Crossing boundaries: developing preservice teachers' professional identity through hybrid school–university partnerships

Abstract

Purpose

School–university partnerships are the core of effective teacher preparation programs, and central to this model are the classroom teachers who mentor preservice teachers into the profession. This article describes an innovative collaboration that transcends institutional boundaries, operating in a hybrid space, aimed at supporting preservice teachers' development as educators, expanding their professional networks and fostering their sense of belonging and professional identity within a broader community of teacher leaders.

Design/methodology/approach

This article describes a hybrid partnership model that provides preservice teachers with innovative mentoring experiences. Research on hybrid partnership models and boundary-spanning frames the discussion. The article provides a brief overview of two iterations of a collaboration between elementary preservice teachers and a cohort of teacher leaders in a fellowship program. The paper concludes by discussing lessons learned and directions for future research on the topic.

Findings

Preservice teachers benefit from opportunities to engage with a variety of mentors throughout their program. While the classroom teacher serving as a mentor is central to teacher preparation, there is a space for hybrid partnership models that provide preservice teachers additional mentors to support their development and connections to a professional learning community of teacher leaders. Through innovative hybrid collaborations, preservice teachers engage with diverse mentors, expanding their professional networks and preparing them to navigate the complexities of the educational landscape with a sense of belonging and identity.

Originality/value

This article contributes to the literature on hybrid partnership models, aimed at empowering preservice teachers by integrating them into a professional community of teacher leaders, fostering their sense of belonging, identity and preparedness to navigate the complexities of the profession.

Citation

Buelow, S. (2024), "Crossing boundaries: developing preservice teachers' professional identity through hybrid school–university partnerships", School-University Partnerships, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 421-430. https://doi.org/10.1108/SUP-03-2024-0003

Clinical experiences are a necessary aspect of teacher preparation, as preservice teachers benefit from opportunities to develop their professional knowledge base for content and pedagogy while simultaneously applying this developing knowledge in the classroom with students (International Literacy Association and National Council of Teachers of English, 2017). In other words, clinical experiences should be the core of teacher preparation programs (Association of Teacher Educators, 2023; National Association for Professional Development Schools, NAPDS, 2021). Central to these clinical experiences are the classroom teachers who serve as mentors to the teacher candidates.

Traditional constructs of mentor teachers, also referred to as cooperating teachers (Clarke, Triggs, & Nielsen, 2014; Wetzel et al., 2020) or school-based teacher educators (Zeichner, 2010), in clinical experiences are the classroom teachers who open their doors and practice for preservice teachers to learn from, learn with and offer guidance as preservice teachers “engage in clinical reasoning, apply theory to practice, and learn from practice” (Jenlink, 2021, p. 6). Moreover, mentor teachers acculturate preservice teachers into the profession by serving as an instructional coach, an emotional support system and as a socializing agent (Butler & Cuenca, 2012). As preservice teachers are socialized into the profession, they weave their teaching practices with professional knowledge and begin developing professional identity (Grossman, Hammernessa, & McDonald, 2009).

Akkerman and Bakker (2011) suggest that much learning occurs within well-bound institutional practices, such as school or family life. However, they also highlight that learning can take place when individuals engage with, move between or participate in various institutional practices. This process of navigating and integrating elements from various contexts to create new, hybrid spaces is referred to as boundary crossing (Engeström, Engeström, & Karkkainen, 1995). In teacher preparation, hybrid spaces can take on many meanings and forms, such as physical places where preservice teachers work with students outside the context of a classroom (e.g. literacy clinics or tutoring experiences) or transformative spaces where preservice teachers engage in innovative practices that may not be present in a traditional classroom (e.g. community-based learning) (Sailors & Hoffman, 2019; Zeichner, 2010). In this article, I will use Zeichner’s call for hybrid spaces in teacher preparation (2010) and Akkerman and Bakker’s (2011) constructs of boundary crossing as a lens to discuss a partnership model that transcended institutional boundaries, with a focus on developing preservice teachers’ sense of belonging and professional identity.

