This article was downloaded by: [Ams/Girona*barri Lib]On: 08 October 2014, At: 02:23Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Research in Post-Compulsory EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpce20

Why do they do it? a study into theperceptions and motivations of traineefurther education lecturersCecilia Mckelvey a & Jane Andrews aa University of Greenwich , United KingdomPublished online: 19 Dec 2006.

To cite this article: Cecilia Mckelvey & Jane Andrews (1998) Why do they do it? a study into theperceptions and motivations of trainee further education lecturers, Research in Post-CompulsoryEducation, 3:3, 357-367, DOI: 10.1080/13596749800200036

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13596749800200036

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, ouragents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to theaccuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the viewsof or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied uponand should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francisshall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses,damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access anduse can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Why Do They Do It? A Study into the Perceptions and Motivations ofTrainee Further Education Lecturers

CECILIA MCKELVEY & JANE ANDREWS

University of Greenwich, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT Despite the enormous changes affecting the role of further education (FE)lecturers and in contrast to the work on school teachers, very little research has beenconducted on the perceptions of new and trainee FE lecturers. This research is a study of16 students on a PGCE FE course in 1996/97, identifies aspects of teaching in collegeswhich intending FE lecturers might find attractive. It considers the influence of traineesprior work experience on perceptions of the role that lecturers have inpost-Incorporation FE. The authors also identify elements within the training coursewhich may equip new lecturers with the ability to negotiate difficulties arising out of therecent conflict and divisions between managers and lecturers.

Background

Further Education (FE) has been the subject of an enormous number ofexternally imposed changes in the past decade that have profoundly affected thenature of the curriculum offered as well as the structure and management of theinstitutions themselves. Since the early 1990s Colleges have undertakenstructural reorganisations which have had considerable impact on staff roles andchanges in the curriculum offered. Incorporation, and a market led approach toeducation and training, have led to lecturers roles undergoing changes. Thepolitical demand to upgrade the level of qualifications in the workforce toprovide a more highly skilled, flexible workforce – essential to maintain theUK’s competitiveness – has fallen on this sector which now teaches more of theover-16 population than all the schools and universities put together.

Surprisingly, despite the scale of these changes and the number of studentswho are affected, there has been little research on their impact. This has recentlybeen noted by Hughes et al (1996) and Young (1995) who all call for moreresearch. McGinty & Fish (1993) suggest the reason for this lack of interest isbecause the academic value system has accorded vocational education a lowpriority. Whatever the reason this lack of interest seems to be evident in the areaof the training of new lecturers. The Teachers Training Agency (TTA), despitebeing responsible for the training of teachers, has largely ignored FE’s

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

357

Research in Post-Compulsory Education, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1998

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

requirements. Guile & Lucas (1996) have drawn attention to the need for newinitiatives to inform both initial and ongoing professional development of FEstaff. The FEDA mapping exercise into the roles, duties and responsibilities oflecturers has prompted fears that new qualifications may mirror the narrowcompetency approach enshrined in the D Assessor awards. These qualificationsare now mandatory for NVQ assessors.

The focus of this article is the perceptions of trainee student teachers in FE.We feel this subject is important because of the enormous changes impacting onthe role of lecturers and the intention of the present United Kingdom (UK)Labour government to introduce some kind of compulsory training. It alsomight indicate some of the reasons why people are initially attracted to teachingwhich is of interest to the TTA in the light of the advertising campaign toimprove the perceptions and status of teaching in general. Before the form ofthis training is decided, it seems important that perceptions of intendinglecturers are investigated. In fact the perceptions and attitudes of new primaryand secondary school teachers has been extensively researched (Calderhead,1987), but this has not occurred in the FE sector.

It has long been recognised that teachers are not the mere tools ofeducational reformers and that their attitudes to a particular change is a keyfactor in the eventual effectiveness, or otherwise, of the initiative. MichaelBarber (1993) has said that it is essential that “ways are found for the voices ofnew teachers to be heard”. In the case of new FE lecturers information regardingattitudes is of vital importance in planning training and the future developmentof the service of which so much is demanded.

We carried out a small research project to discover if there was anycorrelation between previous work history and attitudes towards FE teaching.We felt that there might be different attitudes held by those coming from awork background that could fit with the current market ethos of FE – choice,customer focus, performance indicators etc. – from those coming frombackgrounds with a different ethos. Secondly, we wanted to assess the impact ofexposure to the FE environment during a six-week block placement. Finally wewere interested in the major concerns of FE lecturers at the start of their careers.

