Journal of Learning and Teaching
The Role of a Teaching Assistant: Effective Practice for Student Learning and for Developing as a Teacher? Eamon Grimes, Sport and Exercise Science Abstract In this paper I consider whether the role of a teaching assistant can be important for both teaching support and for individual learning and development. Reflecting on my own experiences of working as a teaching assistant I discuss whether I positively impacted student learning, but equally if I have personally developed in my capacity to teach and work collaboratively with students. Fundamental to the discussion is the notion that both my relationship and communication with the teacher and with the students will impact the effectiveness of my practice and ultimately the students’ learning. Examples of approaches and strategies experienced are discussed, such as a room management strategy derived from Cremin et al. (2003)’s model for teacher and teaching assistant collaborative teamwork. The discussion provides an insight into the impacts of working in this role, and considers whether it may be important for the initial stages of the pedagogical process.
Introduction The role of a teaching assistant is essentially to provide support for students in the learning environment. The tasks of teaching assistants predominantly consist of providing individual support
lead lecturer. As a novice to teaching I will reflect on whether I felt I contributed to the students’ learning experience and also whether working as an associate lecturer has impacted my own approach or philosophy towards both teaching and learning.
to students with specific needs, however the role has extended to
Before discussing my experiences it is important to put the
encompass work that involves whole class, group and individual
teaching into context. I was employed as an associate lecturer at a
work that supports more inclusive approaches to teaching and
university institute and worked on research methods and statistics’
learning (Burgess and Mayes, 2009). The use of teaching support
modules for courses in the department of sport and exercise
is widespread in England, particularly in primary schools for which
science. Having recently graduated from the same institute, in a
in 2000 there was a full-time support staff employee for every 2.7
Masters in sport and exercise psychology, I was familiar with the
teachers (Cremin, Thomas and Vincett, 2003). Furthermore, many
teaching environment, staff and, to an extent, the content. The
individuals across the educational field, reportedly up to fifty per
sessions I assisted with involved working with students from a
cent of employees in some faculties (Mueller et al., 1997), have
variety of sports-based courses, including first year, second year
worked in a teaching assistant, or teaching support, capacity
and masters’ students, during computer practical sessions. My
at some stage in their career. Whilst the presence of teaching
primary role during these sessions was to provide support to
assistants has become commonplace in schools, in higher
students whilst using statistical computer software. The support
education institutes associate lecturers are being employed to fulfil
was required as the sessions could include up to thirty students
various roles and responsibilities that are comparable to that of a
at one time, many of whom were novices to the software and
teaching assistant. Teaching assistants are often individuals who
therefore two working staff were required to provide enough
are experienced learners but also neophyte teachers and so they
support for an entire group. These experiences will be discussed
can provide some useful insight into both teaching and learning
as two distinct but interrelated sections; interaction with the
processes, yet they remain an understudied group (Helland, 2010;
lecturer, and interaction with the students.
Luo, Grady and Bellows, 2001). The current discussion will focus on my experiences of employment as an associate lecturer at a higher
Interaction with the Lecturer
education institute during which I assisted with teaching sessions.
When reflecting on my interaction with the lead lecturer, the
I will consider whether the role of the associate lecturer can be
questions I consider are; did working with the lecturer impact
perceived as an important stage in pedagogical development
my own approach to teaching? What was my role during the
as it provides a unique platform to both gain experience whilst
sessions? Did our collaborative teamwork enhance the students’
working with students, yet equally observe the interactions of the
learning? Or perhaps, did we even work collaboratively? I was
2012 Series: Paper 4
Journal of Learning and Teaching working with two lecturers who were teaching content from the
consider for room management to provide support throughout the
same modules and although the learning objectives were the
group, these are; individual helper, mover and activity manager.
same the differences between their sessions, and distinct teaching
During the sessions I took the role of individual helper and mover,
styles, quickly became apparent. For example, during my first
whereas the teacher was predominantly the activity manager. The
session the lecturer announced to the students that lecture slides
teacher would introduce an activity to the whole group, provide
would not be provided throughout the module and insisted that
a group demonstration if needed and then provide the students
the students should take notes. The rationale behind this strategy
with tasks to complete. Throughout this my role would be to move
was that it encouraged students to listen as they would not be
around the room and provide individual support where needed,
dependent on lecture notes being provided to them. In the second
and similarly following the group demonstration the teacher would
session, on the same module, I assisted with a different lecturer.
assume the role of mover and individual helper for the students.
