The Professional Learning of Teacher Educators Leading International Professional Experience

Abstract

In this article, the professional learning of teacher educators leading international professional experience (IPE) is examined. There is a growing body of research on the learning of pre-service teachers who undertake a period of professional experience in international contexts, but much less is known about the experiences of the academics who lead these programs. This knowledge is important because the success of such programs for pre-service teachers depends largely on the quality of the planning, preparation, and leadership of these as educational experiences. Based on data collected in semistructured interviews with 10 teacher educators who have led IPE to a variety of global locations, this article outlines the professional learning gained from leading a group of pre-service teachers on 3-week IPEs. Findings include the importance of building professional relationships with others involved in the IPE, including the pre-service teachers, school staff, and communities, and the impact of the experience on the development of teacher educator identities and practice.

Keywords

international professional experience teacher educator professional learning teacher educator identity teacher education

Introduction

In the past decade or so, there has been a significant increase in the number of international mobility experiences undertaken by university students in various countries and courses (De, Wit, Hunter, Howard, & Egron-Polak, 2015). Many universities offer study abroad options for students for a variety of reasons, such as the development of intercultural capacities, expanded professional skills and knowledge, and enhanced employment opportunities (Alfaro, 2008; Alfaro & Quezada, 2010; Cushner & Mahon, 2002; Grierson & Denton, 2013; Walters, Garii, & Walters, 2009). Alfaro and Quezada (2010) suggested that these experiences are essential for pre-service teachers because, in terms of cultural and/or linguistic diversity, there is often a “disconnect between teachers and the students they teach” (p. 48). Walters et al. (2009) argued that positive outcomes of study abroad programs include enhanced intellectual growth, personal development, and global-mindedness; acquisition of a new understanding about life, culture, themselves, and others; and an increased level of intercultural sensitivity. Likewise, Brindley, Quinn, and Morton (2009) found that pre-service teachers encounter factors that create either consonance (familiarity) and/or dissonance (unfamiliarity) when working on international placements, and that the “study abroad experience . . . challenge[s] pre-existing assumptions about teaching and causes trainee teachers to re-organize and broaden their developing understanding of teaching and learning” (p. 532).

Participation in study abroad programs also helps to develop skills in self-reflection. For example, Trilokekar and Kukar (2011) maintained that the most valuable learning for pre-service teachers comes from the disorienting experiences they encounter and the extent to which they are able to reflect on these in relation to their existing beliefs and assumptions. They concluded that the greatest value of the study abroad experience is in pre-service teachers’ ability to build “an awareness of their own frames of reference (social, cultural and political contexts), and . . . the challenge of confronting difficult discussions [and] . . . constructing and revising one’s perspective of both self and other” (p. 1149). While the professional learning opportunities for pre-service teachers gained through study abroad programs are well documented, less is known about how and what the teacher educators leading these programs learn from their experiences. Building on previous research (Williams, 2017), the aim of this study is to contribute to this relatively small but growing body of knowledge. This may contribute to strengthening future IPE programs, as the wisdom and knowledge gained by past IPE leaders provide an important foundation for future leaders.

Context of the Study

For the study reported in this article, teacher educators in one Australian university’s Faculty of Education International Professional Experience (IPE) program were interviewed about their experiences of leading an IPE. The program currently has several placement locations on offer, including in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and the Pacific. IPE aims to enhance pre-service teacher learning about education, teaching, and about themselves as teachers, and to develop intercultural competencies that enhance their knowledge and practice, both at home and abroad.

Each of the IPEs in this study involves approximately 15 to 30 pre-service teachers from Bachelor of Education and Master of Teaching courses, undertaking a 3-week professional experience placement in a local school in their host country. The pre-service teachers are usually accompanied by one or two academic staff, and the pre-service teachers and academic staff generally share accommodation in the local community in which they are placed, or are situated nearby. When the pre-service teachers are engaged in teaching in schools with their local mentor teachers, the accompanying teacher educators undertake a variety of tasks. These include classroom visits, during which time they provide feedback to pre-service teachers on their lessons; meeting with principals and other educational and community leaders, to build relationships with stakeholders, increasing collaboration and the sustainability of the IPE; undertaking data collection for research projects; meeting with pre-service teachers out of school hours to provide support, feedback, and debriefing; and organising social events and providing general pastoral care, including managing logistical challenges and health issues. The work of teacher educators during IPE is therefore very different from their involvement in domestic professional experience, which usually involves limited visits to schools, no after-hours contact with pre-service teachers, and very little if any involvement with local school communities.

