Pre-Service Teachers as Agents of Educational Change Via the Practicum

Abstract

There is still an approach to the Practicum in which pre-service teachers are still seen as trainees who cannot contribute to the experienced practice of in-service teachers. The aim of this study was to find out, from the point of view of in-service teachers, university practicum tutors and pre-service teachers themselves, whether the latter doing their last Practicum can contribute to school improvement from an inclusive perspective and, if so, in what aspects of improvement this influence is produced. A qualitative comprehensive-descriptive study was carried out during two school years with the participation of 14 in-service teachers from 2 different schools and 10 pre-service teachers who were participating in the last Practicum, as well as 2 university tutors. Results show that pre-service can play a relevant role in school improvement, especially in classroom organisation, in teacher’s professional development and, in children’s learning. Reflections on teacher training programmes are provided.

Keywords

preservice teacher education professional development schools qualitative research

Educational Change in the Context of Equity and Social Justice

Educational change in the context of equity and social justice refers to the fact that changes in education must focus on improving the learning of all students without leaving anyone behind (Murillo & Krichesky, 2016). In fact, there is a very dangerous tendency to promote changes that continue to generate significant levels of educational segregation (Murillo & Belavi, 2021). As noted by Escudero et al. (2013), despite the various international declarations in favour of educational quality and equity, injustices are still very much present. These kinds of changes generated by inequality and competition between students should be rejected by the educational system, in favour of tools to overcome these inequalities and offer better conditions at school and, by extension, in life.

From an inclusive point of view, changes should aim to benefit everybody, while also focussing on groups that are more vulnerable or at risk (Simón et al., 2021). Furthermore, in the context of social justice, change should move towards the improvement of civilisation and societies, which implies the need for collaboration between teachers and institutions, as well as the engagement of organisations, among other aspects. (Forde et al., 2021). As stated by Porter and Towell (2017), “delivering inclusive education for all requires transformational change in public education systems so that inclusion becomes an intrinsic feature of policy, culture and practice from the classroom to the education ministry and, a core expectation of the communities in which schools are embedded” (p. 4).

With regard to the processes followed during educational changes, one issue that must be clarified is whether these changes should be designed with students in mind, but without their participation. From an inclusive point of view, changes in policies, culture and educational practices should focus on improving attendance, full participation and the learning of all pupils, involving the whole educational community (Booth & Ainscow, 2011). Regardless of the educational level, it is essential to ask and listen to our students to promote full participation, change and improvement (Jones & Bubb, 2021). This is how educational change is to be understood in this paper. The study has been designed based on this understanding.

The Traditional Role of the Teaching Practicum

The first thing that comes to mind when discussing pre-service teachers’ placement in schools is the development of skills for their future professional careers in education, keeping in mind that the practicum is an ideal space and time for theory and practice to come together (Allen & Wright, 2014). However, it is important to remember that this also involves working on feelings and emotional intelligence (González & Fuentes, 2011).

In Spain, ministerial decrees regulate the characteristics of teaching degrees. The current regulations establish that the skills students must obtain during the practicum for a Bachelor’s degree in Primary Education are as follows (Decree ECI/3857/2007, of 27 December, Appendix 1):

Acquire practical knowledge of the classroom and its management.

Know and apply interaction and, communication processes in the classroom and, master the necessary social skills and abilities to promote a classroom environment that facilitates learning and coexistence.

Monitor and follow the educational process and, in particular, the teaching-learning process by mastering the necessary techniques and strategies.

Relate both theory and practice to the reality of the classroom and the school.

Participate in teacher activities and learn how to carry out the role, acting and thinking based on practice.

Participate in improvement proposals in the different areas of action that may be established at a school.

Regulate the interaction and communication processes in groups of students from 6 to 12 years old.

Be familiar with ways to collaborate with the different areas of the educational community, as well as the social environment.

As we can see, participation in improvement proposals in the different areas of the school is taken into account. Therefore, the possible contribution of practicum students to educational improvement is made explicit. This being said, however, during their work placement, students tend to take on the role of an observer.

The figure of the school tutor is mainly involved in moments of action and teaching based on modelling. However, spaces distanced from daily tasks intended to analyse relevant moments of the placement carried out, alongside the student, are rarer (Saiz-Linares & Ceballos-López, 2019, p. 147).

In their research on the practicum, the authors found that pre-service teachers continue to be viewed as subjects in training who can offer little contribution to a practising teacher’s classroom experience. In contrast to this perspective, other proposals have been posited, such as that of Zabalza (2022) who, referring to the practicum, argue that learning the profession also involves questioning and reflecting upon what can be changed in order to avoid perpetuating certain practices that produce and reproduce social order. Promoting this reflection and questioning involves challenging the model that understands pre-service teachers as passive subjects who mainly learn by observing another more experienced professional, without questioning what they see.

However, it seems that the practicum is one of the subjects most valued by pre-service teachers. This is due to the training and professional change that it produces in the pre-service teachers who attend it. For example, a study conducted by García-Noblejas et al. (2023) concludes that (a) the practicum programmes can be improved based on the data provided by the pre-service teachers, (b) the educational potential of the practicum needs to reinforce mechanisms of interaction and coordination between the university, (c) it is important to highlight the role of scholar mentors to supervise and guide learning, and, (d) the schools where pre-service teachers learn must be an authentic framework of learning.

