Context and Participants

Since the Bologna reform was introduced in Portugal in 2006, qualification for teaching requires an undergraduate degree in the subject field and a master’s degree in teaching. The master’s degree in teaching English in primary education was introduced in 2015, following the implementation of English as a compulsory subject in Grades 3 and 4. Before that, English was an optional subject, and teachers qualified to teach it at upper school levels were allowed to teach in primary schools; therefore, candidates for the master’s degree may have had previous experience in teaching English to young learners (TEYL).

The programme has 90 credits distributed across three semesters and includes courses in four training areas: Teaching Subject (English language, culture, and literature), General Education (e.g., primary education curricula and developmental psychology), Didactics (TEYL), and Initiation to Professional Practice (school-based internship in a school mentor’s classes, supervised by a faculty professor, in the second and third semesters).

At the University of Minho, this programme has been offered since the 2015/16 academic year. It is globally aligned with a transformative view of education aimed at enhancing inclusiveness, democratic citizenship, and lifelong learning; therefore, learner-centredness and teacher agency are seen as central aspects of teacher education. The study plan includes three courses on TEYL where pedagogy for autonomy is one of the main curricular topics explored both theoretically and through practical tasks, such as analysing teacher narratives and designing teaching plans and materials. The internship fosters inquiry-based, learner-centred teaching through action research. PTs are expected to teach a total of 24 hours in their mentor’s classes, and a minimum of nine hours is devoted to the development of a small-scale, autonomy-oriented action research project in one class. The project involves several tasks: context analysis, observation of mentors’ lessons in Grades 3 and 4, project design, guided readings on the project topic, project development (including the collection and analysis of classroom data), and the production of a reflective portfolio and a final report that is defended publicly. Action research in this context is understood as a learning-to-teach experience that allows PTs to develop a critical view of language education and their agency to enact and interpret pedagogical change (Crawford-Garrett et al., 2015; Edwards, 2020; Vieira, 2024). Figure 1 (Vieira, 2024, p. 67) illustrates the key elements of action research projects, including topic choice, learner role, teaching approach, and project evaluation. Faculty supervisors are responsible for supporting project design and implementation in collaboration with school mentors.

Figure 1: Key Elements of TEYL Action-Research Projects

The study involved a class of 15 PTs who were in the second internship semester and also attended a TEYL course on materials design and evaluation that supported the development of action-research projects. The study was presented to the PTs by the second author, who taught that course. All the students agreed to participate. Although the data were anonymous and used strictly for research purposes, participation was regarded as a self-development task that allowed participants to reflect on their training experience and their identity as future teachers. Therefore, this was taken into account in their final assessment by adding 0.5 points to the students’ marks (on a scale of 0-20 points).

The group of participants (12 women and three men) was heterogeneous regarding age, previous training, and teaching experience. Most of them (11) were over 30 years old, and the rest were in the 20-24 age range (3) and in the 25-30 age range (1). Except for five PTs, the rest already had experience in teaching English before obtaining their master’s degree, ranging from 1.5 years to 18 years, in pre-school, primary, and secondary education, in state and private schools located in both urban and rural settings. Most PTs (13) also had teaching experiences while completing their master’s degrees. Their previous academic training was quite varied: Modern/European Languages and Literatures (9), Teaching of Portuguese-English (2), Teaching of English-German (1), Teaching of Portuguese (1), Applied Languages (1), and Social Communication, as well as a postgraduate course in TESOL (1). Six PTs had attended courses in TEYL prior to obtaining their master’s degree, and three had received some training in this field during their master’s programme. Prior to the programme, none of the PTs had conducted action research, and their theoretical knowledge of pedagogy for autonomy was either null or reduced.

Data Collection Procedures

The investigation was an exploratory case study of PTs’ self-efficacy beliefs to promote learner autonomy, involving the collection of self-report data through questionnaires and interviews. Insofar as the study highlights the worthiness (potential value and shortcomings) of a particular ITE programme, it shares features of an evaluative case study by providing an understanding of the effectiveness of that programme (Bassey, 1999).

Data were collected in late 2019 by the first author, who was not known to the participants. The second author, who was their teacher and the supervisor of some of them, only had access to anonymised data after the end of the semester to avoid bias in data analysis.

Data Analysis

The analysis of the quantitative data obtained from the self-efficacy questionnaire was based on calculating the mean (ranging from 1 to 5) for each question. The qualitative data obtained from the questionnaire and interviews were analysed inductively by two authors to ensure inter-rater reliability, through an iterative process of reading and re-reading the data for coding. Two broad categories were previously established: enabling factors (i.e., factors perceived to have a positive influence on self-efficacy beliefs) and constraining factors (i.e., factors perceived to have a negative influence on self-efficacy beliefs). The factors identified in these categories were classified into personal factors (factors related to the self, such as personal convictions, beliefs, and perceptions of experience) and contextual factors (factors external to the self, such as educational policies, school cultures, and training opportunities). Although the qualitative data were not quantified, the number of aspects identified for each factor indicates that some factors are probably more significant than others.

