This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]

On: 28 January 2015, At: 08:04

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Studying Teacher Education: A journal

of self-study of teacher education
practices
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cste20

Boundary Crossing and Working in the

Third Space: Implications for a teacher
educator's identity and practice
a
Judy Williams
a
Monash University , Australia
Published online: 03 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: Judy Williams (2013) Boundary Crossing and Working in the Third Space:
Implications for a teacher educator's identity and practice, Studying Teacher Education: A journal
of self-study of teacher education practices, 9:2, 118-129, DOI: 10.1080/17425964.2013.808046

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2013.808046

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,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection 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
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Studying Teacher Education, 2013
Vol. 9, No. 2, 118–129, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2013.808046

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Boundary Crossing and Working in the Third Space: Implications for
a teacher educator’s identity and practice
Judy Williams*

Monash University, Australia

(Received 15 August 2012; final version received 13 April 2013)
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

In this article, I examine my evolving practice and identity as a teacher educator in the
context of supervision of student teachers on practicum in schools. As a classroom
teacher with approximately 25 years’ experience, including mentoring student teachers
in my own classroom, I had assumed that when I began working as a teacher educator
in the area of school-based professional experience programs it would be a relatively
easy and unproblematic transition. This was not to be the case. As I became
increasingly involved in practicum supervision, I encountered many situations that
challenged my understanding of my work as a teacher educator compared to my work
as a classroom teacher. This self-study documents my practice in the so-called third
space between schools and universities, for the period of one academic year. I analyzed
my journal entries of visits to student teachers on practicum using a theoretical
framework of the learning that takes place within boundary spaces between different
communities of practice. Results of the study suggested that, in this boundary space, I
experienced dynamic and shifting identity construction and re-construction in relation
to my former professional identity as a classroom teacher and my relatively new
professional identity as a teacher educator. The study also highlighted my changing
perspectives on what learning to be a teacher is all about and on the delicate negotiation
of relationships that is central to this work.
Keywords: teacher educator; professional learning; identity; self-study; field experience

The complexity of the work of teacher educators is becoming increasingly evident in the
literature of the past decade or so (Loughran, 2011; Murray & Male, 2005; Williams, Ritter,
& Bullock, 2012). On becoming members of the academy, new teacher educators face a
variety of challenges: managing the complex work of transitioning from schools and other
educational settings to university (most teacher educators come from the ranks of teachers);
negotiating new institutional and sociocultural contexts; and forging their own pedagogy as
teacher educators (Mayer, Mitchell, Santoro, & White, 2011; Williams et al., 2012). One
aspect of teacher educators’ work that is under increasing scrutiny is that undertaken in the
so-called third space (Cuenca, Schmeichel, Butler, Dinkelman, & Nichols, 2011; Martin,
Snow, & Franklin Torrez, 2011) between universities and schools. In this space, teacher
educators work with preservice teachers, mentor (or cooperating) teachers, school
administrators and other staff, and with children who are under the supervision of student
teachers on practicum. While this might appear to be a natural professional space for
teacher educators to work within, the growing body of literature in this field reveals a
different story (Bullock & Christou, 2009; Cuenca, 2010; Zeichner, 2010).

*Email: judy.williams@monash.edu

q 2013 Taylor & Francis

 Studying Teacher Education 119

Many teacher educators, particularly those relative newcomers who are still defining
their professional identity and practice as teacher educators, find working in the third space
a challenging and sometimes confronting experience. Working in this third space forces
them to look very closely at their prior professional experiences and to explore how such
previous work is relevant to their current practice as teacher educators. To help shed light
on this relatively underresearched dimension of teacher educator practice, this article
presents the findings of a self-study in which I explored the implications of working in this
third space on my own evolving identity and practice as a teacher educator.

Context of the Study

At the time of the study, I had been a teacher educator for approximately six years. During
that time, I had undertaken several self-studies in which I explored my evolving identity
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