Teacher preparation

The holy grail: clinical experiences in preservice teacher preparation

Simply put, clinical experiences are the holy grail of teacher preparation (Darling-Hammond, 2014). There are several approaches to clinical experiences in the literature, and the quality of these experiences can range from disconnected and disjointed to fully integrated partnerships between schools and universities (Zeichner, 2010). In the application of the theory model, preservice teachers learn theory in campus-based courses and then apply their learning in the context of clinical experience classrooms (Korthagen & Kessels, 1999). There are also models that support early entry into the profession, arguing that one can become a teacher of record and learn about teaching on the job with the support of a mentor (Grossman & Loeb, 2008). In a more gradual entry to teaching, programs provide coursework prior to or in conjunction with an internship (student teaching), under the guidance of a mentor teacher who is ultimately responsible for the classroom (Berry, Montgomery, & Snyder, 2008). Whereas, in a Professional Development School model, academic content and pedagogical instruction are integrated with extensive, closely supervised, hands-on in-school clinical experience (NAPDS, 2021). Across approaches, thoughtfully designed clinical experiences that are coordinated with campus-based methods courses are more effective in supporting preservice teacher learning than disconnected field experiences (Darling-Hammond, 2006). In other words, collaborative and productive school–university partnerships are a critical component of teacher education (Zeichner, 2010).

In productive school–university partnerships, university-based teacher educators and school-based teacher-educators, also called mentor teachers, work collaboratively to coordinate clinical experiences for preservice teachers. In effective models, university-based teacher educators seamlessly integrate course content with clinical practice (Burns, Jacobs, & Yendol-Hoppey, 2020) and mentor teachers influence preservice teachers’ perspectives and teaching practices, offer guidance on the realities of the school day, working with families, engaging in interpersonal interactions, collaborating with colleagues and on other non-instructional responsibilities (Butler & Cuenca, 2012; Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng, & DuBois, 2008; Sayeski & Paulsen, 2012; Schlaack, 2023).

Mentor teachers matter

Mentor teachers, the classroom teachers that support preservice teachers in clinical experiences, teach children, model effective practice, support reflection, provide feedback and serve as gatekeepers of the teaching profession and agents of preservice teachers’ socialization (Clarke et al., 2014). A growing body of research demonstrates the impact that mentor teachers have on preservice teachers (Butler & Cuenca, 2012; Eby et al., 2008; Sayeski & Paulsen, 2012; Schlaack, 2023). Mentor teachers who prioritize time for one-on-one discussions with the preservice teacher, provide feedback, model, create a space for the preservice teacher to experiment with practice and include the preservice teacher in all aspects of their professional life are found to contribute to the quality of student teaching experiences (Sayeski & Paulsen, 2012). Reciprocally, teachers who are part of school–university partnerships and mentor preservice teachers frequently engage in reflection on practice, resulting in personal and professional growth and their leadership within the school (Hudson, 2013; NAPDS Essential 4, 2021).

When preservice teachers are empowered by their mentor teachers with a sense of confidence and agency, they are more likely to develop a professional identity (Bieler, 2013; Izadinia, 2015; Ticknor, 2014). Bieler refers to this type of work as holistic mentoring. Holistic mentoring continuously explores preservice teachers’ beliefs, goals and experiences to deliberately engage reflection in a hybrid space – that is, a space that dissolves hierarchies and allows for co-constructed knowledge.

Boundary crossing and hybrid spaces

Akkerman and Bakker (2011) remind us that “all learning involves boundaries” (p. 132), which they go on to define as “socio-cultural differences that cause discontinuities in actions or interactions” (p. 133). For example, school days are divided into time- and subject-based periods; and students are separated by age and sometimes ability (Bieler, 2013). Teacher preparation has also operated on varying degrees of separation – from the ways preservice teachers must grapple with the distinct roles of being a novice and an expert to the physical and sometimes ideological and pedagogical differences between field-based and university-based coursework (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011; Bieler, 2013). While such boundaries can cause discontinuity and separation, they also create the potential for new, hybrid spaces for learning when one transitions and interacts across these boundaries (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011).