This lecturer advised the students that they should not take notes
However, the teacher remained in control of the activities, and
whilst the lecturer spoke, as the lecture slides would be available
decided on timings and when to conclude an activity. Therefore
electronically following the session. The rationale was that the
we did not experience a clash with role clarity, which was found
lecturer didn’t want the students to be concentrating on writing, but
by Cremin et al. (2003) when assistants took the role of activity
instead to pay full attention and listen. These were two completely
manager. In reflecting on the use of room management, it was an
different, almost conflicting, approaches to achieve the same
effective strategy that would allow the lead teacher to address the
goal. So, which lecturer was using the correct strategy? I soon
whole group, whilst individuals who encountered difficulties could
realised that the teachers were using approaches and strategies
be supported without overall group disruption. Similarly once the
that were fundamental to their own teaching styles and that
groups worked on tasks independently it was important to have
there isn’t necessarily a single, or correct, approach to teaching.
two movers to provide individualised help across the whole group,
Therefore, I found myself in a unique situation where I could
as this would be a time consuming task for one person. Therefore,
observe and interact with two different approaches to teaching,
I felt with the lead lecturer this was a collaborative and effective
using a varieties of strategies, yet also experience the impacts
approach for enhancing the students’ learning experience as
these approaches had on students’ learning. Rowland and Hatch
a whole group but also allowing individualised support where
(2007) discuss their accounts of working as associate lecturers
needed.
during the early stages of their academic career and notably the inspiration of fellow colleagues, through the acquisition of their
Interaction with the Students
ideals and knowledge, were fundamental to developing their own
From my experiences of working with first year, second year and
philosophy of education. I share this view and can relate to the
Masters’ level students from different courses I feel it is appropriate
beneficiaries of working alongside lecturers, or colleagues, with
to consider the students as two groups; undergraduate and
different approaches.
postgraduate. My role in the classroom was to provide support
In terms of my role and interaction with the lecturer in the classroom, there were times in the earlier sessions when I was not entirely confident of my role. On reflection I would attribute this to some initial nervousness and lack of confidence in assisting the students but also I was working with two different teachers on different modules with a variety of student groups so my working patterns varied. Although no formal teamwork strategy was discussed in terms of the dynamics of the sessions (as I did not receive specific instruction of what to do and when), I can relate some of my experiences to the room management strategy proposed in Cremin et al. (2003)’s model for teacher and teaching assistant collaborative teamwork. In this model there are three roles to 2012 Series: Paper 4
to the students during activities, yet I did not feel effective during the first few sessions when working with either undergraduate or postgraduate students. I often found myself wandering the room monitoring for any indication of helplessness from the students, or for an arm to be raised or question to be heard, and yet there were times when I would have no interaction with students for up to ten or fifteen minutes. When reflecting on this, and with some advice from the lecturer, I realised this was related to the students’ confidence in me. It was noticeable that students would reserve their question until the lead lecturer was nearby, and this was a clear indication that the student would prefer to talk to the lecturer rather than me. To overcome this communication obstacle
Journal of Learning and Teaching I decided to simply talk to and familiarise with students more
When I consider this approach I feel that the scaffolding strategy
often, or just proceed to asking a student if they needed help, or
was more effective when interacting with the postgraduate
how they were getting on, rather than wait for them to instigate an
students compared to the undergraduate students. In theory
interaction. Once I overcame this communication barrier, I began
this strategy can be used for any level of student, so I should
to develop a working relationship with the students.