It is traditionally held that theory is learned at university, while practical knowledge is gained at school (Ezquerra et al., 2016; Zeichner, 2010). This is certainly the impression given by the approach put forth by multiple placement programmes at different universities, despite the various attempts to implement innovative programmes in which a horizontal collaboration between universities and schools is promoted, both nationally (Gómez-Hurtado et al., 2020; Onrubia et al., 2021) and internationally (Sharma & Mullick, 2025; Sim, 2010). Creating support networks between universities and schools can be configured as a form of mutual collaboration (Mauri et al., 2019) in which all educational agents benefit (Álvarez Álvarez & Osoro Sierra, 2014; Huberman & Levinson, 1988; Muñoz Martínez et al., 2021). Incorporating pre-service teachers into these networks and generating dynamics of joint reflection between them, pre-service teachers and professors of education could complement the initial and continuous training of teachers, helping to achieve the goals set forth in the 2030 Agenda. Furthermore, we share the theoretical approach of Hargreaves (2019) that underscores that teacher collaboration is not just beneficial but essential for several key aspects of education. It improves student achievement by leveraging social capital, enhances teacher learning through shared professional development, builds professional capital by pooling collective expertise, and drives educational change by fostering a collaborative culture of innovation and continuous improvement. Each of these elements interlinks to create a comprehensive framework where the collaborative efforts of teachers contribute significantly to both individual and systemic educational success.

Towards a New Outlook: Pre-service Teachers as Promotors of Educational Change

Support networks between teachers or professional learning communities are increasingly seen as a way to implement policy, improve practice, drive innovation, create community and boost system coherence. With the right resources and support, professional networks offer an especially promising strategy for schools and teachers who experience considerable isolation and find themselves distanced from readily available traditional supports (Hargreaves et al., 2015). Drawing on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory on teacher education (Shabani, 2016; van Huizen et al., 2005; Wertsch, 2017), this study explores how pre-service teachers, as active participants in collaborative networks, contribute to school improvement by mediating inclusive practices and promoting reflective dialogue in a supportive educational environment.

It is essential that teachers have the opportunity to participate in their own processes of change, with the guidance of their colleagues and the support of the administration and specialists within their school. As active agents of change, educators develop an all-round, functional understanding of the change in which they are participating and, in this way, are capable of identifying the kinds of changes that need to take place (Somma & Bennett, 2020). Furthermore, the importance of sharing joint reflection processes should be highlighted, keeping in mind that the more teachers interact with each other, working towards common goals and developing innovative strategies to achieve these goals, the more likely they are to develop a sense of collective responsibility for the success of all students (Bolívar, 2014; Hargreaves & Shirley, 2012). In the theoretical approach we advocate, the crucial importance of teacher self-assessment for educational improvement is emphasised, asserting that this practice is essential for developing the school’s capacities as stated by Bolívar (2014).

In this regard, it is a good idea to ask ourselves whether the voices of pre-service teachers in training at schools are valuable assets that can contribute to their school’s improvement. In this regard, studies exist that highlight the need to listen to pre-service teachers′ opinions, not only at the school and regarding their experience during their placement, but also regarding their own practical training programme designed by their university (Cortés et al., 2020).

If it is clear that teachers need to be involved in change processes and that creating support networks between them and with other agents is essential to implement reforms, then now is the time to think about the current and future role of pre-service teachers, especially those in their final year before graduation, in terms of educational change and improvement processes. In this regard, White et al. (2021) argue that, since the 90s, pre-service teachers have been helping their tutors at school to drive significant change regarding the introduction of technology, as well as more active learning strategies from a more exploratory point of view in Primary and Science education, acting as agents of change.

Rethinking the role that pre-service teachers can play during their placement implies challenging the traditional practices of Education Faculties. These involve both formal practices, concerning what is asked of pre-service teachers in their papers and learning portfolios, as well as informally in meetings and seminars. Essentially, there are three functions that may be reconsidered (Figure 1). These also involve redefining the functions of university tutors.

Figure 1.

Main functions to reconsider in teaching placements.

Beyond the role that pre-service teachers can play as agents of change in schools, in the context of the responsibilities or functions they can take on, there is evidence that when teachers at the school guide and support these pre-service teachers, this in turn promotes educational improvement through the improvement of teaching and learning quality (Field & Philpott, 2000).

In a study conducted by White et al. (2021) regarding pre-service teachers Maths teachers in Ireland, it was concluded that, with suitable levels of support at the schools and before starting their placement, aspects such as interest, vision, persistence and organisation can be promoted in order to give these pre-service teachers the opportunity to challenge their surroundings and help their tutors see the possibilities and potential of the classrooms in which they work. Additionally, this question should lead to a rethinking of the role of university professors in the preparation and supervision of their pre-service teachers′ placements. This goes far beyond mere technical guidance, towards a joint search for solutions to problems, situations, or dilemmas that may arise during the work placement.

Similarly, Lane et al. (2003) conducted a study about how to turn inexperienced teachers into agents of change in urban schools in California. Their conclusions point towards the idea that tutors changed their teaching practices through talking to pre-service teachers about how they learn and the best ways to facilitate their learning. Consequently, their own beliefs were challenged and rebuilt. Additionally, “pre-service teachers were able to define the meaning of social justice and their critical agenda, as well as develop their own understandings of equity for their pupils” (p. 66).

Meyers et al. (2017) implemented an immersive and participative practicum model which fostered greater collaboration between universities and schools. Their results also showed that this kind of practicum positively affects the professional development of in-service teachers, and not only the pre-service teachers education. Other studies within the Spanish context also underscore the role of service-learning practices in fostering closer ties between universities and schools through the involvement of pre-service teachers (Mayor & Rodríguez, 2015).