and practice in this new professional context. These studies encompassed making the
transition from teacher to teacher educator (Williams, 2008, 2010) and were mostly
focused on my work with students and colleagues in the on-campus university
environment. However, as my teaching responsibilities began to focus more on
professional experience (practicum) units, I became increasingly interested in exploring
this aspect of my practice. I wanted to explore how my previous/other professional identity
as a teacher impacts on my continually evolving identity and practice as a teacher
educator, specifically in relation to practicum supervision.
In my first few years as a teacher educator, when I was asked to supervise students on
practicum, I approached this with enthusiasm and confidence, believing that I had
appropriate experience in mentoring preservice teachers in my own primary school
classroom and would therefore find the task relatively straightforward. However, each
time I visited a student teacher on practicum, I left with an uneasy sense of confused
realities and questions – was I still a teacher, or am I now someone different as a teacher
educator? Although I believed that my supervisory visits generally had a positive outcome,
I left each time with a sense of frustration and a degree of confusion – if I only related to
student teachers as I would have as a classroom teacher, that is, giving advice on how to
teach, what was the point of being a teacher educator in this context? I certainly felt at
home in the school environment, and could offer many suggestions about teaching from
my own experience, but was there more to being a teacher educator than this? My visits to
student teachers in schools highlighted some uncertainty about my sense of self as a
teacher educator in the early years of my being in that role.
When I look back on my time as a mentor teacher in schools, my main focus was
usually about the students’ teaching practice – did they plan well enough? Can they
manage the classroom effectively? How do they cope with challenging behaviors? These
are fairly routine concerns for mentor teachers, but as I gained more experience as a
teacher educator, my perspective on teacher learning had undertaken a gradual change.
While recognizing that the procedural aspects of teaching are important, I became
increasingly aware that in learning to teach (and in mentoring those learning to teach)
other dimensions of practice are also important. My work in academia had increased my
understanding of the complexity of the ways in which professional identities are forged,
and I was becoming increasingly aware of the importance of the person who was becoming
the teacher, as well as their competency in the classroom.
In my first few years as a teacher educator, the number of visits I undertook to schools
was relatively small, so I did not interrogate these questions to any great extent. They were
left unexamined and unresolved. However, as I became more involved with practicum
 120 J. Williams

supervision, and my sense of unease became increasingly apparent to me, I undertook this
self-study to document and examine my experiences as a teacher educator working in the
third space, with the intent of understanding more clearly what it means to be a teacher
educator in this context.

Becoming a Teacher Educator

One of the great challenges of becoming a teacher educator is making the transition from
teacher to teacher educator. A recent review of the literature (Williams et al., 2012) found
that one of the most crucial aspects of the transition from teacher to teacher educator is
managing the tensions between these different professional identities. Many beginning
teacher educators have documented the early stages of their teacher educator careers and,
in doing so, have highlighted the importance of their teacher identity to the construction of
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

their new professional identity as a teacher educator. For example, Williams and Ritter
(2010) explored the challenges they each faced in the transition from teacher to teacher
educator and concluded that:
one identity is not discarded in favor of the other . . . but utilized in ways that will help former
classroom teachers to “repackage” who they are as teacher educators . . . [This] raises
questions about how novice teacher educators can be initiated into the profession in ways that
support their transition from school teaching to teaching teachers in the academic context, and
contributes to the on-going reconstruction of their professional identities. (p. 90)
Likewise, Wood and Borg (2010) described the rocky road to becoming a teacher educator
after many years in the school classroom, as they struggled to align their situational
(context-dependent) and substantial (authentic) selves. They faced many challenges and
were regularly tested by their, “assumption of a seamless transition from the classroom to
the academy, and their inability to predict a struggle in the alignment of personal and
professional selves [which] compounded the depth of the nadirs they experienced” (2010,
p. 26).
Dinkelman, Margolis, and Sikkenga (2006a, 2006b) documented the transition of two
beginning teacher educators from school teaching to university teaching and found that,
early in their new careers, these teacher educators were not “willing to fully give up a
notion of themselves as teachers, and both used their teacher biographies as the foundation
for a confident teacher educator stance” (2006a, p. 19). Dinkelman et al. concluded that
becoming a teacher educator involved constantly shifting role identification. In this
process, teacher identities are not subsumed by teacher educator identities, but are in fact a
constant and re-emerging part of evolving teacher educator identities. For the two teacher
educators in the study:
the extent to which this new role identification indicated an independence from, and remained
in conflict with, their previous identity as classroom teachers was an important dimension of
their experiences in negotiating the transition from classroom teacher to university-based
teacher educator. (2006a, p. 21)
For Ritter (2007), holding onto his teacher identity was a source of credibility, expertise,
and professional security in his new teaching context in the university. He stated that:
this sudden immersion into the unknown initially led me to invoke my classroom teacher
identity as a source of expertise in my new role as teacher educator. I yearned for the security
that comes with a well-defined role to play. (p. 11)
The literature review undertaken by Williams et al. (2012) concluded that, “th[e] crossing
of professional boundaries between school teacher/mentor teacher/teacher educator . . .
represents [one] example of the challenges for beginning teacher educators to . . .
 Studying Teacher Education 121

successfully negotiate boundaries between distinct yet related professional communities