Hybrid spaces in teacher preparation transcend traditional binary distinctions and hierarchies, such as theory versus practice, by integrating seemingly conflicting discourses in innovative ways. This shift from an either/or perspective to a both/also viewpoint fosters collaboration by honoring knowledge from all stakeholders (i.e. university-based teacher educators, P-12 educators, preservice teachers and the community) (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011; Lee, 2018; Sailors & Hoffman, 2019; Zeichner, 2010). This fluid crossing of boundaries between the roles of expert and novice is transformative in school–university partnerships and mentor-preservice teacher relationships, fostering an equitable exchange of ideas and practices, which allows for the co-construction of new pedagogical possibilities (Lee, 2018; Sailors & Hoffman, 2019).

In hybrid clinical practice and partnership spaces, preservice teachers are active participants in negotiating their identity and teaching style as they span the boundaries of theory and practice as well as expert and novice (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011; Laughlin, 2021). In this space, preservice teachers are stakeholders in the conversations about their preparation, co-constructing knowledge rather than merely receiving knowledge (Sailors & Hoffman, 2019). As various ideas and stakeholders come together in less hierarchical ways, collaboration, transformation and innovation take place as meaning is formed through the voices of multiple stakeholders (Bhabha, 1990; Zeichner, 2010).

This paper describes a hybrid approach to clinical practice that transcends the boundaries of traditional school–university partnerships where preservice teachers only work with a mentor teacher in a classroom for clinical experiences. Rather, these preservice teachers had two mentor teachers at any given time as they diffused hierarchies, co-constructed knowledge and crossed boundaries to develop their professional identity, leadership skills and teaching style.

Crossing boundaries: hybrid partnership experiences

For background, I am a literacy teacher educator working in an elementary preservice teacher preparation program at a major university in the Pacific region of the United States. This program seamlessly coordinates campus-based methods courses with school-based clinical field experiences (Darling-Hammond, 2006). Faculty in the department (tenure track and non-tenure track) span the boundaries of both spaces (campus and field-based courses) and are actively involved in clinical supervision. The program utilizes a cohort model for elementary preservice teacher preparation. Each cohort is coordinated by a faculty member who oversees their progression through the program and often supervises them in clinical experiences. My role in this program is dynamic as I teach literacy methods courses, supervise preservice teachers in the field, establish school–university partnerships and coordinate cohorts of undergraduate elementary preservice teachers through the program. Laughlin (2021) describes this work of teacher educators who engage in evaluation, coaching, instruction and partnership and assume expanded and multiple responsibilities across spaces as boundary-spanning teacher educators.

Cohorts progress through the program in four semesters via a gradual entry to teaching (Berry et al., 2008). The first three semesters balance methods courses two days a week and clinical experiences two days a week. The fourth semester, student teaching, is a fully immersive clinical experience – five days a week for the entire semester. Preservice teachers are assigned a mentor teacher for each of the four semesters. Often, they will experience three to four different mentor teachers over the course of the program spanning various grades in K-6 and school sites (changing placement and mentor teachers each semester, but often returning to a familiar placement for student teaching). The mentor teachers are classroom teachers that work in schools where each coordinator has developed a school–university partnership. This paper describes a hybrid clinical experience that occurred over two different cohorts that I coordinated.

This work was inspired by scholars who call for the integration of teacher leaders into preservice teacher preparation programs (Holland, Eckert, & Allen, 2014; Yogev & Michaeli, 2011). To answer this call, preservice teachers in the cohorts I coordinated were paired with cohorts of in-service teachers who were part of a fellowship program that focused on advocacy, policy and leadership. The teachers in this fellowship represented K-12 public and charter school educators from across the state. Many were National Board Certified Teachers, and a few were or later became the Hawaii Teacher of the Year. These were highly effective, highly motivated, engaged educators. The preservice teachers were paired with these educators in addition to the mentor teacher they worked with for their traditional clinical field experiences in elementary classrooms.