Self-Efficacy Beliefs

The questionnaire’s quantitative results (Table 1) indicated that the PTs believed in the value of autonomy as an educational goal in TEYL (M = 4.53) and their sense of self-efficacy for promoting learner autonomy was relatively high, with mean values ranging from 3.27 to 4.07.

Nevertheless, about half of the PTs (eight to nine) were just “sure” or “slightly sure” on some aspects: designing materials and activities that foster children’s cultural awareness, citizenship, and respect for diversity (M = 3.6), and implementing them (M = 3.53); implementing materials and activities that foster children’s learning competences (M = 3.27); and responding to learner diversity (M = 3.6). Response variability was higher as regards their ability to undertake formative learning assessments (M = 3.47), which is something the participants do very occasionally, given the limited number of lessons they teach. Except for the development of learners’ communicative competence, the participants’ beliefs regarding the design of materials and activities, which is supported by supervisors and mentors, were more positive than their beliefs regarding implementation, suggesting the existence of practical difficulties in teaching.

Factors Enabling and Constraining Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Data collected through open-ended responses (questionnaire and interviews) allowed for the identification of enabling and constraining factors that influenced PTs’ self-efficacy beliefs.

Enabling factors were personal and contextual (Table 2). Personal factors primarily refer to personal convictions regarding the educational value of learner autonomy and a positive experience in developing particular aspects of pedagogy for autonomy. Contextual factors were primarily related to the learning opportunities offered in the master’s programme, including the internship. Reference was also made to the role of continuous professional development and interaction with peers.

Constraining factors were also personal and contextual (Table 3). Personal factors were mostly related to practical difficulties encountered in enacting pedagogy for autonomy and the need for further teaching experience, whereas contextual factors were related to mainstream teaching cultures that reduce teachers’ freedom and time to develop learner autonomy (large classes, use of syllabi and textbooks, and summative assessment practices), and the need for further training and support.

Role of the ITE Programme

All the PTs acknowledged the value of the programme in promoting learner autonomy, particularly the TEYL courses and the development of autonomy-oriented action-research projects during the internship. In the interviews, they pointed out several aspects that appeared to enhance self-efficacy beliefs:

• learning about and being encouraged to promote learner autonomy

• learning about and confronting different TEYL perspectives and approaches

• designing and experimenting with learner-centred materials and activities

• analysing learner data to improve teaching and individualise learning

• understanding learners, what they think, and their cognitive development

• developing observation and reflection skills

• analysing other peers’ internship narratives and lesson plans

• discussing their own lesson plans with others and receiving advice from others (peers, teacher educators, mentors, and supervisors)

• improving teaching practices

Some PTs, however, recommended a stronger practical focus on TEYL in the programme. The PTs with no previous teaching experience also suggested that teaching time in the internship should be extended to allow for a more extensive exploration of pedagogy for autonomy. Their colleagues with experience, on the other hand, recommended that the teaching time in their case should be reduced to focus on the development of the action-research project and pointed out the time constraints resulting from holding teaching jobs while completing the internship.

Regarding supervisory support, its importance was fully acknowledged, even though school mentors were perceived to be more sceptical or less willing than supervisors to promote learner autonomy. Supervisors were seen as authoritative figures who support and validate autonomy-oriented action-research projects, which increased the PTs’ confidence to implement them:

The university supervisor’s support is important because sometimes, to innovate the practice, with the school mentor, we have a certain negotiating power because we have support from the university, so to speak. For example, many times there is a certain scepticism and university support gives us validation, a basis to justify our innovation. And since we don’t have experience, there’s that perception that, “Ah, that’s all theory, that’s in the head, it won’t work in practice.” And with the support of the university, we have more strength in our arguments. (Group 1, ST1, Interview)

The PTs with previous teaching experience were particularly critical of prevalent teaching practices focused on following the syllabus and textbooks, which limited their creativity and freedom to develop their projects. They sometimes felt that reconciling different rationalities was hard, especially because they are evaluated by both supervisors and mentors:

My project topic is to develop learning to learn, children’s autonomy. And the school mentor immediately limits it by asking that everything in the textbook be taught within the teaching unit, which cuts off my creativity, or [the possibility of] extending some activities a little further, because I am being marked by the rhythm of time, and at the end of this unit something has to be completed because next they are going to do a test. And then, in other activities that I sometimes try to do, the school mentor doesn’t always agree, because it will make noise, it will destabilise. I don’t think noise is bad... In [autonomous work], they have to make noise; otherwise, they have no chance of working. In this sense, I feel more support from the university than from the school mentor, and sometimes in managing the work that we have to present here, but also pleasing the school mentor, who is also evaluating us and accompanies us every day. We remain in the midway. (Group 2, ST1, Interview)

Impact of Having or Lacking Previous Teaching Experience

Table 4 summarises the PTs’ views on whether having or lacking previous teaching experience exerted a positive or negative influence on self-efficacy beliefs regarding the promotion of learner autonomy.

