48
to assume that where the labour market permits the young teacher's
own school experience still exerts a strong influence upon choice
of course and choice of job. What is implied in these findings is
how little effect the PGCE itself has in crucial professional deci-
sions. There is no indication that the courses themselves are
receptive to these factors that precede the student's entry to the
course and yet may critically effect its outcome. Thus a major
source for diversity goes, as it were, unnoticed in the education
of young teachers.
If the personal and educational development of young teachers was
seen as central to the PGCE years then the pedagogy would have to
be very different from that discussed above. Method tutors' super-
visory work with students with its continuity throughout the year
often including selection prior to the course appeared to make
alternative formulations of process possible. Tutors emphasised
personal knowledge and contact as basic for their professional work
of help, placement and assessment but the latter gave rise to conflict
impeding other aspects of the work such as help and guidance. Ideas
and nurture seem not
far away from the role model that is
implied and yet the researchers reserve the idea of a 'very time
consuming' (1982 P188) pastoral role for those students for whom
the PGCE could be traumatic. However the work of Lacey (1977) suggests
that
the nature of the transformation from student
to
teacher
til
ay
be in degree traumatic for all students which implies that such work
might
constitute a central component of the tutor’s role.
Here again
potential sources
of diversity which
may be
an
important
element
in initial teacher education finds no place.
They are ignored in
dererence to courses which emphksisS practical skills and content