of practice” (p. 8).
Another challenge on the road to becoming a teacher educator is that of developing
one’s own pedagogy of teacher education. One particular aspect of a pedagogy of teacher
education is what may be called the pedagogy of the practicum. Butler, Cuenca, and Elfer
(2012) argued that field supervision is a complex activity that is “generally regarded as
simplistic and believed to require relatively little skill” (p. 70). They concluded that there
needs to be a collaborative conversation among teacher educators about the diversity of
conceptualizations of their practice in the field, which they identified as uncertain judge,
referee, and counselor. Cuenca (2010) found such challenges when he initially approached
his role as teacher educator in the field as that of sharing the tricks of the trade rather than
encouraging his students’ deep reflection on their own teaching practices. Only after
intense reflection through self-study did Cuenca realize that his pedagogy as a field-based
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

teacher educator had to involve helping students to learn about teaching from their own
experiences, rather than from his. Similarly, Bullock (2012) was challenged to develop his
own pedagogy of practicum supervision when he undertook the role of school-faculty
liaison. In this new role, Bullock had to examine his assumptions about how student
teachers learn in the context of field experience and to, “analyse my practice critically and,
in so doing . . . to move beyond the temptation to rely on transmitting propositions about
practice to my teacher candidates” (2012, p. 145).

Being a Teacher Educator in the Third Space

The concept of a third space between university-based teacher educators and school-based
mentor/supervising teachers is attracting increasing attention from researchers in the field
of teacher education (Bullock, 2012; Cuenca et al., 2011; Martin et al., 2011; Tsui & Law,
2007; Zeichner, 2010). Martin et al. (2011) explored the challenges faced by university-
based teacher educators working in schools, and concluded that working in this third space
was essentially about “negotiating a web of relationships” (p. 305). They concluded that,
“redefining the nature of university-based teacher educators’ work adds further dimension
to its complexity as processes of building and negotiating complex relationships are
central to the work” (p. 308). Zeichner (2010) argued that working within the hybrid space
between schools and universities was an essential dimension of teacher education and:
involve[s] a rejection of binaries such as practitioner and academic knowledge and theory and
practice, and involve[s] the integration of what are often seen as competing discourses in new
ways – an either/or perspective is transformed into a both/also point of view. (p. 92)
Korthagen, Loughran, and Russell (2006) suggested that teacher educators working in this
third space hold, “three different perspectives simultaneously: the perspective of the
individual learning to teach, the perspective of the teacher in a school, and the perspective
of the teacher educator in the university setting” (p. 1034). It appears from the literature,
therefore, that the work of teacher educators during field experience involves crossing/
negotiating professional and personal boundaries between different, although closely
connected, communities of practice, and that these movements constitute a critical aspect
of a teacher educator’s pedagogy of the practicum.

Theoretical Framework: The learning potential of boundary crossing

To explore the potential of boundary crossing for the professional learning of teacher
educators in the third space, the work of Akkerman and Bakker (2011) has been
 122 J. Williams

particularly valuable. In an attempt to synthesize the growing body of research in the area
of boundary crossing, Akkerman and Bakker undertook a review of 181 studies in a range
of professional domains, including science, academia, health care, technology and design,
and teaching. While much of the literature reviewed was not specific to teaching or
education, the findings were relevant to my study as they provided a framework within
which to view the practice and identity building that occurs within the space between
universities and schools in the context of practicum supervision. Akkerman and Bakker
(2011) claimed that there are four mechanisms of learning during boundary crossing
between different sites of practice, and that learning involves “new understandings,
identity development, change of practices and institutional development” (p. 142). The
four mechanisms of learning are identification, coordination, reflection, and transform-
ation. In identification, the core identity of each site is questioned, leading to new
insights into areas of concern and potential learning. This is a dialogical process that
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

delineates one practice from another, and where “a range of personal and cultural
identities is contested” (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011, p. 142). Coordination requires a
“communicative connection” (2011, p. 143) or dialogue that attempts to overcome the
inherent ambiguities in boundary spaces. Reflection involves “coming to realise and
explicate difference between practices and thus to learn something new about their own
and others’ practices” (2011, pp. 144 – 145). Transformation occurs when confrontation
necessitates changes in practices, resulting in “a new construction of identity that informs
future practice” (2011, p. 146).

The Study
My original research question for this study was as follows: How does practicum
supervision in schools contribute to my evolving identity and practice as a teacher
educator? As the study progressed, however, I began to ask myself more specific questions
about my practice and identity as a teacher educator including the following: How does my
experience as a classroom teacher mediate my relationships with mentor teachers in
schools? And how do I manage different views of teaching and learning during practicum
visits? As the conclusion to this article shows, this self-study eventually led me to uncover,
and attempt to answer, a previously unarticulated but nevertheless critical question for me:
What is my purpose as a teacher educator working in schools during practicum
supervision?