The PTs with previous teaching experience did not point out any disadvantages arising from it. The other group saw their lack of practical knowledge both as a disadvantage and an opportunity since they were able to enter the profession with a more open and candid attitude towards learner autonomy, relying on the specialised literature and on supervisory support, and not feeling too affected by “teaching vices” and dominant school practices. As one of the PTs put it, they “innovated without intending to innovate”:

I noticed that, inadvertently, we innovated without intending to innovate. I don’t know if others feel this way, but sometimes I feel that to the suggestions we give, they often go “doing that?!” We don’t have certain vices from practice. I at least feel this way, that we come without vices. Another thing is that the support we have is not from practice, it is not empirical, but rather theoretical; we come [to the internship] with a literature baggage that helps guide us. I notice that many times, I spend a lot of time investigating. I want to take this approach, but what have authors done before? What do they say about this matter? I notice that I investigate a lot more. (Group 1, ST1, Interview)

Both groups believed that previous teaching experience facilitated practice, particularly in terms of classroom management issues. However, the PTs with no experience referred more explicitly to the relationship between classroom management and learner autonomy. The following account shows how one of them perceived time management to be particularly difficult in a learner-centred approach where learning paces are not necessarily synchronised with the teacher’s “clock”:

Personally, I don’t think my clock and the children’s clock are in synchrony. I prepare the class, I prepare it in detail: the time dedicated to that activity, the time I want to explain... Children work in a different way and, as I have no experience, I haven’t found one yet; a middle ground in which my clock and that of the children can coincide so that they can work more autonomously and I can work so that I can accomplish what I have to do. It is what I think. I don’t think I’ve found this synchrony yet. (Group 1, ST4, Interview)

Although the PTs with previous teaching experience appeared to feel more confident in developing learner autonomy, action research was new to them, and, for example, they realised the importance of collecting learner data to become more learner-centred teachers:

We, in our practice, and I speak because I have been teaching for some time, we focus a lot on the more immediate feedback that we have in the classroom, on direct observation, but then we don’t have data, we don’t collect data. There are students who are more reserved and don’t show so much that they have so many difficulties, and over time, we may worry too much about the content, and whether they are learning, but then we forget to stop for a moment and think: “What do they think about this activity? Did they like it? Didn’t they like it?” Because sometimes, two or three may not be enjoying it... and it’s not because they are two or three that we have to ignore that those children are not understanding or not enjoying the activity. I think individual questionnaires help us to focus and increasingly individualise our practice. (Group 2, ST3, Interview)

Importance of Personal Convictions on the Value of Autonomy

Self-efficacy beliefs cannot be dissociated from the value attached to autonomy as an educational goal in TEYL. The PTs’ accounts (Table 5) revealed that autonomy was valued from learning and teaching perspectives. They underlined connections between learner autonomy and the development of lifelong learning competences, along with the need to implement learner-centred approaches and understand learner autonomy as a collective, cross-curricular educational goal.

Despite believing in the value of learner autonomy and their ability to promote it, the participants raised some doubts regarding future teaching and identified certain constraints (Table 6). The PTs with previous teaching experience stressed contextual constraints to teacher autonomy in schools, whereas those who lacked experience tended to focus on their own insecurities and learners’ low readiness for autonomy.

The isolation and low status of English teaching in primary schools were mentioned in both groups, especially by the experienced PTs, as a significant constraint to pedagogical innovation. They mentioned that because English is a relatively recent compulsory subject in primary education, which is taught two hours a week by a specialist teacher who moves between schools, it tends to be undervalued by the teacher responsible for all the other school subjects and who interacts with the children on a daily basis. Therefore, the participants often found it hard to get collaboration and support from the school mentors, as they were working in isolation. An imbalance of decision-making power was seen to emerge in this context, even in apparently minor aspects like who may erase the classroom board:

I have also been in a context where I went in to teach a class and [the school teacher] forbade me to erase the board, which for me is already an affront, isn’t it? I mean, I can’t erase the board? I mean, how can we practice and develop learner autonomy if we do not have the autonomy to do what we want? (Group 2, ST2, Interview)

Despite the anticipated constraints, the PTs showed a strong sense of determination to make their voices heard and foster the importance of English teaching in primary schools, underlining the need to enhance the roles of the school, parents, and the community in educational change.