102
and be able to use them. There now exists in our
schools
a supportive and informative
network which
works positively for tutors, staff and students,
and is a simple consequence or regular and sustained
contact.
The nature of the contact with the school is vital
for the tutor’s personal learning
problems are continually presented
is
dynamic
which gives
depth
- new issues and
’ live ’ , and this
and relevance to
the work.
(Jones 1981 P13)
The organisation of the course was predicated on the differences
between schools whilst
also
pting to find common areas of con-
cern beyond those
of
subject
∣ethod.
It was seen that students
could be given a
status and a recognised place
in the school and
in the staffroom
thus making their acceptance into school less a
personal than a professional matter.
The school group seminar held
once a week throughout the year in school was important here. It
was organised in the first place by the university tutor and later
in schools where the course had access first to visiting tutors
and later to teacher-tutors they participated in their conduct and
organisation.
In the early years of the course
school group tutors did not have
a role in the
assessment
of students .
Formal responsibility for teaching practice assess-
ment lies with method tutors, and for most of one’s
School Group students (except those for whom one
is also a Method tutor) one does not have this role,
and this is significant.
Much
as
we
wish
to extend our role as helpers, students are under
considerable pressure to see Method tutors as
assessors. The establishment of the School Group
tutor in the Alternative Course makes realistically
available to students a tutor who is not first and
foremost an assessor. (Jones 1981 P15)