230
Furthermore the economic constraints posed when students have part-time jobs, and
full-time university courses limit their opportunities to be flexible in schools for
2 days a week for a whole semester. This is a constant tension for the implementa-
tion of Model B. The university staff involved in implementing both models are
considering informing preservice teachers of their pairs prior to the start of the
professional experience and provide stronger support for working in pairs within the
subject in which the professional experience is embedded.
Australian teacher education providers are in a period of change brought about
by TEMAG (Department of Education and Training, 2015 ) and other economic
requirements. In the design and delivery of initial teacher education degrees, we
believe that a paired placement model should be a mandatory requirement for pre-
service teachers for at least one placement in their degree program. The advantages
of paired placement are evident in the ability to create a powerful space in educating
classroom-ready teachers. However, universities and schools need to commit
resources to sustain the partnerships like those described in this chapter. In both
models the support of dedicated professional and administration staff cannot be
underestimated. Each model requires substantial resourcing to coordinate inter-
views, pair preservice teachers and provide suitable instructions to schools. This
must be factored into the workload of academic staff as well as supervising
teachers.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The paired placement model provides preservice teachers with a rich experience in
terms of what they are able to achieve and learn with each other. We emphasise the
need for the option of paired placement models like the two described in this chap-
ter. The peer interaction that occurs in the paired placement models nurtures preser-
vice teachers and minimises the power imbalance that can be present in other
models. The paired placement models encourage professional learning for supervis-
ing teachers as well as preservice teachers. Grounded in partnership and focused on
practice, the paired placement models should be dialogical and collaborative, thus
fostering a more equal balance of power between participants. We believe that our
research into this model of delivery provides detail that can inform innovative
design of the professional experience component of ITE programs. This informa-
tion may enable risk management strategies to be put in place to ensure a successful
introduction of the paired placement model. Cohen et al. ( 2013 ) suggested that ‘the
implications will suggest a broader view of the professional experience, designing a
new teacher education program embedded in school organizational culture’ (p. 345).
We also advocate the need to adapt models to suit local cultures, organisational
structures and partnership agreements between schools and universities.
C. Lang and H.T.M. Nguyen