Method
This self-study utilized a qualitative approach, with two primary sources of data – a
personal reflective journal and e-mail correspondence from two preservice teachers.

Data Collection
During one academic year, I kept a personal reflective e-journal in which I entered my
thoughts, feelings, and emotions soon after contact with mentor teachers and preservice
teachers on practicum. This amounted to 18 A4 pages of data. During the year, I also had
e-mail correspondence (approximately 50 e-mails) from mentor teachers and preservice
teachers, most of whom were experiencing difficulties while on placement. Although not
used as data for this article, these e-mails provided context for my journal entries and
enabled me to view specific instances documented in this article with a wider perspective.
 Studying Teacher Education 123

To provide triangulation of data in this article, however, I used e-mail correspondence

from two preservice teachers who gave me permission to use their writing as data.

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using a constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), in
which categories or themes emerged after continuous and repeated examination of the
data. First, I read the journal entries several times to reorient myself to the data; then using
a grounded approach, I made color-coded memos (Punch, 2009) about ideas or patterns
that emerged from the data. After the first stage of analysis, five recurrent themes became
evident: (1) reference to my previous work as a teacher in schools; (2) emotional responses
to events or conversations; (3) ethical dilemmas for me or for mentor teachers; (4)
mediating different/conflicting perspectives; and (5) use of language/discourse. After
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

further examination, I then reduced these five categories to three overarching and
interrelated themes: (1) shifting identities; (2) changing perspectives; and (3) negotiating
relationships. These themes were analyzed in relation to Akkerman and Bakker’s (2011)
framework (i.e., learning as identification, coordination, reflection, and transformation)
and with reference to other relevant literature.

Findings
Data from this study revealed three key dimensions of what it means for me to be working
as a teacher educator in the third space.

Shifting Identities
My journal entries clearly showed evidence of continually shifting professional identities
and the crossing and recrossing of boundaries between my thinking as a teacher and as a
teacher educator, and of the frustration and confusion that this sometimes caused. I often
wrote about the challenges of reconciling my experience and knowledge as a teacher (and
mentor teacher) with my more recent experience as a teacher educator. I made statements
such as:
I was conscious of an almost physical sensation of being at least 3 different but complimentary
people at the same time – teacher, teacher educator, researcher/academic. (11 February 2011)
Hearing [the mentor teacher] use the same type of language that I used to use with my primary
students and seeing the look of anticipation and excitement on the faces of all the [children]
. . . I suddenly felt quite sad and nostalgic. I used to do this! (25 February 2011)
When I met with the pre-service teacher (PST) alone, I felt that I needed to support her in her
concerns, but when [we met with the mentor teacher] I was aware of being “torn” between
advocating for her interests, but actually “taking the side” of the teachers. Was I being
unsupportive of my student? Was I behaving more as a teacher than a teacher educator? What
exactly is my position here – does it have to be one or the other? I understand the PST’s
concerns, but my knowledge and experience as a teacher tell me that she is being unreasonable
and defensive, and that the teacher is only trying to help her. Am I her advocate, or do I tell her
that she is over-reacting and that she is part of the problem? . . . I feel somewhat like a
“traitor” to her. (18 March 2011)
These and other entries showed that I was aware of both identities (teacher and teacher
educator) being played out simultaneously, and that while one body of knowledge and
experience informed the other, I often had a sense of conflicting loyalties or allegiances.
 124 J. Williams

As a teacher I know that student teachers have to be able to teach effectively in the
classroom, appropriate to the stage of their development. However, as a teacher educator I
also know that learning to be a teacher is complex and is about more than just competency
or performance in the classroom. My learning as a teacher educator has opened up many
avenues of thinking and enquiry that I would most likely not have pursued if I had
remained as a classroom teacher and not become a teacher educator. In the situation
referred to in the above extract, it was evident that I felt an allegiance to the mentor teacher
who was concerned about the student teacher’s competency, but I also felt an obligation to
support my student who had very different ideas about what should be expected of her on
this particular practicum. There appeared to be some degree of conflict between my
thinking and loyalty as a teacher and as a teacher educator. Being torn between these two
professional selves forced me to consider how I could reconcile these different and shifting
identities, so that they were not separate and conflicting but connected and aligned and,
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