Teacher Educators’ Learning From IPE

The literature on short-term study abroad programs clearly shows that pre-service teachers experience a range of learning opportunities from their participation in these programs. There is, however, less known about the experiences of the academics who lead IPEs, although a search of the relatively limited literature revealed that this work holds great potential for academics’ professional learning and development (see Fitzgerald, Williams, & Parr, 2017). For example, Williams and Grierson (2016) found that one of their greatest challenges in leading an IPE was to negotiate their relationships with local mentor teachers, and to build an awareness in themselves and their students of cultural and pedagogical difference. They concluded that “the importance of teacher educators adopting a global perspective and a deep consciousness of how they may be perceived by others who are culturally, racially, and/or linguistically different, is fundamental to successfully leading international practicums” (pp. 13-14). As a teacher educator leading an IPE in South Africa, Parr (2012) came to “appreciate anew the importance of a dialogic ethics in my own work as a teacher educator . . . These ethics urge me to appreciate the multiple and overlapping ways in which I, as an educator-academic-researcher, am related to the Other with whom I am teaching, working and researching” (p. 106). In exploring their experiences of leading an IPE to Malaysia, Lang, Cacciattolo, and Kidman (2017) developed a model for academic intercultural competencies, which involved the juncture between personal resources such as confidence and commitment, the location or context of the IPE, and the available support such as resources and colleagues. They concluded that leading an IPE involved facing and managing the inherent discomfort of being part of an IPE and that this “pedagogical discomfort . . . is needed for growth of intercultural competencies” (Lang, Cacciattolo, & Kidman, 2017, p. 15).

Finding the “Self” Through Critical Reflection on Intercultural Experiences

Research suggests that critical reflection on teaching is a central component of the construction of teachers’ and academics’ personal and professional identities. Cranton (2011) argued that academics’ critical reflection on their teaching practice is essential for transformative learning, as “they critically question concrete aspects of their practice in a rational and cognitive way” (p. 77), thereby undergoing changes in perspectives about themselves and others. In relation to international experiences, Sharma, Phillion, and Malewski (2011) maintained that critical reflection on, and not just participation in, study abroad programs provide pre-service teachers with intercultural competencies that enhance their knowledge and practice of equity and social justice in teaching, and in education more broadly. However, as Cranton’s work suggests, it is not only the pre-service teachers who benefit from critical reflection on their intercultural experiences. The teacher educators who accompany them can also experience transformative growth, both personally and professionally. Sanderson (2008) highlighted the importance of critical reflection on experience to an understanding of an academic’s own position in international learning programs, as this helps them to “make informed choices based on who they really are . . .” (p. 283). Sanderson maintained that universities’ goals of internationalisation for students cannot be fully achieved without the internationalisation of the perspectives of the teaching staff who lead these programs. He referred to this as the development of the academic Self and argued that

the internationalization of the academic Self should be seen as a fundamental building block in an institution’s response to global forces affecting higher education . . . [Therefore, academics] as individuals must operate from a base that extends beyond local and national perspectives. They, themselves, have to be among the cosmopolitans of the 21st century. (pp. 276-277)

The term cosmopolitans refers to the disposition of university academics to display attitudes of “openness, interconnectivity, interdependence, reciprocity, and plurality [rather] than necessarily knowing a lot about other cultures” (Sanderson, 2008, pp. 288-289). However, Sanderson (2008) claimed that while many universities develop international programs, less attention is paid to the development of these dispositions in their academic staff. He maintained that “the growing cultural, language and educational diversity in Australian higher education institutions presents a strong case for universities to take heed of the importance of fostering cosmopolitan perspectives in their staff” (p. 300). An essential element in developing the academic Self is self-awareness and the ability to reflect deeply and critically on one’s work and its social and cultural contexts. Sanderson argued that self-reflection helps academics to understand their beliefs, assumptions, and implicit cultural values and norms, and that

critical reflection . . . [is an] important mechanism by which individuals can become aware of the context in which they live and work [and has] the potential to assist in the development of an authenticity that allows individuals to genuinely engage with others in teaching and in life in general. (p. 287)

Research Design

This study was qualitative in design, and aimed to elicit rich descriptions (Patton, 2002) about teacher educators’ experiences of leading IPE, and the personal and professional learning gained from this experience. Ethical approval was obtained from the University Ethics Committee (CF15/2573 – 2015001050). The research question for this study was as follows:

Research Question: How does leading an IPE contribute to the professional learning of the teacher educators involved?

