Cited by 11Teacher Education and Leadership StudiesFlow Experience in Various FieldsTeacher Professional Development and Motivation

Student teachers’ situational engagement during teaching practice in Finland and South Africa

Open access
Loukomies, Anni, Petersen, Nadine, Ramsaroop, Sarita, Henning, Elizabeth, Lavonen, Jari·2022·The Teacher Educator

Abstract

This article reports the outcomes of research on student teachers' situational engagement during their third-year teaching practice in university-affiliated teaching schools (teacher training schools) at the universities of Helsinki, Finland and Johannesburg, South Africa. We have explored situations that possibly engage the student teachers during the teaching practice related to learning, social interaction, working with different domains of teacher knowledge and sourcing from different origins. We have approached the experience of engagement the in the context of flow theory. For the experience sampling measurement, we operationalised engagement as a state of involvement in a learning task identified by higher-than-average individual states of interest, skill and challenge in a situation. In Johannesburg, 42% of all situations were engaging for students compared to 29% in Helsinki. The results emphasise the significance of personal interaction with mentors and university lecturers in supporting engagement. The student teachers found teaching, planning and reflecting on their lessons more engaging than other activities or informal discussions. Students at both universities experienced similar amounts of SMK, PCK and GPK and found working with these categories of knowledge engaging. It is important to include teaching practice in teacher education programmes and organise it in university-affiliated teacher training schools, where mentors can scaffold the students' reflection process, support the students in combining theoretical and practical perspectives of the teaching profession and guide students to seek information from various knowledge sources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08878730.2021.1991539

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Loukomies, A., Petersen, N., Ramsaroop, S., Henning, E., & Lavonen, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • University of Johannesburg (ZA)
Corresponding author
Loukomies, Anni
Venue
The Teacher Educator
Published
2021-10-22
Volume
57
Issue
3
Pages
255-279
ISSN
  • 0887-8730 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-8101
OpenAlex
W3209453513
Cited by
11
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Teacher Educator (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • the Academy of Finland (23 and, 27)
  • and European Commission (70)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Flow Experience in Various Fields
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Professional Development and Motivation
Keywords
pre-service teachers, teaching practice, flow theory, teacher professional development, mentoring, content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge, reflective practice, knowledge sources, Finland, South Africa

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review