most importantly, relevant and useful to the learning of the student teacher.
Akkerman and Bakker (2011) claimed that, “the identification processes occur by
defining one practice in light of another, delineating how it differs from the other practice”
(p. 142). In many of my journal entries, this identification process was evident as I
grappled with the differences and similarities between myself and mentor teachers in
schools. Perhaps it was also a matter of becoming aware of the differences and similarities
within myself, between me as a teacher educator and the mentor teacher I used to be. I was
conscious of being a primary teacher, just as they were, but I was also aware that I was now
somehow different, with new experiences and perceptions that have developed during my
time as a teacher educator. For example, after a visit to one school at which I met up with a
former teaching colleague, I noted in my journal:
Here, with Don in the school ground, surrounded by kids and noise, so familiar, I felt at home.
I want to hold on to that, but to also be someone who has moved beyond that. I was wearing
both “hats” . . . How can I be the “old me” and the “new me,” all at the same time? . . . I have
to harness the knowledge and understanding that I have developed [as a teacher] and use it to
frame my own pedagogy in teacher education. (18 March 2011)
In numerous other entries, I was aware of the need to embrace and affirm my (former) self
as a teacher, but also that I had to move beyond that to develop new pedagogical practices
as a teacher educator. My challenge was to work out exactly what those pedagogical
practices should be. I had to grapple with understanding exactly what it was that I was
supposed to do and how I could support student teachers’ learning, so I was not just
offering them tips for teaching based on my own teaching experience, but delving more
deeply into the nature of the learning and teaching relationship as it is played out in a
school classroom. This was similar to the challenge faced by Cuenca (2010) who
concluded that:
my previous experiences as a classroom teacher informed my practice of field-based teacher
education . . . The development of my practice of field-based teacher education is guided by the
dynamic interaction between my past and my participation in the act of supervision. (p. 31)
My journal revealed that on many occasions I, too, relied on my teacher knowledge and
practice as the starting point for my thinking and practice as a teacher educator. This was
particularly evident in my conversations with mentor teachers.
In many of my journal entries I noted my propensity to consciously engage in dialogue
with mentor and preservice teachers that demonstrated my previous experience as a
mentor teacher. I was aware of internal boundaries being crossed and recrossed between
being a teacher and being a teacher educator, through this dialogue. I believe that such
 Studying Teacher Education 125

conversations created an opportunity to show that I am not merely someone from the
university who has little knowledge of schools and the work of teachers, but that I am also
a teacher who understands and empathizes with the concerns of those working in schools.
Akkerman and Bakker (2011) referred to this as coordination, which involves establishing
a “communicative connection between diverse practices or perspectives” (p. 143) that
helps to create permeable boundaries so that “interactions [can] run smoothly” (p. 144).
One example of coordination occurred during a visit to a school at which the coordinator
of student teachers, Gill, had recently rung the university to criticize our program and my
handling of an at-risk situation. I noted in my journal:
When I arrived at the school, I was expecting a very hostile reception. As I was sitting in the
staffroom, Gill sat down and asked if it was me she spoke to last Monday. I said no [it was
someone else] . . . She looked a bit severe, so I didn’t say anything more, neither did she. After a
few minutes of non-communication, I broke the ice by . . . [telling] her that I used to teach in the
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

neighboring school . . . When we were talking as teachers, she seemed to relax and be less
confrontational . . . I deliberately slipped into “teacher talk” to try to diffuse the tension that
appeared to be there when we first spoke. Instead of talking to “the university” over the phone,
she was talking to me, a teacher who was familiar with the local area . . . I really think this ability
to slip into the lives and language of a classroom teacher . . . is essential to dealing with these
difficult situations when mentor teachers and student teachers are at odds. (3 November 2011)
As Cuenca et al. (2011) found, working in the third space “create[s] conversational spaces
that bring competing discourses into dialogue with each other” (p. 1069). By
communicating with Gill as a fellow teacher, and establishing a common base for
dialogue about the preservice teacher I was visiting, I was able to diffuse a potentially
difficult encounter and reconstruct it as a supportive space for dialogue, reflection, and
learning. I had asked myself several times in my journal why I adopted the teacher
persona, and considered whether or not it helped me to establish trust and credibility in the
eyes of my students and their mentor teachers, as Ritter (2007) had done. I was keenly
aware that trust was an essential ingredient in my relationship with mentor teachers.
Sharing experiences, knowledge, and understandings was an important bedrock on which
to establish a respectful professional relationship through dialogue in relation to our work
with preservice teachers. To do this successfully, I had to constantly shift between my
teacher persona, to establish some degree of trust, and my teacher educator persona, to
develop new ways of thinking about and understanding teacher learning.