Our combined interest in APL, staff development and management and ourinitial impressions that trainee lecturers in the mid 1990s may have had verydifferent experiences in the workplace than their predecessors prompted thisresearch.

The Literature

We investigated the literature on school teachers which instead of regardingteachers as ‘interchangeable types unchanged by circumstance or time’emphasised that in “understanding something so intensely personal as teaching itis critical to know about the person the teacher is” (Zeichner et al, 1987).

The research into perceptions of new teachers has pointed to two potentsources of influence. Biography research by Zeichner et al (1987) suggests thatstudent teachers approach training with an existing body of attitudes andknowledge that shape what they extract from training. Knowles argues that

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews

358

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

“understanding the origins of the student teacher perceptions is largely a productof understanding the impact of biography” while Feiman-Nemser (1983) takes apsychoanalytic stance and regards teachers’ attitudes as products of their ownrelationships as children.

The other influence is described by Hammersley, (cited in Zeichner et al,1987), and Fenstermacher (1980). They argue that it is the impact of the“ecology of the institutions and the classrooms” in which teachers do theirteaching practice which act as constraints and positive pressure to act in certainways. These conditions are in turn the result of policy and political decisions.Fenstermacher (1980) has argued that institutions are the most potentdeterminant of future attitudes towards teaching while Dreeben (1973) hasshown that student teachers are influenced by experience of colleagues andnorms within teacher peer groups.

The literature therefore indicates that on the one hand individual teachercharacteristics, including biography, is more influential in determining teachersocialisation than various institutional factors, while other studies haveemphasised the power of institutions. A third approach, and one which informsthe design of this research, is emphasised by Lortie (1975) and Pollard (1982)and emphasises the interaction of individual and institutional factors.

The researchers believe that both biography and contact with FE Collegesduring the teaching placement period could be influential.

The contact with FE colleges for new lecturers in the present climate islikely to be seen as more influential because of the changes and conflicts whichare present in many colleges. The research which has been conducted on theimpact of change on lecturers has indicated a negative effect. The profession issaid to have become demoralised, stressed and alienated (McGinty & Fish,1993).

One significant recent case study about the impact of recent changes in thesector focused on a small group of full-time creative arts lecturers teaching inone college. Elliott (1996, 1997) has found that the ‘new managerialism’ whichhas spread throughout the public sector has alienated those who think ofthemselves as “professionals” and has led to splits between the values ofmanagement and lecturers.

Methodology

The participants in the study were students on a pre-service FE PGCE courseand the methodology was primarily qualitative using interviews withindividuals. Initially one student from each of 16 discrete tutor groups wasasked to participate to represent a spread of different FE colleges, vocational andacademic experiences. Fourteen students remained in the research projectthroughout the year, of whom eight were women and six were men. Theyoungest student in the sample was 25, the oldest 57, the median age 35.Students on the PGCE course spend one day a week in FE Colleges during thefirst university term followed by a full-time block placement of six to sevenweeks during the second term. The colleges were of two types, inner city urbanand suburban. All were in London and the southeast.

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

359

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

In late September, before they had had any significant contact with theirplacement college, students attended a briefing session in which the purpose ofthe research was explained. At this meeting they were asked to complete awritten questionnaire which contained three kinds of questions. Firstly,participants were asked to rank their responses to questions relating to teachingin FE, covering such areas as job security, job satisfaction, pay, hours, holidays,student characteristics. Secondly, open questions invited fuller responses aboutparticipants’ reasons for wanting to teach in FE and their knowledge of thesector. Finally the questionnaire asked for biographical information. Aquestionnaire was used at this stage as it was the most efficient means of gettingbasic biographical information and of getting a snapshot of prior views andopinions about FE before exposure to colleges.

Information from the questionnaires was used to inform the first interviewswhich were held in November, after students had had initial contact with theircolleges and mentors, but prior to the block placement. Some of the questionsused in these interviews deliberately repeated areas covered in the questionnairein order to provide an alternative source of data and to enable students todevelop earlier ideas.

The first interviews were structured around a framework of topics:participants’ prior work and life experiences: their reasons for wanting to teachin FE. and their prior knowledge of FE students, FE structures and the FEcurriculum. This style of interview was intended to ensure: “Freedom to allowthe respondent to talk about what is of central significance to him or her ratherthan the interviewer ... but some loose structure to ensure that all topics whichare considered crucial to the study are covered” (Bell, 1993). Some openquestions were also asked about participants’ initial impressions of theplacement.

There was an intention to use self-reporting diaries during the blockplacement period, but because of sensitivities surrounding students’ positions inplacement colleges in relation to any suspicion of breech of confidentiality, andthe fact that they were being assessed by college staff, it was felt that althoughvaluable, it could have been difficult for the students to complete. Since studentswere not recording experiences as they happened, some illuminating detailconcerning the development of professional identities may have been lost.

The 14 students were interviewed again after the block placement. In threecases, where for various reasons they were not available at the university, theywere interviewed by telephone. The main purpose of the final interview was toelicit the impact of the block placement on attitudes and perceptions. Studentswere also asked to talk about their expectations and plans for future work in FE.

A focused interview allowed the researchers to establish a framework inwhich the major areas of inquiry had been determined beforehand, based on thesubjective experiences of the participants and themes which had emerged duringthe first interviews. The features of this approach are described by Merton &Kendall (1946) and cited in Cohen & Manion (1994).

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews

360

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Findings

A Flexible View of Job Security?

Most of our students did not expect teaching in FE to offer job security. Thosewho had not experienced security in previous jobs (e.g. someone working in thetheatre, an artist) thought that FE teaching might offer a bit more security thanthey were used to or at least another avenue for finding work. One studentremarked that: “I’ve had no great expectation of a job in my whole life so there’snothing new”.

At the start of the research project most of the sample said they hoped toget full-time work in FE, but most did not expect to. At the time of the secondinterview, none of the students had secured permanent or full-time FE jobs, apattern reflected across the whole PGCE course. Most were still reasonablyoptimistic that they would find some work, and accepted, with varying degreesof enthusiasm, that they would need to be flexible about work opportunities,building up a portfolio of work inside and outside the sector. One already hadexperience as a self-employed trainer, another was optimistic about freelanceopportunities, while a third had decided that part-time teaching would combinewell with her wish to pursue a Masters degree.

The one student in the sample who withdrew from the course during theperiod of our research did so because she found that the opportunities forteaching the subject she loved (History) were limited in FE. Interestingly, shewas someone who had left a secure full-time job in insurance to do the course.As well as being disappointed not to be able to teach history to academicallyinclined students, she was also disturbed that prospects for full-time employmentseemed so bleak. “After I’d left, the lecturers at (my placement college) said thatI’d made the right decision – if there had been lots of history teaching it mighthave been different.”

While there was some disquiet about starting levels of pay for full-timeposts, several students remarked that part-time rates were reasonably good.Rates might not compare favourably with rates in other professions but werebetter than in some of the jobs students had been doing prior to the course:“when you’re used to supplementing your income with security work at £4 anhour then £17 is great”.

Satisfaction about Teaching

Before their first contact with colleges, students were strikingly enthusiasticabout teaching. Many had been attracted to teaching in the first place out of adesire to pass on knowledge or love of a subject or vocational skill andexpertise. Those who had gone to FE colleges themselves (almost half thesample) had all had positive experiences, one reporting her course as ‘lifechanging’.

In the main students’ feelings of satisfaction about teaching increased afterthe block placement. They talked about considerable work satisfaction derived

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

361

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

from direct student contact, and the creativity which teaching demanded. Severalenthused about the possibilities for being imaginative in devising learningopportunities for their students: “The more I put in, the more they (the students)gave me”. Another said: “I really liked the students. I liked being in charge,taking lessons”. And from a third: “I became a bit obsessed. I used to go homeand think: ‘how can I make this really interesting and original?’.”

The students felt they were good communicators who gained personalsatisfaction when people learned something. Several who had worked in innercity colleges reported feelings of altruism and a sense of working in aworthwhile setting. For example one said he felt a “sense of service to thecommunity”.

One of our sample was someone who had taught part-time in an olduniversity and really wanted to teach in HE. He decided that in the absence ofHE work a year spent getting a teaching qualification might be a profitable wayof spending his time. It was interesting that while he consistently said that hedidn’t want to ever teach in FE, that after the placement he reported moresatisfaction with the actual teaching than he had anticipated.

College Morale

Nearly all students were shocked when they first went into colleges about lowlevels of lecturer morale. Prior to starting the course most had heard of changesin FE, particularly the impact of Incorporation, but most were unprepared forthe levels of dissatisfaction encountered: “People are to a man and womandisgruntled, fed up”; “Morale is pretty appalling”; “They’re pretty cheesed off”;“It’s awful”: “There’s lots of bad feeling between management and staff”; “Moraleis pretty bad at the moment”; “There’s a general atmosphere of pessimism andstruggle – everyone’s really battered”. They talked about ‘trouble in thestaffroom’, ‘bitterness’ and ‘confrontation’.

This first contact with colleges was initially demotivating for nearly allstudents. One student commented that conditions were “terrible, absolutelyterrible” even worse than expected. Some felt that they were part of the problemand that their presence caused lecturers more work.

After the block placement most of the student teachers had developed theirown perceptions of these morale issues. It seemed that they were able to distancethemselves from the conflicts, often finding that peer support provided a ‘bufferzone’. Additionally those of our sample who had been well supported by theirpersonal mentors said that the block placement had strengthened theircommitment to teaching in FE. Among these students there was admiration forthe ‘energy’ and ‘friendliness’ of staff.

Several of the student teachers distinguished those lecturers who reallycared about their students and those who had become so disillusioned that theyno longer seemed to bother. One remarked upon the ‘curious split in morale’between lecturers’ feelings towards the college as an institution (‘rock bottom’)and their feelings towards their students (‘very positive’). Another commented onthe extreme cynicism of lecturers – “some of them just moaned all the time –they missed lessons, they didn’t turn up. I was shocked about that.”

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews

362

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

The Impact of Student Biography

In general, it was possible to see in this small sample a difference in attitudetowards many of the chances occurring in FE than that displayed by thosealready in employment. About 80% of our sample had prior work experience,often for many years, in industries (public, private and voluntary sectors) wherethey had experienced part-time and temporary contracts, inflexible and longworking hours, performance related pay and a management ethos which sharedmany of the characteristics which now pervades FE. One student who hadworked for the National Health Service felt that the kinds of managementstructures which had been imposed in hospitals were now being recreated in FE.Many simply accepted that these kind of working practices are the way thingsare in the 1990s. Others felt that the nature of FE teaching meant that FE was alot better than what they had experienced. A former social worker, a formeraccountant, a former construction worker, a former caterer and former winetrade manager each commented on the variety and flexibility of FE in terms ofmore interesting work and more flexible hours. Most of our sample felt thatlecturers in colleges were fighting a losing battle over new contracts. One said:“No, I can’t say I’m particularly distressed by new contracts”. For another, whohad worked in the catering industry, the prospect of not having to work overChristmas for the first time in 20 years was a real bonus!

This group of student teachers thought that the pressure which they sawlecturers working under was a part of ‘normal’ working life. Many students inour sample were highly critical of the current FE funding methodology whichthey found bizarre in its complexity. They were, however, comfortable aboutworking in a context where issues of quality control, accountability, and thepursuit of efficiency were central.

It was evident that some of the student teachers found the negativeatmosphere prevailing in many colleges personally difficult to handle. Onestudent hated the ‘politics’ in her placement college and failed to understand it.After her placement she said she was more enthusiastic for teaching, but hadbeen put off by the anger and bitterness of lecturers and managers alike. Sheexperienced a lack of support, and missed the close support and supervisionfrom colleagues which had been a feature of her work in the voluntary sector.She was shocked by what felt like a lack of care in her college. Similarsentiments were expressed by one of the older students in our sample, who hadherself returned to FE as a mature student in the 1980s. She had fond memoriesof her time taking an Access course, which contrasted sharply with these firstexperiences as a teacher. She referred to ‘destructive backbiting’ between staff onSilver Book contracts and newer staff.

There was enormous frustration with the ‘inefficiency’, and ‘clumsiness’ ofmanagement and administrative systems. Talking about the difficulties he hadencountered booking a video recorder one student teacher who had worked as amanager in retailing remarked: “I’m used to sorting that kind of thing out with asingle phone call. Mistakes didn’t happen habitually. They were rare.” We heardmany anecdotes about confusions over room bookings, photocopying equipment

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

363

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

breakdowns, room keys, parking permits. Frustrations caused by systems’breakdowns in these areas were felt to be more serious than some of the issuesraised by disputes about hours and contracts. Reports of lack of resources forteaching purposes were also common.

Students who had worked in the private sector were also highly critical ofthe lack of managerial skills. ‘Chaotic’ was used by several students to describemanagement practices. “I don’t know where they get their ideas aboutmanagement from – just basic things like communicating properly”. One studentrecounted an incident (about car-parking) which had caused a furore in hercollege. A senior manager had sent round a curt memo telling staff that carparking would no longer be available for part-time lecturers. “They (thelecturers) were up in arms about it. I just thought there must have been a betterway of explaining the reasons to everyone. They (the managers) were makingmistakes all the time.”

Poor, or nonexistent line management was mentioned several times. Thosewho had worked in industry and the voluntary sector were used to regularcontact with their line managers, to appraisals, supervision sessions, and personaltarget setting. They could distinguish ‘good’ and ‘bad’ bosses. They wereperplexed that routine aspects of line management seemed to be missing in manycases.

Several of the student teachers were surprised that lecturers lackedsystematic staff development and were critical of this. Students noticed that somelecturers in vocational areas badly needed skills up-dating. One mentioned thedrive for the Investors in People kitemark in his college, but felt that the collegewas only playing lip-service to the staff development needs which werenecessary to achieve the standard. He had previously worked for a privatecompany which had gained the award, and said he couldn’t see how “that lotcould get it”.

Implications

In his introduction to Geoffrey Elliott’s (1997) book, Ernest Theodossin arguesthat the sample (full-time creative arts lecturers) used in that case study issignificant because participants were neither typical of the popular vocationalimage of FE lecturers (hairdressers, engineers etc.) nor academics who might beconsidered inevitable opponents of the market place paradigm. The data fromElliott’s study showed that “the lecturers are not resistant to business methodsand practices per se; on the contrary, on issues such as appraisal, the use ofexternal performance indicators and in relation to the autonomy brought aboutby incorporation, lecturers can, in many cases, see clear advantages of suchinitiatives”. The findings from our own study support this view. One of thestudent teachers summed this up: “As I’ve come from a business background I’mquite used to everything being very performance related. I’m not sure it’s quitethe same in education, but it’s not a culture shock.”

Elliott (1997) and Harper (1997) have described the antagonism incolleges as a conflict between ‘professionalism’ and ‘managerialism’, between apedagogic culture and a managerialist culture. Our student teachers were critical

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews

364

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

of aspects of both cultures and the positions that some lecturers and managershad adopted.

It was evident from this research that previous work background did affectperceptions, particularly in regard to views on management. The studentteachers in this survey, many with experience of management in the privatesector were startled by the style of much management practice in FE. They werenot against a managerial ethos. Indeed, many were familiar with the language ofthe new managerialism and talked easily about quality targets and performanceindicators. Several said however, that managers in FE seem to have adopted avery old-fashioned ‘hard’ management style. They felt that FE managers had notkept up with ‘forward management thinking’ in the 1990s which values themanager as leader and the manager’s responsibility for communication. Studentsin our sample thought it noticeable that these two key aspects of a manager’srole were neglected in FE.

Since Incorporation there has been emphasis on the skills needed forstrategic planning, and for operational management skills in human resources,financial and premises management. Students we interviewed did not seemanagers in FE yet demonstrating those management skills and practices drawnfrom the human relations school of management, that individuals need to bevalued for themselves, that teams are crucial for effective working and thatbehaviour, values, interpersonal relationships and group identity, may be ascritical as pay, rewards and working conditions. It is ironic that at a time whencollege mission statements reflect a concern for student needs (even whencouched in the language of the client or customer), that managers give theimpression that they have neglected these essentials in relation to how staff aretreated.

David Holloway (1994) has pointed out that FE lecturers have alwaysactually lacked a clear homogenous professional identity. For many vocationallecturers it was their expertise in industry and business which provided a basisfor their recruitment to the sector. He also argues too that the low numbers ofFE lecturers with teaching qualifications accounts for “their lack of preparednessfor curriculum development”. The student teachers in our survey echoed thisconcern and noticed that some of the lecturers in colleges seemed ill-preparedfor the changes which had occurred in FE.

Initially, although aware of the conflicts in the sector, it was striking howenthusiastic trainees were about the prospect of teaching and the mainly,intrinsic satisfactions, opportunities for creativity, involvement with a muchloved subject/skill involvement with young people, that they expected to derivefrom it. For most the enthusiasm for teaching survived the realities of workingin a FE institution – even those which were experiencing quite a high degree ofchange, dislocation and antagonism. One important factor which enabled thesestudents to survive was their willingness to adopt a reflective practitionerapproach to their experiences.

Our student teachers are encouraged on their initial training course to bereflective about their teaching and their experiences in colleges. Theirassessment during the block placement includes the requirement to maintain areflective log. As ‘outsiders’ in their colleges the student teachers were able to

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

365

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

stand back from conflicts and view the FE scene as interested participantobservers. They came across problems and difficulties, but had a remarkablyflexible approach to their solution. They drew on previous work experience, onthe theory they had learnt on the training course and they were creative aboutproblem solving. Most were not interested in the politics: whatever theirpolitical persuasion they were prepared to look at problems reflectively. Theywere critical on occasion of both lecturers and managers, but equally werewilling to praise good practice in both. The central concern of the studentteachers was about their own practice as teachers and the needs of their students.

It appears to us that the reflective practitioner approach experienced by thestudent teachers helped them to negotiate the conflicts they encountered incolleges. It may be that this was much easier to maintain because to a largeextent students on teaching placement are outsiders in many respects. Howeverthis project does give some grounds to suggest, with Elliott (1997), that if thisapproach was more widely adopted in staff development programmes in collegeswith existing staff, the unhelpful polarisation evident in many FE institutionsmight be ameliorated to some extent.

The main concern of trainee lecturers was to be able to do a socially usefuljob for realistic remuneration and in a work environment which offered themthe resources to be able to do it well. They were not as hostile to cost cutting,efficiency changes in FE and did not perceive conditions as poor except inregard to resourcing and management but feared that further pressure mightmake the work much more difficult.

We of course recognise that their views might change radically when theyhave experienced the pressures of real employment and responsibility in FEcolleges. Ian Nash (1996) writing in The Times Educational Supplement cites arecent NATFHE survey which showed six out of 10 lecturers consideringleaving the profession. Despite these difficulties, at the start of their careers, mostof our sample remained eager to work in the sector, if not necessarily in full-timejobs. We hope that a follow-up survey of our students and of other new FElecturers will enable us to see whether or not their perceptions change once theyare in jobs.

Correspondence

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews, School of Post-Compulsory Education andTraining, University of Greenwich, Queen Anne Building, 30 Park Row,London SE10 9LS, United Kingdom.

References

Barber, M. (1993) Editorial, British Journal of In-Service Education, 19, pp. 3-4.Bell, J. (1993) Doing Your Research Project. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Calderhead, J. (Ed.) (1987) Exploring Teachers’ Thinking. London: Cassell.Cohen, L. & Manon, L. (1994) Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.

Cecilia McKelvey & Jane Andrews

366

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Dreeben, R. (1973) The school as a workplace, in R. Travers (Ed.) Second Handbook ofResearch on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Elliott, G. (1996) Educational management and the crisis of reform in further education,Journal of Vovational Education and training, 48, pp. 5-23..

Elliott, G. (1997) Crisis and Change in Vocational Education and Training. London: JessicaKingsley Publishers.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983) Learning to teach, in L. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds) Handbookof Teaching and Policy. New York: Longman.

Fenstermacher, G. (1980) What needs to be known about what teachers need to know?,in C. Hall, S. Hord & C. Brown (Eds) Exploring Issues in Teacher Education: questions forfuture research. Austin: University of Texas Research and Development Centre.

Guile, D. & Lucas, N. (1996) Preparing for the future: the training and professionaldevelopment of staff in the FE sector, Teacher Development, pp. 47-54.

Harper, H. (1997) Management in Further Education: theory and practice. London: DavidFulton.

Holloway, D.G. (1994) Further education teachers’ development: a post-technocraticmodel, Teacher Development, pp. 46-57.

Hughes, C., Taylor, P. & Tight, M. (1996) Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 1,pp. 7-18.

McGinty, J. & Fish, J. (1993) FE in the Market Place: equity, opportunity and individuallearning. London: Routledge.

Nash, I. (1996) Lecturers search for way out, The Times Educational Supplement, 6December.

Young, M. (1995) Teacher Education for thr Further Education Sector: training the lecturer forthe future. London: Post-16 Education Centre.

Zeichner, K.M., Tabachnick, B.R. & Densmore, K. (1987) Individual, institutional andcultural influences on the development of teachers’ craft knowledge, inJ. Calderhead (Ed.) Exploring Teachers’ Thinking. London: Cassell.

Perceptions of Trainee FE Lecturers

367

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

s/G

iron

a*ba

rri L

ib]

at 0

2:23

08

Oct

ober

201

4