Page 37 - 2018_Jour_85-1_Societal-Issues

Schools and Societal Issues 37

However, only one study from 1998 included specific research regarding nontraditional
students in teacher preparation programs (Manos & Kasambira, 1998). The scarcity of
research led to the exploration of issues of nontraditional students in general to be applied
to the research topic, and implications from the 1998 study were included in the analysis.
The review of the literature revealed research regarding nontraditional student
characteristics and implications for university personnel to consider the needs of
nontraditional students (Forbus et al., 2011) and to develop strategies for meeting those
needs (Klein-Collins, 2011) by looking at curriculum and finding ways to strengthen
student support (Goddu, 2012). Several strategies recommended for university personnel
included meeting the needs of adult learners by providing timely and purposeful feedback
(Wuebker, 2013); recognizing life experiences to enhance learning (Goddu, 2012);
providing evening advisers and nonwork-hour support (Klein-Collins, 2011); and clearly
stating objectives, timelines, and expectations (Walsh et al., 2005). Research revealed that
the most effective program should involve a variety of ways for nontraditional students to
succeed (Wuebker, 2013).

Statement of the Problem
With a steady increase in the number of nontraditional students enrolled in higher
education (NCES, 2017), the requirements for clinical teaching may pose a significant
challenge for nontraditional candidates. Higher education faculty have a direct role
and responsibility in preparing these candidates for a successful career in education,
so understanding nontraditional students’ challenges and concerns could positively
affect the program and increase candidates’ success. Whereas the literature provided
recommendations for ways faculty can become equipped to make small adjustments for
nontraditional student support (Forbus et al., 2011; Goddu, 2012; Klein-Collins, 2011;
Merriam & Bierema, 2014; Walsh et al., 2005; Wuebker, 2013), a notable gap existed
in the literature regarding nontraditional clinical teacher candidates. The purpose of this
study was to explore the challenges of nontraditional candidates who persisted through a
teacher-preparation program.

Operational Definitions
A teacher-education program, also known as an Educator Preparation Program
(EPP), is “an entity that must be approved by the State Board of Educator Certification to
recommend candidates” (TAC, 2016, p. 2) for certification. Although these requirements
are indicative of Texas standards, similar standards exist in most states.
Two types of learning experiences include field-based and clinical teaching. Field
experience involves observation of students, teachers, faculty, and staff in a public-school
setting (TAC, 2016). Clinical teaching, also known as student teaching, is a minimum 14-
week, full-day assignment in a public school and is required for Texas teacher certification
(TAC, 2016) as well as for certification in other states.
Students are defined as children enrolled in pre-K through Grade 12 (Council for
the Accreditation of Educator Preparation [CAEP], 2015), and preservice teachers (or
candidates) are college students enrolled in an EPP (TAC, 2016) to prepare for a career in
education (CAEP, 2015). Whereas candidates are typically considered traditional students
fulfilling requirements for a career in education, some are nontraditional. “Traditional
enrollment is defined as enrolling immediately after high school and attending full time,
while students who diverge from this pattern would be considered nontraditional” (NCES,
n.d., para. 3).