Changing Perspectives
One of the most confronting and sometimes confusing aspects of my work as a teacher
educator in schools was the apparent changes taking place in my understanding of what
learning to become a teacher was all about. As discussed earlier, my work with student
teachers in the field prompted me to deeply reflect on my purpose as a teacher educator in
this context and to always bear in mind that student teachers are not merely performing as
teachers, but that they are in fact forging new professional identities. This is complex
work. As different perspectives of teacher professional learning were swirling in my head,
and coming to life in front of my eyes during school visits, I was also aware of my
occasional frustration with mentor teachers who seemed to focus first and foremost on the
procedural and technical aspects of teaching, with apparently little regard for the person
doing the teaching. I noted in my journal that:
I can see a clear disjunction between how [the mentor teacher] sees teaching and how I see it
as a teacher educator. I can see a big change between how I perceived it early in my teacher
educator career (teach them how to teach; tips and tricks of the trade; sharing classroom
 126 J. Williams

experiences, etc.) compared to how I see teacher education now . . . I am aware of a gulf
between how some mentor teachers think and how I now think. Is this a turning point in my
journey of becoming a teacher educator? I know and acknowledge where they are coming
from, but I no longer share [all their concerns]. How does this affect the issue of “trust” that I
have referred to earlier in this diary? Is becoming a teacher educator about growth of
understanding and broadening of horizons, as much as about developing a “pedagogy of
teacher education”? Is the broadening of understanding part of the pedagogy? (16 May 2011)
This and other journal entries revealed a level of frustration and a growing awareness of
my changing perspectives in relation to teaching and learning, and were therefore
evidence of my gradually evolving pedagogy of teacher education. Akkerman and Bakker
(2011) stated that reflection on practice in boundary spaces helps participants to see their
own practices in new ways. It is essential to “mak[e] explicit one’s understanding and
knowledge of a particular issue” and to “tak[e] another perspective . . . to begin to see
things in a different light” (p. 145). I found that the emergence of different perspectives on
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

learning to become a teacher was a hallmark of my work in schools and that this
sometimes led to difficult relationships, which had to be carefully managed.

Negotiating Relationships
During several of my school visits, it was clear that the mentor and preservice teachers had
different views on the preservice teacher’s competency, and that this often created tense
relationships. These relationships had to be negotiated to enable the different points of
view to coexist without diminishing the integrity of those who held them. One particularly
fraught relationship was between Jane, a mentor teacher, and Song (both pseudonyms), an
international student from Korea who was placed in Jane’s classroom over a period of one
year. Jane’s greatest concern was the standard of Song’s English, while Song believed that
she was being unfairly maligned by Jane and that her other teaching abilities were
overlooked. While I understood Jane’s concerns, I felt that she did not place enough value
on the complex identity-related learning that was underway within Song and that her
constant focus on correct English was somewhat unfair. After a visit to Jane’s classroom to
observe Song teach, I wrote:
I feel very anxious about this issue and find it very confronting to deal with. I can understand
Jane’s concerns . . . However, I feel it is a much bigger issue than incorrect English – are we
being “small minded” in judging [international] students to be unsuccessful as teachers
because they do not have perfect English? The teacher educator in me sees this bigger issue,
which is really around Song’s identity as well as competence as a teacher. The teacher in me,
however, understands and shares Jane’s perspective that the children need to be taught English
correctly. This really challenges me to walk that fine line between understanding and
empathising with the various perspectives. (1 June 2011)
This is an example of when I was required to “legitimate coexistence” (Akkerman &
Bakker, 2011, p. 143) and find a way to help those involved to recognize and accept
differences “without necessarily overcoming discontinuities” (p. 143). Throughout the year,
Jane had strong concerns about Song’s English skills, and believed this was a deficiency in
her teaching. Song, however, viewed it as about much more than her competence in English.
In an e-mail to me following the completion of her placement, Song stated that:
While I was doing placement, I tried not to think she treated me unfairly. I myself consider
that she is just one of the people who care things a lot and what she thinks is right. But after
spending last two placement days, I cannot help but wonder if she would treat me same if I am
an Aussie student teacher? Sorry that I keep asking you unpleasant things but I cannot just let
it go. (24 September 2011)
 Studying Teacher Education 127

This lament was further evidence for me that learning to teach is not just about technical
competence, but it is also about identity and belonging: How does a Korean student
teacher become a member of an increasingly globalized profession when she is judged
mainly on the standard of her English? My role as a teacher educator in this instance was
about bridging that gap between a conscientious teacher, who stated that she was merely
trying to uphold her school’s high standards, and a novice teacher from a non-English
speaking background who insisted that she knew how to teach and believed that she was
being treated unfairly.
In another case of fraught relationships, a cry for help came from Rose, who was
feeling very vulnerable in her relationship with her mentor teacher. Rose wrote in an e-
mail that:
In terms of personality . . . I would describe the situation as completely mismatched. I would
describe my teacher as having body-mind disconnect. This manifests in her not always being
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

aware of her aggressive behaviour – both in speech, and body language (on occasions –
slamming the door, looking past me, loudly sighing) . . . The best thing to come out of this so
far is for me, as a beginning teacher, to acutely feel how some students must feel, and vowing
never to let this happen to one of my students . . . knowing what it feels like to be trying to do
the right thing, working really, really hard at it, and failing – success perpetually out of reach.
And, while there are brief moments of sunshine, more often it’s the dark feeling of the
teacher’s wrath. Confidence-sapping. (29 October 2011)
After receiving this e-mail, I visited Rose in her classroom and my subsequent journal
entry illustrated my struggles to bring together two parties who had such different
perspectives on teaching, but to nevertheless acknowledge the validity of both. Akkerman
and Bakker (2011) caution that “legitimating coexistence is often highly political and
sensitive to those involved” (p. 143), and I found that I had to be very diplomatic in
balancing the conflicting beliefs and needs of mentor and preservice teacher. I also felt
very much caught in the middle. I wrote that:
When speaking to the mentor teacher, I can understand her frustration with Rose’s apparent
lack of organization and [not] being on top of things. The teacher in me sees this. I struggle,
though, as I see much learning in Rose, [although] the teaching is not coming together at the
moment. Is that the difference between mentor teachers and teacher educators – we focus on
the learning of our students, and they focus on the teaching? Are these different things? It was
heart-wrenching to meet with Rose alone after the lesson . . . and tell her that she is considered
at risk of failing this placement. She was in tears, looking so disappointed and defeated.
Teaching is so much about the person, and here I was saying she is “not good enough.” I felt a
sense of betrayal because I have followed her challenges and personal growth through the year
. . . How can I support Rose to continue on her journey to becoming a teacher, while
recognizing that she is not there yet? (02 November 2011)
In this situation, I realized that my work as a teacher educator in the third space is about
acknowledging the mentor teacher’s concerns about performance but, at the same time,
supporting the emotional, pedagogical, and philosophical growth of a struggling
preservice teacher. In these two cases, it was indeed like the “complicated dance”
described by Martin et al. (2011, p. 305).

Conclusions
This self-study has highlighted the challenging nature of being a teacher educator in the
third space, and how learning in this space is as much about the evolution of personal and
professional identities as it is about learning to teach. Akkerman and Bakker (2011) stated
that, “transformation leads to profound changes in practices, potentially even the creation
 128 J. Williams

of new, in-between practice, sometimes called a boundary practice” (p. 146). This self-
study has shown that working in the third space, and undertaking a self-study of this work,
has indeed been transformative as it has helped me to examine and understand some of the
boundary practices that constitute my developing pedagogy as a teacher educator. These
practices are not static, but dynamic, fluid, and evolving. They highlight the importance of
dialogue between myself and others to bridge external boundaries and to negotiate delicate
relationships, and of the dialogue within me as a self-study researcher, as I traverse the
internal boundaries between shifting professional identities and changing perspectives on
teaching.
My pedagogy of the practicum involves acceptance and continual reconstruction of my
professional past as a classroom teacher and integration of this with my current knowledge
and experience as a teacher educator – a continually evolving understanding of what
becoming a teacher (and a teacher educator) is all about. Rather than seeing myself as an
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

experienced classroom teacher going back into classrooms, I see myself more clearly as a
bridge between two sometimes conflicting but always connected worlds of teaching – the
experiential, hands-on world of school teachers and the multiple new perspectives on
learning and teaching gained at university. The boundary practices of the third space
require a delicate balancing act of acknowledging and respecting the personal and
professional identities of all involved, and using dialogue to facilitate professional
learning conversations. The challenges and tensions involved in developing these
boundary practices are essential elements of my evolving identity and practice as a teacher
educator.
The transformative nature of this self-study has enabled me to see that I do not have to
choose between being a teacher and being a teacher educator, but that I “belong to both
one world and another” (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011, p. 141). It has helped me to uncover
how a familiar and often taken for granted professional practice (mentoring preservice
teachers on practicum) is actually a highly complex and delicate endeavor. In addition to
helping me answer my original research questions, this self-study has enabled me to see
and consider a troubling but previously unuttered question: “What is my purpose as a
teacher educator when supervising student teachers in schools?” I now see that my purpose
as a teacher educator working in the field is to support the learning of student teachers in
all the dimensions of their professional becoming by drawing on my experiences as a
teacher, teacher educator, and self-study researcher. This means being attuned to mentors’
and student teachers’ concerns about the day-to-day enactment of teaching practice in the
classroom and also supporting student teachers’ learning by being mindful of the
challenges that they face in developing their teacher identity and self-efficacy. My
learning from academic endeavors, and particularly from self-study research, has taught
me that the professional learning of student teachers, and indeed all teachers and teacher
educators, does not just involve learning how and what to teach, but is a far more complex
process of learning to become a teacher. The challenge for me is to reconcile and learn
from these different selves – teacher, teacher educator, and researcher – so that each
becomes an integral part of my professional identity as a teacher educator and contributes
to my ever-evolving professional practice.