Gaining more knowledge about how pre-service teachers can contribute to educational improvement can shed light on how universities and even administrations can contribute to designing initial and continuous teacher training models that promote this improvement from an inclusive point of view, facilitating the achievement of the fourth Sustainable Development Goal in the 2030 Agenda. This goal sets out to guarantee inclusive, equitable and quality education as well as promoting lifelong learning opportunities for everyone. In this context, the aim of this study was to find out, by listening to the opinions of practising teachers, university tutors, and pre-service teachers themselves, whether pre-service teachers carrying out their final practicum can contribute to educational improvement from an inclusive point of view and, if so, in which aspects of improvement this influence is produced.

Methodology

A qualitative comprehensive-descriptive study was carried out, looking to understand the meanings as per the participants themselves (Yin, 2017).

Study Contexts

The study was conducted in the context of Practicum III of the Early Years and Primary Education degree at the University of Alcalá. This was the last placement period carried out by the pre-service teachers. It took place during the second term of the final year of their studies. The placement period consisted of a 9-week in-person placement at a school (225 hr) under the supervision of a tutor, that is, a teacher with at least 3 years of experience. Pre-service teachers also had four seminars during this time with their tutor from the Education Faculty. For 2 years, study participants took part in a university teaching innovation project, whose aim focussed on the establishment of learning, collaboration and support networks among university and non-university teachers through the Education Faculty’s Primary Education Practicum: years 2019 to 2020 (project UAH/EV1110) and 2020 to 2021 (project UAH/EV1215). Through the conduct of four placement seminars that were usually led by the university tutor with pre-service teachers, joint meetings involving the school placement tutors, the pre-service teachers and the university professors were carried out. At the request of the participants, the meetings were held at the schools themselves outside of class hours, although during lockdown they were held virtually for health reasons.

The participants belonged to two schools in two different regions (Community of Madrid for schools 2 and Castile-La Mancha for school 1). While these regions are governed by national educational laws, both have the power to regulate the educational system within their scope of action. Both schools were located in towns in the Corredor del Henares area (a residential, industrial and business area close to the city of Madrid) with prominent logistic and industrial development. Specifically, they are about 6 km apart. School 1 has a total number of students of 738 distributed from 3 years to 6th grade of Primary Education. 6% of the students have special educational needs, 12% are of nationalities other than Spanish and 7% belong to ethnic or cultural minorities. The total number of students of school 2 is 565 distributed from 3rd to 6th grade of Primary Education. Twelve percentage of the students have specific needs for educational support, 15% are of other nationalities than Spanish.

Participants

Each participating school had a distinguished set of identifying features. However, both schools were similar in the fact that they implemented methodologies that are active (e.g. manipulative maths), inclusive (e.g. cooperative learning) and focussed on fostering coexistence (e.g. conflict mediation), as well as in their strong commitment to teacher training based on collaboration.

A total of 12 teachers participated in the study. In the first year, 5 teachers participated from School 1 and 4 teachers participated in School 2. In the second year in School 1, 2 teachers repeated and 3 new teachers joined the study. From school 2, 1 teacher repeated and participated in the study. The majority were female teachers between 40 and 50 years old, with 15–25 years of teaching experience. Given the fact that some of them specialised in a specific subject (e.g. Physical Education or English), they taught various groups of pupils.

Two professors from the University of Alcalá took part in this process during both years of the study. Both were female professors between 40 and 45 years old, with 15 to 20 years of teaching experience.

In parallel, in 2019 to 2020 five pre-service teachers participated, with another five in 2020 to 2021, its characteristics are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Data of the Participating Pre-Service Teachers.

School year	Pre-service teacher	Gender	Age range	Degree pursued
2019/2020	1	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2019/2020	2	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2019/2020	3	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2019/2020	4	Male	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Certificate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2019/2020	5	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2020/2021	1	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Physical Education
2020/2021	2	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs
2020/2021	3	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education Teaching Graduate
2020/2021	4	Female	22–28	4th Primary Education and Early years Education Double Teaching Graduate Certificate
2020/2021	5	Female	22–28	4th Early years Education. Teaching Graduate Mention in Special Educational Needs

Source. Compiled by authors.

Data-Collection Techniques

Eight discussion groups involving all the participants and the pre-service teachers′ learning portfolios were used to collect data. Eight discussion groups lasting around 2 hr each were held over the 2 school years. All of them were recorded. Some of them were held virtually on Microsoft Teams due to health reasons. Specifically, during the seminars, participants collectively reflected on inclusive cultures, policies and practices (Booth & Ainscow, 2011) in the participating schools, giving the pre-service teachers a voice as key actors in the improvement processes in the classrooms in which they carried out their placement. The selection of these techniques was informed by our theoretical approach, which is rooted in the principles of teacher professional development, specifically through various formal and informal collaboration methods aimed at enhancing student learning and teacher professional growth (Hargreaves, 2019). In this study, we structured discussion groups based on their content and composition, involving practicing teachers from two different schools, future teachers, and university tutors. Our objective was to establish a foundation for the development of: (a) communities of professional learning, those are groups of educators who regularly collaborate to refine teaching practices, analyse student data, and improve student learning outcomes; (b) collaborative planning: this involves teachers working together to plan lessons, units, and assessments, and to share best practices; and (c) school networks.

