Practice, theory and research in initial teacher education: international perspectives

Initial Teacher Education (ITE) has been discussed from a wide range of perspectives, focusing on its structure and curriculum, on field experiences and coursework and the interplay between them, as well as on the learning experiences of student-teachers (Darling-Hammond, Newton, and Wei 2010; Flores 2016; Townsend 2011). In a recent review, Craig (2016) argued that the structure of education is not only shaped by history, culture and economics, but increasingly dictated by politics. Thus, a more systemic analysis of ITE programmes is needed in order to fully understand its rationale and aims as well as its outcomes. This encompasses, therefore, the analysis of the nature and goals of school curriculum itself, the conception of the teacher as a professional and his/her role in curriculum development, the key components of ITE curriculum and the political, economic, social and cultural contexts in which it is embedded. More recently, issues such as the formation of teacher identity in ITE and the role of research in connecting theory and practice and curriculum integration in ITE have been advocated (Flores 2016; Flores et al. 2016). The theory–practice divide is well documented in international literature (e.g. Flores 2016; Van Nuland 2011) and it has been identified as the perennial problem in ITE (Korthagen 2010). The reasons for this are diverse amongst which are the socialisation process into existing patterns in schools, the complexity of teaching, the nature of the learning process in ITE, the kind of knowledge valued (associated with the tension between the more practical and the more formal) and the ways in which the affective dimension is overlooked within a technical-rationality perspective (Korthagen 2010). An analysis of the international literature reveals that teaching practice in ITE varies not only in terms of location in the different programmes and of its length but also in regard to its philosophy, aims and assessment methods (Flores et al. 2016). Thus, it is possible to identify different ‘practices’ in ITE curriculum internationally and diverse ways of articulating them with other components of the programmes. In addition, a look at the curriculum plans of ITE internationally illustrates a diversity of ways of including research into teacher education programmes as well as ways of integrating it into practice and course work (Flores 2016). Overall, in Europe and elsewhere, the research component varies: in some cases it is non-existent; in other cases it is not explicit in ITE curriculum, as it depends on the higher education institutions to develop student-teachers’ research competences, for instance during practicum (Flores 2016). In other cases, an explicit curriculum unit on research methods is included in the curriculum as well as an enquiry approach to the practicum (e.g. Flores et al. 2016; Niemi and Nevgi 2014). There are, therefore, clear variations across ITE programmes internationally in terms of the research dimension and its connection (or lack of it) with theory and practice. Different ways of understanding ‘research’ in ITE and of putting it into place may also be identified as the papers included in this Special Issue clearly illustrate. In particular, this Special Issue addresses the following questions: (i) What are the critical issues in the ITE curriculum internationally? (ii) How is the research dimension integrated in ITE programmes? (iii) What are the approaches and strategies to integrate theory and practice in ITE internationally? The collection of articles included addresses, therefore, the topic of practice, theory and research in ITE internationally, including analyses from different perspectives and contexts.