consider, why did I only feel a scaffolding effect developed
I have considered my interactions with the students and thought in depth about my role in providing support. The support I provided was either knowledge of how to use the computer software or of the theory and logic behind the statistical activity the students were taking part in. I believe my role in providing this support can be likened to a scaffolding strategy based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (van der Stuyf, 2002). The theory is based around the zone of proximal development; which is the distance between what the student can achieve independently and what the student can achieve with appropriate support. The scaffolding strategy proposes support, or scaffolding, is provided to learners to facilitate development through internalising new information, and that consequently after internalisation of the new information a student will become independent and ready to move onto the next level of understanding (van der Stuyf, 2002). The zone of proximal development is a balance between the difficulty of the challenge being set and the competence of the student. There is a risk of the student becoming bored in situations where they are un-challenged as they are already competent and knowledgeable, Appendices or anxious in situations where they are over-challenged and feel Figure 1 incompetent.
successfully with the postgraduate students? Firstly, this could be due to the characteristics of the student. I found postgraduate students are more proactive in developing and internalising new information. With assistance the postgraduate students could reach their own solutions and eventually the scaffolding effect resulted in the student becoming familiar with the processes and requirements and they could then act independently in completing tasks successfully. Once the postgraduate students had reached a conclusion they would also develop the interaction further by asking a new question or finding a new problem. In contrast, undergraduate students appeared to be more interested in being shown what to do, and perhaps were less interested in the theoretical underpinnings, or to consider ‘why?’ The important issue here is to consider my role in this scaffolding strategy. Although a student has some responsibility to learn, I should really be debating what should I do, or what should I not have done, to improve my teaching capacity with the undergraduate students. The scaffolding teaching strategy is based on the premise that you provide new information that is more complex than the students’ understanding. Therefore they acquire this new information and build on their own knowledge base, thus internalising. However, what if I provided information that was too complex for their knowledge base, or maybe moved onto the next scaffold before the student internalised the previous? It is comprehensible that during the scaffolding process as new information is not understood a student would lose interest in the internalising aspect, and would then focus on the how to, the procedure or the ‘what button do I press now?’. When considering why I felt working with the undergraduates was not as productive I realised a fundamental problem with my own practice. Kugel (1993) proposed that as a teacher develops they progress through three key stages; self, subject and student. I think I can accept that due to inexperience I was more focused
Figure 1. Based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory the scaffolding strategy proposes there is a zone of proximal on ensuring development, depending on the level of challenge and competence of the student. Figure 1. Based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory the scaffolding strategy
proposes there is a zone of proximal development, depending on the level of challenge and competence of the student.
I was prepared and knowledgeable of the the session
content (self and the subject) so that I could provide this information to the students, rather than considering how this information was being received by the student. Gonsalves, Harris and McAlpine (2009) reported from interviewing graduate student teaching
2012 Series: Paper 4
Journal of Learning and Teaching assistants that their views were far more focused on ‘thinking
feel prepared for research but not to teach undergraduates (Austin,
about teaching’ compared to ‘thinking about learning’. This is
2000). Golde (1997) found that of 197 doctoral graduates, 93 %
comparable to my own experiences as in these early stages of
felt confident to conduct research yet only 63 % felt prepared to
experiencing teaching I was only ‘thinking about teaching’’, which
teach undergraduates. Furthermore Anderson and Swazey (1998)
perhaps involves more focus on the ‘self’ and ‘subject’ stages of
reported that over half of teaching graduate respondents learnt
Kugel’s (1993) development process.
more from peer interaction than from the faculty. In considering
Conclusions
this, it is comprehensible that for individuals pursuing a teaching career gaining experience in a teaching assistant role alongside
Mueller et al. (1997) discusses that becoming an effective
lecturers, or colleagues, would help them acquire a multitude
teacher is a complex progress, and it is possible that the role of
of skills and better prepare them for teaching practice. I would
a teaching assistant provides a firm pedagogical foundation for
conclude that working as a teaching assistant provides a unique
the development process. In reflecting on my own experiences,
platform for initial pedagogical development and this could be
I would concur that the role has enabled me to experience both
important in the early stages of developing a teaching philosophy.