Participants

Ten teacher educators in the Faculty of Education agreed to participate in this research and gave informed consent. They all had varying degrees of experience in leading IPE, and had led an IPE within the previous 5 years. Details of the participants can be found in Table 1.

Table 1.

Details of Participants.

Name/pseudonym^a	Experience leading IPE programs	IPE location/s
Angela	Taking high school students overseas on housebuilding projects and working in orphanages in Vietnam and Cambodia. Faculty IPE program coordinator for 2 years.	Cook Islands, Italy, Israel, India, United Arab Emirates, Nepal
Anne	No previous experience, first IPE.	Malaysia
Chloe^a	Significant experience in leading overseas study tours to Europe. First IPE.	Italy
Graham	No previous experience, first IPE. Established new IPE (Africa) and led for 4 years.	Africa
Julie	No previous experience, first IPE.	Africa, Malaysia
Karen	No previous experience, first IPE.	China
Libby	As director of professional experience, helped to establish new IPEs in Malaysia, South Africa, and Italy. Leader of students in India with the Asia Education Foundation.	Malaysia, Africa, Italy
Mike	No previous overseas teaching experience, but a former Physical Education and Outdoor Educator, so experience in taking students away on campus and for extended periods. First IPE.	Italy
Pearl	No previous experience, first IPE.	Africa
Robyn	No previous experience, first IPE	Cook Islands

Note. IPE = international professional experience.

One participant, Chloe, chose to use a pseudonym.

Data Collection

After gaining ethical approval, an email was sent to all recent leaders of an IPE in the faculty, with 10 teacher educators replying that they would be willing to be interviewed. Semi-structured interviews were held with each of the teacher educators, lasting for approximately 30 to 45 min. Interviews were digitally recorded and professionally transcribed.

Data Analysis

When all the interview data had been transcribed, the audio recordings and transcriptions were reviewed and key ideas were recorded in a table under the headings “Name,” “Background,” “Challenges,” “Learning,” “Impact on self/teaching,” and “Other.” The second phase of analysis involved reviewing the data in the table and on the recordings, and determining major themes that emerged across the data. After multiple readings of the data, the themes identified were (a) managing administration and logistical and ethical challenges, (b) understanding others, and (c) understanding self. When a draft of the “Findings” section of the current article was completed, it was sent to each of the participants to ensure that it provided an accurate representation of their views and experiences as expressed in the interview. In this article, findings in relation to Themes b and c only are presented, as these most clearly illustrate how leading an IPE contributes to teacher educators’ evolving sense of their academic self.

Findings

Understanding Others in the Work of IPE

The teacher educators in this study revealed how their experiences of leading IPE resulted in a greater understanding of others in international contexts, especially the pre-service teachers and the local school communities in which they worked. This in turn led them to a greater awareness of their own position and dispositions as teacher educators working in an unfamiliar international context. A word used frequently by the participants was “negotiate,” which suggested a need to listen to and respect different views and perspectives, to compromise, and to work within the local conditions to solve problems and support pre-service teacher learning. Most of the teacher educators were keenly aware of the difficulties that the pre-service teachers faced in unfamiliar settings, and of the need to provide pastoral care and support, as well as pedagogical advice. They were also aware of the importance of their understanding of the local context to effectively support the pre-service teachers, and to build relationships with local providers. Libby stated that her greatest challenge was the sociocultural contexts of IPE, having worked in three very different locations—Italy, Malaysia, and Africa. She discussed the need to work through the logistics, assumptions, and practices of each location, and to negotiate the complexities that unfold at each phase of the placement. For example, one challenge was the use of corporal punishment in schools. “We don’t want to wrap the students in cotton wool. We want them to learn through the experience but we also need to be concerned about their feelings in that situation.” Libby explained that in Italy, she needed to problem-solve on a regular basis, and to use tact, and her listening and negotiating skills, to gain a deeper understanding of the local context.

You are negotiating language and expectations with everyone you meet . . . You draw on your prior experience to work out in the moment what’s going to be the appropriate way of approaching this here. Because often you’re problem-solving from when you first walk [in].

