this is feasible and replicable. While teachers of future species are generally very competent people, there is need to collectively question our practices and to develop them. The supply of timeshare professors and activists engaged in educational movements and additional associations and school feeding could usefully renew this reflection. In saying this, I obviously called for my "chapel" but I stand in line with amendments to the recasting act. Future hope they will open their structures and give consistency to these intentions? It is often difficult to open up to others when you feel threatened … Hopes and concerns Is the construction of the training tomorrow at the stakes? Can we expect the change by cooperating structures marked by conservatism and issues exacerbated territories? How to build a national training with structures that claim autonomy? How to move from intentions to deeds? There are many concerns have on the success of this reform. The inertia is a feature of our beautiful country. But the ability to judge a policy before it has been implemented is as much a through our French culture. Let us not forget either that it was the situation of training in the previous five years. The pessimism of reason should not outweigh the optimism of the will. But it clearly refers to a governance issue. The introduction of species that will result in a ceremony is an opportunity to rhetoric. But it is also expected beyond words, there is a strong political will to transform intentions into action. This requires clear tradeoffs and also a willingness to make a regular assessment of the reform. Modern governance requires a permanent adjustment. The IUFMs now, we keep saying that this is a "temporary situation" and that there will be changes to make. But we know that another French specialty is the interim that lasts … The grueling haste in which are built Espe could then lead to a difficulty to hand it starts. This will however definitely necessary. With a single criterion: the training is in place she can build a more just and effective school? Does it allow to train teachers able to fight against school failure and inequalities in success? Hopefully … Note: you can complete reading this long post by another entitled "teaching is a craft that can be learned. Collectively "which specifies the design of the teaching profession that I defend. We can also read the "contributions to the consultation" made by the CRAP-Cahiers Teaching in autumn 2012 which contains a significant part of teacher training. To download the ticket as a PDF document, it is here … Posted by Watrelot on Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *