arguably
such
constraints
often
57
appear
more immediate and intractable
than those that are resolved in committees.
First
there
is
the
focus
on
subject
method
work
seen
as
centrally
defining the reality of the PGCE experience.
Throughout the duration of
the Alternative Course subject method departments established an effective
challenge to the pre-eminence of discipline based education work and both
exerted particular pressures on the Alternative Course.
Then there is
the lack of integration within the PGCE course
an accepted fragmentation
of component courses that makes any attempt to provide an integrated course
a hazardous undertaking.
Involved in attempts to reduce fragmentation,
staff as well as students became aware and subject to the pressures
Lsing from the fragmentation.
Parallel to the lack of horizontal
integration of courses which make up the PGCE is the lack of vertical
integration of Institute and school which makes it difficult to allow
the school to influence and shape the agenda of the PGCE concerns.
Alongside this is the pedagogy of the PGCE which overwhelmingly espouses
the view of teacher education as training where the university transmits
essential knowledge.
To move towards a view that sees students as both
knowledgeable and necessarily active in their learning is not easy in this
context.
In many senses the pressures that arise from developing a position
where the course
can be responsive to both schools and students are
extremely positive
but
they contradict
mainstream
practices
and
attitudes .