During his IPE in Africa, Graham also developed a deeper appreciation for the importance of working with local mentor teachers, and of being seen to be a colleague and a collaborator rather than having a “colonialist” agenda. In leading mentoring workshops with local teachers, Graham came to understand the importance of building trust and demonstrating a belief that he and the pre-service teachers were there to learn with, and from, the host mentors.

The kind of workshops that we developed were . . . to bring people together to have conversations about their work with student teachers . . . what they were able to teach our student teachers and also what they learnt from the student teachers.

A renewed understanding of the rewards and challenges of being a pre-service teacher was also a common theme in the data. Many of the teacher educators mentioned how important it was to support the pre-service teachers on a daily basis, and that this gave them insights into the students as individuals, as well as a heightened awareness of what it means to learn to teach, in any context. For Robyn, the importance of community and relationships in teaching and learning to teach was highlighted during her IPE in the Cook Islands. She noted that the peer relationships that developed between the pre-service teachers, and with their respective mentors and school communities, led to what she believed to be a transformative learning experience for her and for the pre-service teachers. Robyn stated that,

[I remember] seeing students sitting in the main lounge at 11 o’clock at night still working on their [lesson] plans and talking together about their experiences, . . . talking about their thinking about teaching, and comparing it to what they knew before . . . An experience like that can transform how people think and affirm how they feel about things.

Anne talked about how she came to see how much negotiation pre-service teachers have to do during their practicum, and how resilient they need to be in relation to their emotional, academic, and psychological well-being. She noted,

You see [this at home] to a certain extent, but you’re not there every evening talking to the students about how they’ve gone at school that day . . . By seeing the students take classes, you actually see how creative they are in working in a different cultural context.

One of the most significant insights gained by Libby was her increased awareness of the importance of scaffolding pre-service teacher learning during IPE, and the opportunities provided to develop her ability to do this successfully. Mike also gained greater insight and respect for pre-service teachers and the challenges that they face on placement, by being involved in numerous classroom visits during IPE. He gained clearer perspectives on the role he was able to play in that learning. Mike stated,

I was reminded of how hard it is to become a teacher . . . because [at home] you don’t live it and you don’t see it and you don’t hear those challenges and frustrations that students experience in classrooms . . . So I think for me to be more sensitised to the complexity of teaching and what it takes to become an effective teacher . . . is much clearer in my mind now.

Understanding Self as a Teacher Educator

While working in their respective IPE locations provided the teacher educators with opportunities to learn about and with others, their critical reflection on these experiences helped them to gain a greater understanding of their professional identity as “cosmopolitan” (Sanderson, 2008) teacher educators. Their professional learning about the work and relationships inherent in IPE had an impact not only on what they did, but also on their perceptions of themselves as teacher educators, and of teacher education itself. This transformation of their professional and self-knowledge not only influenced their work during IPE but, for many, had implications for their work on their return home. Most of the teacher educators mentioned that they either gained enhanced knowledge and confidence in their ability to undertake such work, or that leading IPE consolidated and strengthened qualities that they felt they already possessed. For example, Chloe felt that her leadership of IPE “reinforced skills and competencies I already possess, and that I can still perform very well in mentor/leadership roles . . . IPE has reinforced that what I have done for a long time still works.” Angela reflected that she realizes now she can deal with more than she thought she could, and that “I’m okay at dealing with this kind of day in, day out, ups and downs, and [it] strengthened my understanding of myself, in terms of how I work with people.” Anne developed more confidence in providing pastoral care to young people, especially as a result of having to manage the fallout from a perceived terrorist threat, while the experience enhanced Graham’s sense of himself as an educational leader. He developed a degree of confidence and resilience that he might not have otherwise gained, and had a “richer sense of what’s involved in intercultural education, intercultural confidence, [and] understandings.” Robyn adopted a much more relaxed and open approach to her teaching, both during IPE and at home, as a result of her experiences in the Cook Islands. She stated,

I feel more confident . . . to put myself “out there” with students. I’m definitely less preoccupied with how students are perceiving me. I feel like I’m being myself more . . . I have noticed students are dropping by my office this semester much more than they have before . . . I do feel I have a much stronger relationship with students now.