In line with what Heberle et al. (2021) did with transformative accompaniment practices, the students’ learning portfolios were also consulted in this proposal. Each pre-service teachers was in charge of creating their own. Generally, the portfolios included: a reflective journal, a descriptive analysis of the school’s projects and a critical analysis of the teaching practices carried out in their classroom. These were to be accompanied with suggestions for improvement based on the theory they learned, as well as a reflection on their own learning throughout the practicum.

Research Process

The selection process for the participating schools was intentional and based on the following criteria: (a) recognition for their interest and effort to implement inclusive models through projects, contracts, or awards; (b) teaching through active methodologies that favour inclusive education (e.g. cooperative learning, project-based learning, projects to promote coexistence through conflict mediation or learning communities) (c) the fact that researchers had access to these schools. In fact, these schools had already been studied in previously conducted research (Muñoz-Martínez, 2021; Muñoz Martínez et al., 2021; Sen & Ujados, 2021). The pre-service teachers were selected based on whether they were: (a) studying towards a degree in Primary Education, (b) enrolled in Practicum III, (d) doing their placement at one of these two schools.

To select and design the data collection tools, the process used varied depending on the tool in question. Concerning the discussion groups, scripts were designed by the research team based on the indicators and questions from the Index for Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2011). On the other hand, the proposed structure for the learning portfolio was in line with the Education Faculty’s preestablished guidelines and procedures.

Concerning the analysis of the information, an emergent coding procedure was followed, which gave way to the following code system (Table 2): impact of the proposal (organisational development, teacher development and school-pupil development). For this, the Atlas.ti 9 software was used, keeping in mind the grounding (number of codes related to other codes) and density (number of quotations for each code). This analysis involved a triangulation process for the sources (students, university tutors and school tutors) and techniques (seminars and learning portfolios), which aimed to enable the search for consistencies and contradictions between the data obtained (Yin, 2017).

Table 2.

System of Codes Resulting from the Analysis.

Code families	Codes	Subcodes
Impact of the proposal	Organisational development	Teacher coordination Coexistence Methodological changes Family participation
	Teacher development	Future teacher development (integration of methodologies, methodological decision-making, understanding of pupil maturity, reflection skills, satisfaction and needs analysis)School-tutor development (experimenting with methodological alternatives and satisfaction)University-tutor development (knowledge of work methods in schools)
	School-pupil development	Attention to diversityLogical-mathematical learningLiteracy learningMotivationSocio-emotional skills

Source. Compiled by authors.

All participants were informed of the research objectives, the fact that participation is voluntary, and the ethical uses of the results by the research team. Additionally, they all signed an informed consent form. The research obtained a favourable opinion from the University of Alcalá’s Research Ethics Committee.

Results

The emergent data analysis gave a series of results concerning the impact of the proposal on the organisational development of the school, the professional development of the teachers and the pupils’ learning development.

Pre-Service Teachers as Agents of Change: Effect on Organisational Processes

The benefits regarding educational organisation were mainly focussed on the improvement of teacher coordination, coexistence, the implementation of methodological changes across the institution and the active participation of families in educational processes. Specifically, in the context of the improvement of teacher coordination, the fact of having reflection spaces shared by teachers and pre-service teachers was significant, as this promoted the creation of projects that incorporated a range of subjects, levels, classrooms, teachers, etc., as well as the participation in shared reflection processes regarding teaching practices: “I don’t teach Science, but I am familiar with what my colleagues do. In Arts and Crafts, in line with what they do in Science, we do lots of projects that relate to the Science topics they’re working on” (discussion group, 5:20); “I really liked reflecting, [. . .] both as a group and individual[ly], on things that don’t lead to good results or that [cause] difficulties, etc. That’s one of the objectives [. . .]. I think that it’s helped a lot” (discussion group, 1:10).

Regarding the management of coexistence at school, it was clear that it improved thanks to, among other aspects, the fact that the pre-service teachers designed projects and applied certain techniques as agents of change:

You’ve just heard a rap song, okay? And it is the final product of the project we’ve been working on during this placement. This project can be understood in the context of the preparation, by both people [(pre-service teachers and tutor)], of very broad, open, flexible activities and proposals with a real-world purpose [. . .]. It’s leading to an improvement in coexistence (discussion group, 1:18).

We did an activity in which the pupils had to write down their name on a piece of paper. Then, they had to pass it around the whole class for their classmates to write something positive about them. This activity helped to improve relationships within the group and the students’ self-esteem, [as an] essential factor in interpersonal relationships. They also realised that everyone had lots of positive qualities and they felt greatly valued by the group (learning portfolio, 4:55).

Similarly, the pre-service teachers also contributed to generating methodological changes across the educational organisation. This was especially related to the needs analysis they carried out during their training placement. In this way, gamified activities were carried out which had an impact both in the classroom and in the playground. This also promoted an inclusive atmosphere at breaktime, encouraging everyone to participate.

Based on another need, the aim was to fill breaktime with learning content. What we did notice, however, was that our play area at breaktime didn’t [. . .] have much playing material. So, we had a game board with specific suggestions of definitions, drawings, etc. And what we did was work on it in class so that, later, the children could take it outside. At first, [the board] was planned with competitive instructions [. . .], however, we tried to change it up to look for prizes that would benefit everyone [. . .] to promote inclusivity (discussion group, 1:20).

Among the different ways in which the schools’ organisational processes were impacted, the role of the pre-service teachers should also be highlighted in terms of promoting the educational participation of children’s families. This being said, their role was much more prominent in the development of the different initiatives than in their design and assessment.