The impetus of this hybrid clinical experience began with collaborations with two state-level education specialists who work in teacher leadership and talent development. We frequently found ourselves on the same committees and in the same professional communities, which led to conversations about how we might connect our work in in-service teacher leadership and preservice teacher education in mutually beneficial ways. Thus, our partnership was born. In connecting the preservice teachers to their Hawaii State Teacher Fellows (HSTF) mentors, the goal was to support preservice teachers through carefully designed experiences that allowed them to collaborate and connect with their HSTF mentors while developing a sense of belonging, agency and identity within a professional learning community. Throughout the four years of this collaboration, which spanned two cohorts, we organized several events and opportunities to connect the HSTF to the preservice teachers. Each collaboration engaged stakeholders in developing professional relationships and building communities of practice so that current and future educators embraced lifelong learning and their position in the community as agents of change.

In planning for this collaboration, several goals were identified for both the preservice teachers and the HSTF mentors. First, for preservice teachers, our goals were to support their developing professional identity as an educator, establish and grow their professional learning network with educators across the state, encourage reflection and systematic thinking about larger issues surrounding education and provide preservice teachers with opportunities to meet InTASC Standard 10, which calls for teachers to become leaders and collaborators for the advancement of the profession (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2013). For the HSTF mentors, our goals were to develop their leadership and initiative competencies, support their developing identity as an “experienced” professional, utilize their strengths to help a rising educator and foster the perspective of mentorship as a part of their own professional development and contribution to the field. In addition, these collaborations offered opportunities for some of the HSTF mentors working in rural/remote locations of the state where existing school–university partnerships were not present, the opportunity to serve in a mentorship capacity.

This partnership was not constrained by the typical boundaries of clinical experiences – i.e. physical institutional settings or the K-6/6-12 dichotomy. Rather, this hybrid partnership transcended boundaries and created space for horizontal knowledge flow between mentor and preservice teacher, thus confronting the hierarchies and binaries of expert and novice that often define clinical experiences and partnerships. We used writing and storytelling as the primary vehicles to support the desired goals of the project, as they offered tangible tasks for the preservice teachers and HSTF mentors to center their engagement. This hybrid clinical partnership had two iterations: the first was the “Professional Identity Project” and the second, a result of reflection on the experiences with the first iteration, was “Speak Hawaii.”

Professional Identity Project

The Professional Identity Project represented the first collaboration between preservice teachers and the HSTF mentors. For this experience, preservice teachers were intentionally paired with their HSTF mentors based on personalities, needs and strengths. We also looked for previous connections that might foster deeper levels of engagement (e.g. the mentor teacher was a high school teacher where the preservice teacher attended). Again, the goals of this project were to cultivate preservice teachers' sense of belonging through professional networking and learning communities while also fostering their developing identity and leadership skills. Additionally, the project aimed to nurture leadership in the HSTF mentors.

The preservice teachers’ tangible task for this collaboration was an essay focused on why I teach. This was a culminating, integrated assignment in the writing methods course and introduction to teaching course that the preservice teachers were enrolled in that semester. The tangible task for the HSTF was also to produce a reflective teaching essay as part of their fellowship program. Preservice teachers and HSTF mentors served as peer reviewers and thought partners for one another on these tasks.

After the preservice teachers and HSTF mentors were paired, an initial meet and greet was organized. The purpose for this meeting was to build community and for the HSTF mentors to introduce the preservice teachers to online professional learning communities that they personally found beneficial for their growth and support in the profession (e.g. message boards, Twitter/X, etc.). After this initial meeting, preservice teachers and HSTF mentors were required to meet a few times throughout the semester to continue to build trust and community, reflect on their experiences, share their writing and enculturate the preservice teachers into professional networks. The preservice teachers and their HSTF mentors determined where and how they would meet and what they would accomplish at each meeting. Sometimes these meetings were social events (e.g. over dinner or coffee), sometimes they were strictly task-based (e.g. touching base over zoom to discuss the writing task) and other meet-ups were more formal (e.g. a preservice teacher visited the classroom of their HSTF mentor). Throughout this time, the HSTF mentors were charged with facilitating conversations with the preservice teachers on why they chose teaching as a profession, both sharing and reflecting on their reasons as part of the writing process.

