۱- Introduction

۲- Understanding teacher educator identity

۳- An integrated identity framework

۴- Methodology

۵- Findings

۶- Discussion

۷- Implications and conclusion

References

Abstract

This study explores two novice nontraditional teacher educators’ identity (re)construction in different universities in Hong Kong. Drawing on data from in-depth interviews, field observation, and informal communication, the findings demonstrate how the two novice teacher educators, without formal school teaching experience, underwent different identity change trajectories (i.e., from identity conflicts to identity deficits and vice versa), influenced by their personal beliefs and aspirations as well as contextual demands in higher education. The findings provide insights into the under-researched area of nontraditional teacher educators’ professional development and offer useful implications on how to prepare and develop effective and committed teacher educators in Hong Kong and similar educational contexts where teacher education is mainly housed in higher education institutions.

Introduction

Teacher educator identity has become an emergent research area over the past years in teacher education (e.g., Izadinia, 2014; Swennen, Jones, & Volman, 2010). Identity as a theoretical lens can allow researchers to explore teacher educators’ lived experiences, which are central to the continuing innovation and improvement of teacher education (Robinson & McMillan, 2006). For teacher educators, looking into their own identities as the interplay between the external socio-cultural context and their internal sensemaking can help build a professional, positive self-image that supports effective teacher education practice and their professional reflections and growth (Dinkelman, 2011). To date, previous researchers (e.g., Murray & Male, 2005; Wood & Borg, 2010) have paid attention to novice teacher educators’ identity change as they transition from school teaching to teacher education in university settings. However, in many educational contexts (e.g., Australia, Hong Kong, Mainland China, and USA) where teacher education is mainly housed in higher education institutions, the past decade has witnessed an increasing number of fresh doctoral graduates who become university-based teacher educators (Mayer, Mitchell, Santoro, & White, 2011; Newberry, 2014). Referred to as “nontraditional teacher educators” (Newberry, 2014, p. 163) with little or no formal school teaching experience, they are recruited mostly due to their excellent research profiles and then practice teacher education in universities, which place a strong emphasis on research competitiveness and international rankings (Yuan, 2015). Different from those who become teacher educators through the traditional route (i.e., moving from school teaching to university-based teacher education) (Murray & Male, 2005), nontraditional teacher educators may lack sufficient understanding of local teaching practice and school systems and culture, and therefore they are likely to encounter challenges in designing and implementing effective and relevant teacher education tasks as well as communicating with pre- and in-service teachers about their learning needs and progress (Yuan, 2015).