The aim is to make the school attractive both for the pupils as well as for the teachers and families. In order to achieve this objective, a collaborative art project is carried out involving the families and teachers. All families, alongside the teachers, get together once a week for a month, in order to paint the walls of the school together (learning portfolio, 1:20).

Out of all these aspects mentioned, the most common ones underlined the contributions of pre-service teachers to the improvement of educational coexistence and teacher coordination.

Pre-Service Teachers as Agents of Change: Effect on Teacher Development

In this case, it was evident that the effect on the professional development of teachers focussed on three collectives: pre-service teachers as future teachers, the practicum tutors at the schools and the practicum tutors at the university. Specifically, regarding pre-service teachers as agents of change, it was possible to observe improvements in terms of the integration of methodologies, methodological decision-making, understanding of pupil maturity, reflection skills, satisfaction and needs analysis skills. Certain relationships were also found between these areas (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Code relationships concerning pre-service teacher-teacher development.

This way of approaching the practicum, in which spaces and time for the students, school tutors and university tutors were provided to reflect on teaching practices, not only led to improvements in the training of future teachers, but also contributed to the enrichment of both the school and university tutors. In both cases, the participants confirmed that they were very satisfied with the pre-service teachers′ work as agents of change. This sentiment was linked to the teachers’ professional development. This being said, regarding the benefits gained, there were also some differences depending on the professional profile. In the first case, this was closely linked to experimenting with alternative methodologies and the fact that the pre-service teachers contributed new methodological approaches and theoretical ideas.

In multi-level activities, I still don’t have much experience [. . .]. This year we started doing them in the classroom. Multi-level activities allow us to personalise learning and discover new ways pupils can interact. They also focus more attention on the teacher and boost motivation. We organised the activities in stages [. . .] and established what needed to be done at each stage (discussion group, 1:24).

On the other hand, as far as the university tutors were concerned, there was a focus on updating their knowledge regarding work methods from a methodological point of view in the schools, as well as on how theory meets practice: “Being able to connect Early Years and Primary education with university is a truly positive experience. This placement project encourages this connexion” (discussion group, 5:5).

Pre-Service Teachers as Agents of Change: Effect on the Pupils’ Learning

In addition to impacting organisational and teacher development, the pre-service teachers also offered learning opportunities to the school pupils. In fact, this was the most repeated idea found during the data analysis.

Firstly, these pre-service teachers’ contributions to improving attention to the diversity of school pupils were especially noteworthy. Attention to diversity was approached from an inclusive perspective. Generally, their contributions were focussed on the support they offered in terms of personalising the pupils’ learning, both directly in the classroom, as well as indirectly, by helping to adapt materials and activities that were previously designed or selected by the tutor at the school.

There are two pupils who sometimes get confused with the operations and make mistakes. However, they really love doing sums despite these mistakes, and in their free time they always come to me asking for more sums. So, I really take this opportunity to give them ones that I know are harder, thereby helping them more specifically to improve their operation-solving skills (learning portfolio, 3:12).

Secondly, pre-service teachers also contributed to designing curricular activities, especially those related to reading and writing, as well as logical-mathematical skills. This was mainly observed in the implementation of novel practices at these schools, such as Number-Based Learning.

The first resource was for Spanish Language. Up to this point, the children were familiar with the sounds of the different syllables and, taking advantage of the fact that the previous week they were told a story to practise the different sounds, I suggested playing syllable bingo (learning portfolio, 5:58).

We’ve worked on maths using another new method. Up to now, we’ve worked with the Singapore method, where the pupils manipulate polycubes to grasp the concepts of numbers, quantities and grouping. Now we’ve started to work on tens and units thanks to the Number-Based Learning method. The Number-Based Learning method has given the pupils the opportunity to manipulate material by grouping/ungrouping and composing/decomposing as they please, until they get the expected result (learning portfolio, 5:52).

Thirdly, we were able to observe a contribution to improving the pupils’ motivation thanks to the role played by the pre-service teachers. Basically, this was possible thanks to their contribution to the design and development of gamified learning activities that promoted the pupils’ participation.

We travelled to space. It’s true that children learn the most when there’s magic involved, when the activities are fun, and when the experiences are most meaningful for them. So, we travelled to space. Every day we arrived, fastened our seat belts, launched into space, visited all the planets, danced, etc. The truth is that it was a really fun project [. . .]. This motivation was half of the work, because the children were really happy to come to class [. . .]. It’s a wonderful way for the children to learn (discussion group, 1:13).

Fourthly, we can highlight the development of the pupils’ socio-emotional skills thanks to the role played by the pre-service teachers. Although most of the time this development was planned, intentional and coordinated with the school tutors, some spontaneous situations also brought this about.

I decided to look through a book one of the pupils lent me called De mayor quiero ser. . .feliz [When I Grow up I Want to Be. . . Happy]. It’s about emotions and feelings [. . .]. When I started reading it, another pupil saw me and said she also wanted to read it, so I decided to read the book together [. . .]. A classmate of hers saw us and, since she had the first part of the book, she brought it over and said that she also wanted to read with me (learning portfolio, 1:33).

Of these four ideas mentioned in this section, the most frequent issue according to the participants was the pre-service teachers’ contribution to attention to diversity from an inclusive perspective. This was followed by improving logical-mathematical learning as well as reading and writing among the school pupils.