At the end of the semester and formal collaborations, preservice teachers and their HSTF mentors were encouraged to maintain their partnerships beyond the project. With the support of their HTSF, the preservice teachers were invited to share their stories/writing with a broader audience. One preservice teacher shared her story with her HSTF mentor’s high school pre-education class. She was positioned as an expert as she shared her reasons for entering the profession and gave the pre-education students tips on classroom management and developing lesson plans. A second preservice teacher worked with her HSTF to publish her essay on an educational blog with a national audience. A few other partnerships continued to stay connected via online professional networking (e.g. Twitter/X) or with informal/social meetups.

Speak Hawaii

The second iteration of this hybrid partnership was designed after reflection on the previous experiences with the Professional Identity Project. The aspects that were most appreciated and beneficial were having a tangible task for the partnership (e.g. the writing and feedback aspect), a structured meet and greet and the flexible and autonomous framework for how each partnership developed throughout the semester (e.g. the pairs determined when and how to meet, what would be accomplished at each meeting, etc.). Yet, the Professional Identity Project seemed to lack a sense of formal closure, and while there was collaboration, for most interactions, there still seemed to be a hierarchy in that HSTF was the expert and the preservice teacher was the learner. The Speak Hawaii project was designed to cross these boundaries and diffuse hierarchies so that preservice teachers become active and equal participants in the knowledge exchange.

The Speak Hawaii project began with a new cohort of preservice teachers and a new cohort of HSTF. The overall goals remained the same with this new iteration: enculturating preservice teachers into a professional learning community to support the development of a professional identity, elevating preservice teachers as leaders in the profession and instilling leadership skills and a mentoring identity in the HSTF mentors. However, this new iteration also sought to create a pathway to elevate teachers’ and preservice teachers’ voices to equal levels to aid in preservice teachers’ identity formation through agency and empowerment (Bieler, 2013; Izadinia, 2015; Ticknor, 2014). With this goal in mind, we designed and hosted a culminating event that welcomed educators from across the state (from public, charter and private sectors), preservice teachers, teacher educators, administrators and community members. The event elevated teachers’ voices through verbal storytelling. The process by which we prepared the preservice teachers and HSTF mentors for the event was the same as the Professional Identity Project in that intentional pairings were made, community and trust were established, flexible parameters for engagements were outlined and writing served as a vehicle for reflective conversations. The difference with the second iteration, however, was the authentic audience and purpose for their writing and both preservice teachers and HSTF mentors were positioned as storytellers at the community event. To note, the preservice teachers and HSTF were not required to present at the event that was optional as professional autonomy was a critical piece to this partnership, but they were required to attend the event. In addition, there was an open call for speakers to educators across the state and while many of the speakers were HSTF and one was a preservice teacher, many were from the broader educational community.

Speak Hawaii was a well-attended event that uplifted teacher voice and experience and also elevated preservice teachers as equals in conversations about education. The event featured several keynote speakers and multiple breakout speakers that allowed participants more intimate conversations. Feedback collected from all attendees and participants of the Speak Hawaii event indicated it was well received. Preservice teachers were elevated as experts as they shared inspirational stories across the broader educational community in our state and engaged in collaborative discussions with educators in breakout rooms. One participant at the event said,

[Preservice Teacher], you inspire me. I am beyond proud of you for sharing your VOICE! You make me want to be a better teacher not only in writing, but in all areas of teaching.

Another participant said,

I loved this event, as a presenter I really enjoyed the opportunity to share my story and be inspired by others. I think it is a great idea to continue to bring in students from the [preservice teacher preparation] program, their feedback in my breakout room was inspiring. I think it is really impactful to create these correspondences for our next generation of educators.