For some of the teacher educators, their IPE caused them to reflect on what teacher education is, or should be about, and led to a shift in their pedagogical beliefs and practices. Chloe said that her IPE experience “enhanced me pedagogically” and that she now draws on IPE experiences to teach new content at home, with new perspectives. She also has a “special unspoken bond with [former IPE] students in my current classes.” Pearl’s experience in Africa deepened her understanding of the use of technology in teaching. She came away feeling that teachers should not be too reliant on technology and other resources, and that they should know what to do when these fail. She believes that pre-service teachers need to be open to different ways of teaching that help students to learn, regardless of the context and resources available. “I said this to a class before [IPE], but it came through more strongly since IPE.” After his IPE experiences, Mike became more reflective about the role of professional experience in teacher education programs and, more specifically, the role of teacher educators during professional experience. He lamented the lack of opportunity at home to visit pre-service teachers in schools, and to take advantage of those “teachable moments” which were so abundant during his IPE in Italy. He stated that his work on IPE “[has] helped me clarify what I think professional experience should look like and how we should do it.” Likewise, Libby felt that much of her (and the pre-service teachers’) learning occurred “through informal chats during social occasions that rarely occur in home-based practicums, but are a feature of IPE.”

Karen’s experiences in China helped her to gain new perspectives on what it is like to be an overseas student in a new culture, and encouraged her to consider how students from international backgrounds are taught in Australian schools and universities. Referring to her current teaching of international students in Australia, Karen stated,

I already had some ideas, [but] it’s probably made them even stronger and opened up [the question]—how do we teach international [students]? I’m very much aware of what I do here, more than ever before . . . I’ve always been worried about them and I worry even more now . . . [In fact], I have adjusted my own teaching [at home] and I started a new initiative [for international students] last year as a result.

Julie’s experiences on IPE encouraged her to think about the pre-service teachers who do not participate in IPE. She wondered about how intercultural competencies could be developed on-shore, and how she could best teach students to understand the world differently, without leaving Australia. Julie identified a “critical awareness” that was triggered by her IPE experiences, that is, “how do I open local students’ eyes to these things? This catalysed my existing beliefs sharply.”

In addition to learning about teacher education and learning to teach, most of the teacher educators mentioned the importance of working collegially with other staff on IPE programs, and with the local communities in which they were immersed. The professional conversations and mutual support in challenging times helped to forge relationships with people and institutions that might not have otherwise developed. This helped them to make critical decisions for the benefit of the pre-service teachers. Most of the teacher educators expressed appreciation for the support they received from local colleagues in country, such as mentor teachers and principals, government agencies, and community bodies. For example, Graham highlighted how this collaboration and collegial support was invaluable especially during difficult times, as he

had the chance to talk these things through with [the local staff] and that made it easier. It . . . helps to explain and characterise the sense in which the work that you’re doing there is always a negotiation of ethically complex and challenging and complicated situations.

Angela mentioned that “bonding with fellow staff members” was an important part of her professional learning from IPE, while Graham stated that “some of the richest conversations I’ve had are with people who’ve subsequently undertaken an IPE in places . . . I’ve never known about. The conversations that we have had has been incredibly rich.” Karen, however, lamented the limited debriefing that she had experienced back at the university:

I’ve had a bit of debrief this year . . . but probably not enough . . . Because . . . you come back and you’ve got a lot you want to talk about but sometimes there’s no one to talk to about it. That’s why I wanted to get involved [in this research] because it’s a time to share.

Discussion

Data from this study revealed that the work of teacher educators leading IPE is not only multifaceted, complex, and challenging but also transformative in relation to their professional and personal learning and identities. As Williams, Fitzgerald and Parr (2017) argued, “the extraordinary range of IPE experiences [in this program] . . . enriches and promotes the development of academic . . . identities” (p. 10). The relationships that the teacher educators develop with colleagues, pre-service teachers, school staff and students, and with local communities are central to the work they do during IPE and to the development of their sense of self. Sanderson (2008) argued that “being accepting of cultural difference and knowing something of other cultures have a pivotal place in internationalization at the level of the individual teacher” (p. 282). It was clear from the data that the teacher educators not only valued but embraced the opportunity to learn from and with the local communities in which they worked, and that this was essential not only for their own professional learning but for their ability to support the learning of the pre-service teachers. Participation in IPE for teacher educators, and for the pre-service teachers, is not merely to learn about other cultures but to learn through engagement with them. The participants in this study were all very aware that their work as teacher educators was mediated through their interactions with people of different cultures and language backgrounds, and in response to the different pedagogical approaches that they encountered. They had to negotiate and develop respectful relationships, and were careful to listen and empathize so they would be perceived as co-learners and collaborators, rather than as outsiders seeking to impose their own world views on host schools and communities (Parr, 2012; Williams & Grierson, 2016). This awareness appeared to underpin their ability to negotiate different ways of doing and knowing during IPE, and suggests that “individuals who are self-aware . . . might be better able to comprehend, accept and work with cultural Others” (Sanderson, 2008, p. 287). As Lang et al. (2017) argued, such challenges and the strategies adopted to manage them are part of learning thorough “pedagogical discomfort,” which “is needed for growth of intercultural competencies” (p. 159).