Discussion

In conducting this study, we have been able to confirm and understand that, during their final practicum, pre-service teachers do have an impact on the improvement of the schools in which they are placed. Specifically, when approaching the question of educational improvement from an inclusive point of view or, as defined by Escudero et al. (2013), equitable educational improvement, we are referring to certain elements or dimensions that are being improved, such as the curriculum, teaching, the school environment, teacher training, leadership or the organisational model.

Creating spaces and opportunities for collective reflection, mutual listening, and the sharing of success stories is fundamental to fostering educational improvement. This approach aligns with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, which emphasises the importance of social mediation and supportive educational environments for teacher professional development (Shabani, 2016; van Huizen et al., 2005; Wertsch, 2017). Research on teacher professional development over recent decades underscores that schools achieve significant progress when such organisational practices are implemented (Hargreaves, 2019). The findings of this study highlight the importance of these reflective practices, particularly during the teaching practicum. As Bolivar (2015) asserts, integrating reflective processes into the daily routines of schools not only enhances professional practice but also strengthens institutional capacity to sustain long-term improvements in educational quality. Providing safe and collaborative spaces for sharing practices and perspectives among diverse educational agents is crucial. Within these spaces, pre-service teachers, and even university professors, can offer critical insights, as demonstrated by numerous studies and guidelines promoting inclusive education (Sandoval et al., 2021).

Pre-service teachers contribute to analysing what goes on both in the classroom and in spaces outside the classroom. In this way, the playground takes centre stage as an essential space for academic and social learning. In turn, this contributes to a shift in perspective when it comes to the significance of spaces that at times are viewed as secondary or even non-educational.

Enabling teachers to listen to the voices of pre-service teachers and consider the analyses they contribute regarding classroom and school dynamics serves as a catalyst for educational change and improvement, as highlighted in studies on university-school collaboration (Mayor & Rodríguez, 2015). These activities foster the active, responsible, and critical participation of pre-service teachers alongside other socio-educational agents by grounding their efforts in a collective analysis of needs. Moreover, improvement proposals that involve all stakeholders have been developed, aligning with Hargreaves’ (2019) concept of collaborative planning, which emphasises shared responsibility and joint efforts to enhance educational practices.

The practicum is a space that allows theory to meet practice over time. It is a space where, if the university and school cooperate, theoretical knowledge can lay the foundations for practice, while practice can give meaning to theory in the daily tasks of practising teachers as well as pre-service teachers. This is also what Sharma and Mullick (2025) argue with the results of their study, as they posit that the knowledge of practising teachers could guide university professors when it comes to identifying the right resources to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Regarding equitable change in education, Escudero (2011) points out that a good way to promote learning among teachers is to highlight teaching practices and how they relate to theory. With this in mind, the study demonstrates that pre-service teachers bring valuable theoretical perspectives and innovative ideas regarding methodologies and approaches to coexistence. Their contributions extend beyond theory, as they actively implement practices that foster improvements within educational settings. Additionally, pre-service teachers play a pivotal role in designing engaging and participatory activities rooted in active-learning approaches, which aligns with findings from other studies indicating that a high-quality practicum involves students actively participating in the planning and execution of lessons, experimenting with various pedagogical methods, and engaging in reflective practices about their experiences (Jenssen & Haara, 2024).

Pre-service teachers can make a big difference when it comes to promoting education that is more inclusive. In this regard, the results reveal their participation in personalising learning through the use of support resources, as well as through designing and adjusting materials, especially when it comes to key aspects such as reading and writing as well as logical-mathematical thinking. In this regard, these findings coincide with Sharma and Mullick’s (2025) discoveries in their study based in Australia. This specifically addressed the relationship between university and school during the practicum, finding that pre-service teachers can indeed help to identify effective teaching strategies for all pupils, especially for those with more support needs. Along these lines, some studies conducted in Spain (Gómez-Hurtado et al., 2020), which promote collaboration between universities and schools with a clear focus on equity, highlight the contribution of pre-service teachers to designing materials and resources for pupils with special educational needs.

Pre-service teachers have the potential to become agents of equitable educational change, but this transformation is contingent upon the context of the schools and the practicum models in which they are embedded. This study underscores the necessity of a collaborative practicum model that facilitates reflective meetings between pre-service teachers and their school mentors, guided by university professors—a practice supported by prior research (Mauri et al., 2019). Establishing these spaces as safe, nonjudgmental environments where all participants collaborate on equal footing is a complex undertaking. It demands deliberate efforts from university professors to foster strong, collaborative networks with schools. These findings align with those of Meyers et al. (2017), who emphasised the critical role of “close partnerships between schools and universities” in achieving meaningful and equitable outcomes.

Conclusions

It is possible and necessary to develop collaboration networks between universities and schools that promote bidirectional learning. University students training to be teachers can contribute to the improvement of schools and to the implementation of the fourth Sustainable Development Goal, regarding the development of inclusive education and lifelong learning. The necessary educational collaboration between university and non-university educators can be implemented through the practicum, creating different ways to collaborate. These can even come about in the context of improvement projects designed collectively at the beginning of each school year or for a specific period of time.

The design of future teachers’ study plans should take into account the results of relevant research and break away from the idea that theory-based learning and practice are two separate aspects that are to be studied in different contexts, expecting the pre-service teachers themselves to bridge the gap spontaneously at some point in time.

