80
Alongside these findings are those which suggest that there was,
for students, a more flexible and responsive relationship with the
school and that students had more teaching experience. Despite the
restrictions of practice which centred around responsible (ie VI
Form) and difficult (ie bottom stream) pupils teacher - tutors were
seen as feeling greater responsibility for their students because
of
their
formal
role
and this resulted in higher rates of classroom
observation by tutors.
However
despite this fori
of support Sussex
students felt no more accepted by
staff and pupils than did students
in other university departments.
Interestingly given the stated
aims of the course.findings showed
that confusion existed among tutors
concerning the importance of ’integration into school’ as one aspect
of their role.
This
may
be
influenced by the finding that 25% see
assessments of tutees as among their most important activities.
Role of University Tutor
Earlier Lacey comments that implementation of the in-service element
of the Sussex schjeme might have changed the results and this is
apparent throughout this section and perhaps nowhere is it
more
pertinent than in relation to assessment. The finding needs to be
placed in the context of the position in which Sussex teacher tutors
found
themselves
Despite friendly relationships between university
staff and teacher-tutors no evidence was found of close working
relationships either of university staff in the school nor of teacher-
tutors in the university (1973 Ch8 P25). Such findings suggest that
the good intentions which undoubtedly existed needed to be underpinned
by changes in structure and in roles that require conscious planning
and determined implementation.