The teacher educators in this study also highly valued the extensive opportunities they had to get to know the pre-service teachers in their care, and to understand how to best support them in their learning as teachers in these often challenging and unfamiliar environments. Such pedagogical and personal relationships are much more difficult to develop when teaching at home, because so much less time is spent with pre-service teachers, and the relationships are often more formal and less personal. While a supportive pedagogical relationship is relevant to professional experience in any location, the nature of IPE in which pre-service teachers are away from home, and from their familiar support structures, encourages greater depths of understanding and the provision of support that would be unlikely or unnecessary in their home context. As Williams (2017) found, the intense nature of living and working with pre-service teachers in what are often challenging circumstances provides a rare opportunity to see the pre-service teachers differently and to get to know them as “complex human beings, not merely as student teachers” (p. 180). These deeper relationships sit at the core of what it means to be a teacher educator, and enabled Williams to see that these relationships “ . . . are a key to my success as a teacher educator” (p. 179).

The work of leading IPE also enabled the teacher educators to draw on existing personal and practical knowledge, as they became aware that their own past experiences and knowledge could be harnessed to assist the pre-service teachers to learn and grow. There was a sense that although the teaching context was different, they already had skills and qualities that they could use, and adapt if necessary, and that their learning was often a case of building on what they already knew rather than starting from a position of ignorance. Their critical reflections helped them to see what they had to offer, as well as what they needed to learn. As Sanderson (2008) suggested, critical reflection results not only in self-awareness but also in self-acceptance. The teacher educators were also clearly open to learning about their new teaching contexts and to reflecting deeply on the implications of IPE on their teaching identities and practice not only during IPE but also at home. As Lang et al. (2017) discovered, teacher educators on IPE need to “interrogate their practices in an attempt to bring to the surface those aspects of their teaching that needed to improve. Engaging in this reflexive process result[s] in a better understanding of the practitioner self” (p. 15).

Conclusions and Implications for IPE in Teacher Education

This study provides important knowledge about the work of teacher educators who lead IPE. It is complex and demanding work that needs to be well supported in terms of resources, knowledge-sharing, briefing, and debriefing opportunities. An expanded research base will also ensure that the work is constantly examined and more deeply understood. There is extensive knowledge and wisdom about what it means to lead IPE, but the challenge is to harness this knowledge so that it is available to other IPE leaders. In addition to research, sharing of experiences, resources, advice, and reflective opportunities is one way in which future IPEs can be developed and enriched. For example, information about how teacher educators prepare their students, and themselves, for the challenges and opportunities of IPE; learning from critical incidents or confronting situations; ways in which partnerships with host communities can be developed and sustained over time are just some of the elements of IPE that would be useful to share. Development of accessible resources and networks within and between universities might be a way in which this could be achieved.

Just as no two IPE locations are the same, no two teacher educators are the same, and different people will respond differently in different (or the same) contexts. There are, however, similarities in terms of the multilayered and complex work that is required, and the need to be responsive to local conditions and to the needs of the pre-service teachers. It is important to see IPE not only as an educational experience for pre-service teachers in intercultural learning and teaching, but to view it as also inextricably linked to the personal and professional growth of the academics who accompany them. It is interesting to note that the professional learning of teacher educators mirrors that of pre-service teachers on IPE found in the literature, for example, managing and negotiating new social, cultural, and educational contexts and relationships, and learning invaluable lessons about who they are as teachers and as people. IPE is an opportunity for transformative learning for all those involved. As this study has shown, collegial interactions and support for learning through dialogue and professional relationships are an important part of an IPE, and are central to the development of academic identities. It is therefore important that time for these conversations is embedded within IPE programs, both in country and on the return home. Learning through critical reflection during and after the experience will help to enrich the learning opportunities not only for the pre-service teachers but also for the teacher educators and potentially for the host communities. Building supportive relationships starts well before the IPE begins, and these need to be nurtured and enhanced throughout the program, and beyond.