There are schools that lend themselves as ideal contexts to develop teaching skills that promote equitable education. These contexts should be prioritised when it comes to pre-service teachers placements. Mechanisms should also be developed to help schools that do not have these inclusive policies, practices and cultures, so that they can move forward and work towards providing quality and inclusive education for all children. These mechanisms can include support from universities when it comes to developing collective improvement projects, in which pre-service teachers play an essential role. This also holds universities accountable when it comes to collectively building a fairer society that respects everyone’s rights.

Limitations of the Study

However, the results and conclusions detailed here should be taken into account bearing in mind the methodological limitations of the research. The main limitation is that the results are based on two schools that previously participated in a teaching-innovation project involving the creation of a support and learning network in the context of the teaching practicum, over the course of 2 years. As such, these results cannot be generalised to other schools that may not have this collaborative culture in which joint-reflection spaces have been created in order to analyse their own teaching practices and look for solutions together.

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Yolanda Muñoz Martínez

Patricia Gómez Hernández

Ethical Considerations

The research obtained a favourable opinion from the University of Alcalá’s Research Ethics Committee.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was framed within Teaching Innovation Projects UAH/EV1110 and UAH/EV1215, and Research Project “Improving initial teacher education and professional development through the Practicum: Participatory strategies for inclusive and socially just education” (ref. SBPLY/24/180225/000106), funded by the Regional Goverment of Castilla-La Mancha.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Allen

J. M.

Wright

S. E.

(2014). Integrating theory and practice in the pre-service teacher education practicum. Teachers and Teaching. Theory and Practice, 20(2), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.848568

Álvarez Álvarez

Osoro Sierra

J. M

. (2014). Colaboración Universidad-Escuela para el cambio escolar. Una investigación-acción en proceso[University-school collaboration for school innovation: An actio-research in process]. Innovación educativa, 24, 215–227. https://doi.org/10.15304/ie.24.1483

Bolívar

(2014). La autoevaluación en la construcción de capacidades de mejora de la escuela como comunidad de aprendizaje profesional [Self-assessment in capacity building to improve the school as a professional learning community]. Revista Portuguesa de Investigação Educacional, 14, 9–40. https://doi.org/10.34632/investigacaoeducacional.2014.3398

Booth

Ainscow

(Eds.). (2011). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools (3rd ed.). Centre for Studies in Inclusive Education.

Cortés

González

Padua

(2020). Visiones del alumnado y el sentido del Prácticum en Educación Primaria [Students’ perspectives and the meaning of the practicum in primary education]. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 34(2), 275–298. https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v34i2.79613

Escudero

J. M.

(2011). Los centros escolares como espacios de aprendizaje y de desarrollo profesional de los docentes [Schools as spaces for learning and professional development of teachers]. In González

M. T.

(Ed.), (Coord.) Innovaciones en la gestión y el gobierno de los centros escolares (pp. 117–144). Editorial Síntesis.

Escudero

J. M.

González

M. T.

Rodríguez

M. J.

(2013). La mejora equitativa de la educación y la formación del profesorado [Improvement of educational equity and teacher training]. Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research, 3(3), 206–234. https://doi.org/10.4471/remie.2013.14

Ezquerra

M. P.

Argos

Fernández-Salinero

González

J. L.

(2016). Transiciones formativas para una práctica docente democrática: la dialéctica entre los contextos universitario y escolar [Formative transitions for a democratic teaching practice: The dialectic between the university and school contexts]. In Carrillo

(Ed.), (Coord.) Democracia y educación en la formación docente (pp. 261–289). University of Vic.

Field

Philpott

(2000). The impact of hosting student teachers on school effectiveness and school improvement. Journal of In-Service Education, 26(1), 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674580000200107

10.

Forde

Torrance

Angelle

P. S.

(2021). Caring practices and social justice leadership: Case studies of school principals in Scotland and USA. School Leadership and Management, 41(3), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1866526

11.

García-Noblejas

B. P.

Barceló-Cerdá

M. L.

Rodríguez-Gómez

López-Gómez

(2023). Exploring student teacher perceptions on the benefits of the teaching practicum. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), 242–257. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1384

12.

Gómez-Hurtado

Moya-Maya

García-Rodríguez

M. P.

(2020). Aprendizaje-servicio en la formación inicial de docentes en la Universidad de Huelva: el proyecto INCLUREC [Service-learning in special education teachers initial training at the University of Huelva: INCLUREC project]. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 18(1), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2020.18.1.006

13.

González

Fuentes

E. J.

(2011). El Practicum en el aprendizaje de la profesión docente [Practicum in the learning of teaching professionals]. Revista de Educación, 354, 47–70.

14.

Hargreaves

(2019). Teacher collaboration: 30 years of research on its nature, forms, limitations and effects. Teachers and Teaching, 25(5), 603–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1639499

15.

Hargreaves

Parsley

Cox

E. K.

(2015). Designing rural school improvement networks: Aspirations and actualities. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2), 306–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956x.2015.1022391

16.

Hargreaves

Shirley

(2012). The global fourth way: The quest for educational excellence. Corwin Press.

17.

Heberle

A. E.

Sheanáin

Ú. N.

Walsh

M. E.

Hamilton

A. N.

Chung

A. H.

Eells Lutas

V. L.

(2021). Experiences of practitioners implementing comprehensive student support in high-poverty schools. Improving Schools, 24(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480220943761

18.

Huberman

Levinson

(1988). Un modelo empírico para el intercambio de conocimientos docentes entre universidades y escuelas [An empirical model for the exchange of teaching knowledge between universities and schools]. Revista de Educación, 286, 61–78.

19.