Finally, a preservice teacher shared this feedback with a speaker: “Everything you’ve said is everything I have been thinking as a teacher candidate. I can’t tell you how much I connected with your piece. So inspiring. I’m really speechless.” The words of this preservice teacher show their connection to the community of educators by hearing others' stories that validated their own experiences.

Concluding thoughts

NAPDS Essential 4 reminds us that “reflective practice and responsive innovation” are keys to successful school–university partnerships (NAPDS, 2021, p. 5). Furthermore, Essential 8 is a reminder that successful school–university partnerships allow for roles that span the boundaries of institutional settings (NAPDS, 2021). This paper describes a school–university partnership that crosses boundaries into a hybrid space. That is, a partnership model that transcended physical spaces and the K-6/6-12 dichotomy to allow for reflective and responsive innovation to bring together preservice and in-service teacher leaders.

This hybrid partnership provided an additional layer to the classroom teacher mentor that the preservice teachers experienced in their program. Just as the preservice teachers and the HSTF mentors were continuously asked to reflect on their why, I also reflected on why. Why develop this hybrid mentorship model? What value does it add to the already rich field experiences for preservice teachers? In reflecting on these experiences, I came to recognize the profound opportunity these collaborations offer preservice teachers to integrate into teacher leadership communities of practice. There is no replacement for the classroom mentoring that the preservice teachers were experiencing, and I highly value the existing school–university partnerships that I have cultivated over the years. Yet this innovative approach complements and integrates into existing models. Connecting preservice teachers to educators across the state and/or system can foster a deeper sense of place and belonging in the profession. Preservice teachers who are holistically mentored into a supportive professional community will be better prepared to navigate the ever-evolving educational landscape as they develop their professional identity (Bieler, 2013; Izadinia, 2015). Through these supportive and innovative experiences, the preservice teachers had access to two caring mentors at any given time to support their transition into the profession and developing teacher identity. In addition, they were building professional networks at physical school sites and in hybrid spaces across the state.

This hybrid partnership also positioned preservice teachers as leaders as they participated in professional learning communities alongside their HSTF mentors. I noted this diffusion of traditional hierarchies and shifting of roles from novice to expert when the preservice teacher facilitated learning and shared her story with her HSTF mentor’s Teacher Academy high school students; when a preservice teacher published her work on a national platform and when a preservice teacher shared her voice and positioned herself as a leader at the Speak Hawaii event. In addition, for those preservice teachers who chose to visit the classroom and observe the practice of their HSTF mentor, they were active participants in constructing their own teaching repertoire by gaining different experiences, perspectives and practices to span the boundaries of theory to practice.

The opportunities afforded in this hybrid approach to school–university partnerships allowed us to cross the boundaries of partnerships as being bound to physical spaces/schools/districts and instead looked at a cross section of educators across the state within a fellowship program. The preservice teachers had opportunities to be mentored by teachers who are out of their license area (e.g. secondary teachers mentoring elementary preservice teachers) and geographic area, which provided unique and multiple perspectives to emerge. Most importantly, these preservice teachers were being mentored into a professional community of teacher leaders who are change agents in our system. As Smith (1992) reminds us, we learn from the company we keep – these preservice teachers were learning from and learning with many educators as they were embraced by multiple mentor teachers. They were set up to enter the profession, securely established and nurtured by some of the best and brightest educators in our state.

Looking ahead, further investigations into hybrid mentorship/partnership models are needed to more fully understand how they might support preservice teachers in developing a professional identity and sense of belonging into the profession. It would also be worthwhile to look longitudinally at these cohorts as they become practicing teachers. Laughlin (2021) reminds us of the need for a space that provides collaboration and the production of new ideas that authentically produce the profession-ready teachers that schools need. In moving toward a collaborative hybrid space, the potential for offering preservice teachers diverse mentors broadens partnerships. These partnerships need not be bound by school/districts or even states as we consider how to embrace the next generation of teachers into strong professional networks that will support their transition into the profession, create a space for horizontal knowledge exchange and reject the traditional binary of novice and expert, as preservice teachers play an active role in co-constructing their teaching practice and knowledge.