While this study makes a contribution to knowledge about academics who lead IPE, it can only scratch the surface of what is means to be a teacher educator in this context. The study was also based on only one university IPE program, and the experiences of academics in other programs might be different. Therefore, we need to explore more deeply the individual experiences of a wider diversity of teacher educators, and of IPE programs and locations. It is also important to consider the learning opportunities when things inevitably go wrong. The participants in this study were all overwhelmingly positive about their experiences, but they also referred to the challenges they faced. Closer examination of these difficulties might uncover, for example, how particular ethical dilemmas or critical incidents emerge and impact on teacher educators’ thinking, practice, and learning. It is also important to consider to what extent the learning gained during IPE is sustained into future practice, both at home and abroad. Further research, including the rich personal stories of teacher educators whose voices we do not always hear, will deepen our knowledge and understanding of what it means to learn from this experience, and how this knowledge can enhance current and future IPE programs for pre-service teachers, teacher educators, and host schools and communities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biography

Judy Williams is a senior lecturer in the Faculty of Education, Monash University. Her research and teaching interests include teacher professional learning, self-study of teacher education practices, professional experience including international professional experience, and qualitative research methodology.

References

Williams

(2017). Learning from leading: A teacher educator’s perspective of learning through leading an international professional experience. In Fitzgerald

Parr

Williams

(Eds.). Narratives of learning through international professional experience (pp. 169-184). Singapore: Springer.

Williams

Fitzgerald

Parr

(2017). Monash university international professional experience program. In Fitzgerald

Parr

Williams

(Eds.). Narratives of learning through international professional experience (pp. 1-14). Singapore: Springer.

Williams

Grierson

(2016). Facilitating professional development during international practicum: Understanding our work as teacher educators through critical incidents. Studying Teacher Education, 12(1), 55-69.

Alfaro

(2008). Global student teaching experiences: Stories bridging cultural and inter-cultural difference. Multicultural Education, 15(4), 20-26.

Alfaro

Quezada

R. L.

(2010). International teacher professional development: Teacher reflections of authentic teaching and learning experiences. Teaching Education, 2, 47-59.

Brindley

Quinn

Morton

M. L.

(2009). Consonance and dissonance in a study abroad program as a catalyst for professional development of pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 525-532.

Cranton

(2011). A transformative perspective on the scholarship of teaching and learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 30, 75-86.

Cushner

Mahon

(2002). Overseas student teaching: Affecting personal, professional, and global competencies in an age of globalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 6, 44-58.

De Wit

Hunter

Howard

Egron-Polak

. (2015). Internationalisation of higher education. Brussels: European Union. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/540370/IPOL_STU(2015)540370_EN.pdf

10.

Fitzgerald

Williams

Parr

(Eds.). (2017). Narratives of learning through international professional experience. Singapore: Springer.

11.

Grierson

Denton

(2013). Preparing Canadian teachers for diversity: The impact of an international practicum in rural Kenya. In Thomas

(Ed.), What is Canadian about teacher education in Canada? Multiple perspectives on Canadian teacher education in the twenty-first century (pp. 187-210). Sherbrooke, Québec: Canadian Association for Teacher Education/Association Canadienne pour la formation à l’enseignement.

12.

Lang

Cacciattolo

Kidman

(2017). The global education practicum: Perspectives from accompanying academics. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45, 145-161.

13.

Parr

(2012). Leading an international teaching practicum: Negotiating tensions in a site of border pedagogy. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40, 97-109.

14.

Patton

M. Q.

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

15.

Sanderson

(2008). A foundation for the internationalization of the academic self. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12, 276-307.

16.

Sharma

Phillion

Malewski

(2011). Examining the practice of critical reflection for developing pre-service teachers’ multicultural competencies: Findings from a study abroad program in Honduras. Issues in Education, 20(2), 9-22.

17.

Trilokekar

Kukar

(2011). Disorienting experiences during study abroad: Reflections of pre-service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 1141-1150.

18.

Walters

L. M.

Garii

Walters

(2009). Learning globally, teaching locally: Incorporating international exchange and intercultural learning into pre-service teacher training. Intercultural Education, 20, 151-158.