MOFET JTEC - Comparing the Effectiveness of Two Models of Initial Teacher Education Programmes In Israel: Concurrent Vs. Consecutive

JTEC Home The MOFET Institute Home Page Home Page
Trends in Jewish Education Teacher Education In-Service Training Education & Administration Formal Education Informal Education Adult Education Technology & Computers Israel Education Learning Resources Conferences & Events

Section: Teacher Education
Comparing the Effectiveness of Two Models of Initial Teacher Education Programmes In Israel: Concurrent Vs. Consecutive
2017   |   Type: Abstract
  
The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of two common models of initial teacher education programmes that are prevalent in many countries, including Israel. The two are: the concurrent model, in which disciplinary studies and pedagogical studies are integrated and taught at the same time; and the consecutive model, which focuses mostly on pedagogy following the disciplinary studies already completed by university graduates interested
to go in to teaching.

The study followed two cohorts of graduates who completed their studies in teacher colleges in Israel in the years 2005–2006 for a period of 10 years, a total of 11,978 graduates. Out of them, 10,428 studied in the concurrent model and 1550 in the consecutive model. To compare the effectiveness of the two models, efficiency and equity measures were used. The findings of the study indicate the advantage of the consecutive model in most of the measures examined.
 
In conclusion, the current study found that graduates of the consecutive model outperformed graduates of the concurrent model in most of the measures utilised. Two explanations might account for the superiority of the consecutive model. The frst, mentioned above, is related to the profle of the students in each model. The consecutive model recruits older, more educated candidates with greater abilities and previous work experience.

The second explanation might be related to the layered manner in which the curricular components are organised in the two models. In the consecutive model, a sound preparation in theoretical and disciplinary knowledge interwoven with research is frst given to the students at the university. The second layer, which is added at the colleges of education, is centred mostly on the preparation of the students to teach and contains foundation studies, pedagogical studies and practical teaching experience. This layered approach seems to better contribute to graduates’ feeling of self-efcacy, readiness to teach and willingness to take on leading roles in school (Ross et al. 1999). Although it is commonly perceived that the concurrent model allows for better integration of curricular components (Doherty 1979), it might have, in fact, a negative effect. Condensing all curricular components together might result in a shallow treatment of each of them, thus leading to feelings of unpreparedness and low readiness to teach.
 
Despite the fairly clear-cut results showing the superiority of the consecutive model, some limitations of the current study should be taken into consideration in policy-making concerning which of them to adapt.

First, the study followed only two cohorts of graduates, who studied in those years in only half of the existing teacher colleges in Israel. Since then the number of colleges of education that offer the consecutive model has doubled and the number of graduates studying in the consecutive model has increased dramatically. This increase for itself might have an effect on the differences between the two models.

Second, the study followed graduates who completed their studies in 2005–2006. Since then, due to lowered admission standards at the universities and recent raised admission standards of the academic colleges, the profle of students who study in the two models became more similar. This might also have an effect on the differences between the two models.

Third, a uniformed curriculum initiated in 2006 by the Council of Higher Education for all teacher education institutions made the teacher preparation of the two models more similar (Council of Higher Education 2006). This new curriculum was meant to improve the disciplinary component at the colleges of education by increasing its weight on the one hand, and to improve the pedagogical and practical components given at the universities by increasing its share on the other.
Add a Comment
(* - required)




Click the button to copy the link to the clipboard. You may then paste it into your web site or blog.
Copy Permalink