References
Akkerman, S., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of
Educational Research, 81, 132– 169.
 Studying Teacher Education 129

Bullock, S. M. (2012). Creating a space for the development of professional knowledge: A self-study
of supervising teacher candidates during practicum placements. Studying Teacher Education, 8,
143– 156.
Bullock, S. M., & Christou, T. (2009). Exploring the radical middle between theory and practice: A
collaborative self-study of beginning teacher educators. Studying Teacher Education, 5(1),
75 – 88.
Butler, B., Cuenca, A., & Elfer, C. (2012). Metaphors of complexity: The roles of university
supervisors. In J. Young, L. Erikson, & S. Pinnegar (Eds.), Extending inquiry communities:
Illuminating teacher education through self-study (Proceedings of the Ninth International
Conference on the Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, pp. 68 – 71). Provo, UT: Brigham
Young University.
Cuenca, A. (2010). In loco pedagogus: The pedagogy of a novice university supervisor. Studying
Teacher Education, 6(1), 29 – 43.
Cuenca, A., Schmeichel, M., Butler, B., Dinkelman, T., & Nichols, J. (2011). Creating a “third
space” in student teaching: Implications for the university supervisor’s status as outsider.
Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 08:04 28 January 2015

Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 1068 –1077.

Dinkelman, T., Margolis, J., & Sikkenga, K. (2006a). From teacher to teacher educator: Experiences,
expectations, and expatriation. Studying Teacher Education, 2(1), 5 – 23.
Dinkelman, T., Margolis, J., & Sikkenga, K. (2006b). From teacher to teacher educator: Reframing
knowledge in practice. Studying Teacher Education, 2(2), 119– 136.
Korthagen, F., Loughran, J., & Russell, T. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher
education programs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 1020– 1041.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Loughran, J. (2011). On becoming a teacher educator. Journal of Education for Teaching:
International Research and Pedagogy, 37, 279– 291.
Martin, S., Snow, J., & Franklin Torrez, C. (2011). Navigating the terrain of third spaces: Tensions
with/in relationships in school-university partnerships. Journal of Teacher Education, 62,
299– 311.
Mayer, D., Mitchell, J., Santoro, N., & White, S. (2011). Teacher educators and “accidental” careers
in academe: An Australian perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37, 247– 260.
Murray, J., & Male, T. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: Evidence from the field. Teaching and
Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 21, 125– 142.
Punch, K. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ritter, J. K. (2007). Forging a pedagogy of teacher education: The challenges of moving from
classroom teacher to teacher educator. Studying Teacher Education, 3(1), 5 – 22.
Tsui, A. B. M., & Law, D. Y. K. (2007). Learning as boundary-crossing in school-university
partnership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1289– 1301.
Williams, J. (2008). Self-study as a means of facilitating a new professional identity: From primary
teacher to teacher educator. In M. L. Heston, D. L. Tidwell, K. K. East, & L. M. Fitzgerald
(Eds.), Pathways to change in teacher education: Dialogue, diversity and self-study
(Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Self-Study of Teacher Education
Practices, pp. 318– 322). Cedar Falls: University of Northern Iowa.
Williams, J. (2010). Public practices, private identities: Examining the relationship between my
changing practice as a teacher educator and my evolving identity as a teacher educator. In L. B.
Erickson, J. R. Young, & S. Pinnegar (Eds.), Navigating the public and private: Negotiating the
diverse landscape of teacher education (Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on
Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, pp. 282– 285). Provo, UT: Brigham Young
University.
Williams, J., & Ritter, J. K. (2010). Constructing new professional identities through self-study:
From teacher to teacher educator. Professional Development in Education, 36(1/2), 77 – 92.
Williams, J., Ritter, J., & Bullock, S. M. (2012). Understanding the complexities of becoming a
teacher educator: Experience, belonging and practice within a professional learning community.
Studying Teacher Education, 8, 245– 260.
Wood, D., & Borg, T. (2010). The rocky road: The journey from classroom teacher to teacher
educator. Studying Teacher Education, 6(1), 17 – 28.
Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in
college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1/2), 89 – 99.