Jenssen

E. S.

Haara

F. O.

(2024). High-quality practicum – According to teacher education students on their practicum at partnership schools. European Journal of Teacher Education, 47(5), 876–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2370892

20.

Jones

M. A.

Bubb

(2021). Student voice to improve schools: Perspectives from students, teachers and leaders in perfect conditions. Improving Schools, 24(3), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480219901064

21.

Lane

Parachini

Isken

(2003). Developing novice teachers as change agents: Student teacher placements ‘‘Against the Grain”. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30, 55–68.

22.

Mauri

Onrubia

Colomina

Clarà

(2019). Sharing initial teacher education between school and university: Participants’ perceptions of their roles and learning. Teachers and Teaching. Theory and Practice, 25(4), 469–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2019.1601076

23.

Mayor

Rodríguez

(2015). Aprendizaje-servicio: construyendo espacios de intersección entre la escuela-comunidad-universidad [Service-learning: Building spaces of intersection between the school-community-university]. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 19(1), 262–279.

24.

Meyers

Mathur

Barnes

(2017). Exploring the impact of extended and early practicum experiences. Excellence in Education Journal, 6(2), 5–31.

25.

Muñoz-Martínez

(2021). El acompañamiento a los centros educativos para la educación inclusiva: de la formación tradicional a la creación de redes de colaboración docente [Accompaniment to schools for inclusive education: From traditional training to the creation of teacher collaboration networks]. In Torrego

J. C.

Monge

(Eds.), (Coords.) Inclusión y convivencia en los centros educativos: experiencias y propuestas (pp. 95–114). Editorial Síntesis.

26.

Muñoz Martínez

Domínguez Santos

Madarova

de la Sen Pumares

García Laborda

. (2021). Inclusive practicum: Creating networks of learning and collaboration between students. Teachers, and the Faculty of Education, 96(35.3), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.47553/rifop.v96i35.3.89093

27.

Murillo

F. J.

Belavi

(2021). Differential impact of school segregation in the performance of native and non-native students in Spain. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.559

28.

Murillo

F. J.

Krichesky

G. J.

(2016). El proceso del cambio escolar: una guía para impulsar y sostener la mejora de las escuelas [The process of school change: A guide to drive and sustain school improvement]. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 10(1), 26–43.

29.

Onrubia

Mauri

Colomina

Arús

Ginesta

Mayordomo

Vidosa

Yúfera

(2021). Vertebrar las prácticas de maestro desde los retos, metas y motivos de cambio y mejora de la escuela [Structuring teacher practices from the challenges, goals and reasons for change and improvement of the school]. Congreso Internacional de Docencia Universitaria e Innovación, 5, 1–10.

30.

Porter

G. L.

Towell

(2017). Advancing inclusive education: Keys to transformational change in public education systems. Centre for Inclusive Futures & Inclusive Education Canada.

31.

Saiz-Linares

Á.

Ceballos-López

. (2019). El Practicum de Magisterio a examen: reflexiones de un grupo de estudiantes de la Universidad de Cantabria [The practicum in teacher education under scrutiny: Reflections of a student group enrolled at the University of Cantabria]. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior, 10(27), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.20072872e.2019.27.344

32.

Sandoval

Muñoz

Márquez

(2021). Supporting schools in their journey to inclusive education: Review of guides and tools. Support for Learning, 36(1), 20–42. https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-9604.12337

33.

Sen

Ujados

(2021). Convivencia y gestión de conflictos en un Centro de Educación Infantil y Primaria [Coexistence and conflict management in a school]. In Torrego

J. C.

Monge

(Eds.), (Coords.) Inclusión y convivencia en los centros educativos: experiencias y propuestas (pp. 313–333). Editorial Síntesis.

34.

Shabani

(2016). Applications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach for teachers’ professional development. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1252177. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2016.1252177

35.

Sharma

Mullick

(2025). Bridging the gaps between theory and practice of inclusive teacher education: International perspectives. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 29(10), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1882060

36.

Sim

(2010). Sustaining productive collaboration between faculties and schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2010v35n5.2

37.

Simón

Muñoz-Martínez

Porter

G. L.

(2021). Classroom instruction and practices that reach all learners. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(5), 607–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2021.1891205

38.

Somma

Bennett

(2020). Inclusive education and pedagogical change: Experiences from the front lines. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(2), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.6.2.285

39.

van Huizen

van Oers

Wubbels

. (2005). A Vygotskian perspective on teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 267–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027042000328468

40.

Wertsch

J. V.

(2017). Mediated action. In Bechtel

Graham

(Eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 518–528). Wiley.

41.

White

Johnson

Goos

(2021). Pre-service teachers as agents of change in the mathematics classroom: A case study. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 23(1), 54–73.

42.

Yin

(2017). Case study research and applications. Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.

43.

Zabalza

M. I.

(2022). Practicum en la universidad: sinergias entre presencialidad y virtualidad [Practicum at the university: Synergies between face-to-face and virtuality]. In Martín-Cuadrado

A. M.

Méndez-Zaballos

González-Fernández

(Eds.), (Coords.) El Practicum en contextos de enseñanza no presenciales: investigación desde la práctica (pp. 181–194). Ediciones Narcea.

44.

Zeichner

(2010). Nuevas epistemologías en formación del profesorado: repensando las conexiones entre las asignaturas del campus y las experiencias de prácticas en la formación del profesorado en la universidad [New epistemologies in teacher education: Rethinking the connections between campus courses and practical experiences in teacher education at university]. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 24(2), 123–149.