teaching and learning in a more comfortable environment that has allowed for development. This is because there is lesser responsibility for a teaching assistant, as ultimately the lead lecturer is responsible for the session, and consequently this lesser responsibility has enabled me to focus more on the students and the impacts our actions have on their learning experience. From a teaching perspective the working experience has provided much insight into how to plan and conduct sessions and use different strategies to maintain student engagement. In terms of the
References ANDERSON, M. S. AND SWAZEY, J. P. (1998). Reflections on the Graduate Student Experience: An Overview, in Anderson, M.S. (Ed.), The Experience of Being in Graduate School: An Exploration. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 101, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
students’ learning process, I think this is an area that I still lack
AUSTIN, A. (2002), Preparing the next generation of faculty:
understanding of. When reflecting on the lack of effectiveness of
graduate school as socialization to the academic career, The
the scaffolding strategy with undergraduate students, I need to
Journal of Higher Education,73 (1), pp.94 - 122.
consider alternative approaches to engage the students to develop understanding, and perhaps gain the collaborative interactions experienced with the postgraduate students. In this sense, I feel that in Kugel’s (1993) three stages of personal development I need to consider further the importance of focusing on the student, and
BURGESS, H. AND MAYES, S. (2009), An exploration of higher level teaching assistants’ perceptions of their training and development in the context of school workforce reform, Support for Learning, 24 (1), pp. 19-25.
their ability to absorb and internalise information and knowledge,
CREMIN, H., THOMAS, G. AND VINCETT, K. (2003), Learning
and subsequently I can develop further my teaching capability.
zones: an evaluation of three models for improving learning through
Although I have addressed only a few of the strategies or approaches I experienced, I would acknowledge that the increased
teacher/teaching assistant teamwork, Support for Learning, 8 (4), pp. 154 – 161.
confidence in communicating with students, either individually
HELLAND, P. (2000), Espousal of undergraduate teaching
or in groups, is perhaps the most significant change in terms of
normative patterns of first-year teaching assistants, The Journal
my development. This change was similarly a key response for
of Higher Education, 81 (3), pp. 394 - 415.
participants following working experience in a teaching assistant training course (Burgess and Mayes, 2009) and this poses the contention that experiencing teaching in a supporting role, and by this I suggest active participation and not simply observation, is a necessary process for development. Indeed, previous research has identified that graduates employed at higher education institutes 2012 Series: Paper 4
GOLDE, C. M. (1997), Gaps in the training of future faculty: Doctoral student perceptions, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Albuquerque, USA.
Journal of Learning and Teaching GONSALVES, A.J., DIK HARRIS AND MCALPINE, L. (2009), The zones framework for both teaching and learning: application to graduate student teaching assistants, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 33 (3), pp. 205–218. KUGEL, P. (1993), How professors develop as teachers, Studies in Higher Education, 18 (3), pp. 315-328. LUO, J., GRADY, M.L. AND BELLOWS, L.H. (2001), Instructional issues for teaching assistants, Innovative Higher Education, 25, pp. 209–30. MUELLER, A., PERLMAN, B., MCCANN, L. AND MCFADDEN, S. (1997), A faculty perspective on teacher assistant training, Teaching of Psychology, 24 (3), pp. 167 – 171. ROWLAND, T. AND HATCH, G. (2007), Learning to teach? The assistant lecturer in colleges of education 1960-75, History of Education, 36 (1), pp.65-88. VAN DER STUYF, R. R. (2002), Scaffolding as a teaching strategy, Adolescent 11/04/11
Learning from
and
Development
Section,
retrieved
http://condor.admin.ccny.cuny.edu/~group4/
Van%20Der%20Stuyf/Van%20Der%20Stuyf%20Paper.doc.
2012 Series: Paper 4