New Teaching And Teacher Issues

NEW TEACHING AND TEACHER ISSUES

No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means. The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, medical or any other professional services.

NEW TEACHING AND TEACHER ISSUES

MARY B. KLEIN EDITOR

Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York

Copyright © 2006 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher. For permission to use material from this book please contact us: Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175 Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com NOTICE TO THE READER The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material. Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise contained in this publication. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the subject matter cover herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal, medical or any other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. FROM A DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Available upon request.

ISBN: 978-1-60876-236-1 (E-Book)

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York

CONTENTS Preface Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

vii Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions: Assessment, Teaching, Learning, Curriculum and Efficacy Gavin T. L. Brown Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education: The Construction of the Teaching Self in the Professional Artistry of Teaching Sylvia Yee Fan Tang The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science and Technology Teachers: Towards School-Wide Reform Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

Chapter 4

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science Lily Cherian

Chapter 5

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons Harkirat S. Dhindsa

Chapter 6

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market Deborah Corrigan

Chapter 7

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

Index

1

51

73 97

115 141

163 183

PREFACE Teaching is a profession which is so enormous and so packed with significance that the issues related to it have a consistently high ranking with members of society in virtually every public opinion poll. These issues include multicultural education, teacher training and accreditation, burn-out, teaching under conditions particular to a worldwide certain country, student behavior and preparation, computers in the classroom, parental influence on the teaching process, the changing curriculum and its meaning for teaching, budgetary problems, and a multitude of similar issues. This new book presents issues current to the field from educators and researchers from around the globe. How teachers’ beliefs about assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and efficacy relate to each other is not well understood. The general stereotype proposes a dichotomy between a teacher transmission of surface content for accountability conception and a learnercentred, deep learning assessed for formative purposes approach. In chapter 1, teachers’ conceptions were examined to determine the nature of their connections. A questionnaire survey of over 230 New Zealand primary school teachers used five batteries to measure teachers’ conceptions. Joint and multi-battery exploratory factor analyses of the 22 scale scores revealed four conceptions and average strength of agreement was determined. Teachers strongly agreed with the deep, humanistic and nurturing conception; moderately agreed with their ability to deliver surface learning in accountability assessments, moderately agreed with teaching and curriculum for social reform or reconstruction, and slightly agreed that assessment was bad and could be ignored because it does not improve teaching or learning, is inaccurate, and external factors prevent teachers from making improvement. This pattern revealed New Zealand teachers to be strongly child-centred with a somewhat positive orientation towards accountability. Teachers’ conceptual make-up was more sophisticated than the stereotypical dichotomy. Teachers’ professional learning is conceived as the construction of the teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching in chapter 2. This chapter seeks to examine the complex dynamics of preservice student teachers’ professional learning in various arenas of professional learning, namely pre-training influences, coursework of the teacher education programme, and the student teaching context. Through the in-depth examination of two cases of student teachers’ learning-to-teach journeys, this chapter illustrates an integrated framework with “teaching self,” “teaching repertoire,” and “framing” as central themes to enrich our understanding of teacher professional development in its early phase. The recognition of the central role the teaching self plays in professional learning implies that

viii

Mary B. Klein

those involved in the teacher education process, namely teacher education faculty and school mentors, need to engage with student teachers as persons and their emerging teaching selves. When preparing and structuring quality professional learning experiences for student teachers, teacher education faculty and school mentors have to work with student teachers’ life histories, their construction of teacher knowledge and the challenge and support they face. The development of institute-school partnership structure and culture in initial teacher education will also facilitate the provision of quality professional learning experiences for student teachers. Chapter 3 describes a model for pedagogical content knowledge that was developed and informed by sustained classroom based research. The model is discussed in the context of technology education and the changes that occurred in classroom practice when it was used as the basis for professional development. However this is only part of the story. Although change in classroom practice occurred for all teachers from a range of schools involved in the research and development project, there was one school that changed its practices on a school-wide basis. This chapter explores the characteristics of pedagogical content knowledge that can inform professional development programmes and the way professional developers and schools can work together to bring about school-wide change. Many researchers have identified a number of variables that influence learner’s attitude towards Science as a school subject. Since the objective of any Science curriculum includes fostering of favourable feelings toward Science as well as imparting knowledge, it is imperative that researchers attempt to find out if these are achieved. If a positive attitude is a reasonable expectation for young South Africans, science educators have an obligation to conduct research on the attitudes and factors that promote positive attitudes of adolescents. In chapter 4, the purpose of the study was to investigate the attitude of Grade 12 learners in South Africa towards Science and also to study the most important factors that affect their attitudes towards Science. Twenty-seven schools were selected randomly from Northern Province of South Africa. Questionnaires were administered to 793 learners. The sample included 422 female learners and 369 male learners. Their ages ranged from 17 to 24 years. The results showed that the following factors are highly correlated with learner’s attitude towards Science. They are: teacher characteristics [which included teacher attitude, teacher qualification, teacher’s knowledge of the subject, teacher’s personality), class size, laboratory facility, gender, peer influence, educational level and occupation of parents. Teacher characteristics are a key factor in the success of educational reform efforts in South Africa, which is still in its early years of democracy. Teacher communication behavior in a classroom is an important dimension of the classroom learning environment that significantly contributes towards a unique learning environment. In chapter 5, the aim of this research was to study secondary students’ perceptions of science teacher communication behaviour and its association with enjoyment of science lessons. Data were collected (a) by administering a teacher communication behaviour questionnaire and students’ enjoyment of science lesson questionnaire to 1098 students in 53 classes and (b) by direct observation of 20 science classes. Factor analysis, alpha reliability and discriminant validity coefficients for the five scales in the instruments using a student or a class or a school as a unit of analysis supported internal consistency and the distinct nature of the scales, thus the high quality of the data collected. The results of the study revealed that Bruneian science students perceived their teachers to some extent friendly and understanding who exercise dominance in the classrooms controlling the overall

Preface

ix

classroom interaction without so often challenging their students with higher order questions. The students seldom received praise, non-verbal support, and encouragement from their science teachers despite a large number of the teachers are expatriates with qualifications from and experience in developed countries. The female students perceived their teachers to be statistically significantly more challenging as well as understanding and friendly than the male students. A low level statistically significant difference in favour of Form 5 (Grade 10) students was observed on encouragement when compared to Form 4 students. Low to moderate level statistically significant differences between class means as well as school means revealed that teacher communication behavior varied marginally between the classes and schools. Statistically significant positive simple correlation values between students’ perceptions of enjoyment of and factors of teacher communication behaviour in science lessons suggest that teacher communication behaviour directly influence enjoyment of science lesson. The implication of this research is (a) for classroom teachers to optimse their classroom communication behaviour, and (b) for teacher educators to redesign their training programs to optimize pre-service teachers’ communication behaviour to make science lessons more enjoyable. Teacher education programmes throughout the world need to be mindful of teaching as a global profession. In similar ways to nursing, teaching has become a profession that transcends geographical boundaries in the current climate of a “global village.” This is also particularly evident in teachers whose main language is English, with their teaching abilities being widely sought after by non-English speaking countries as they enter the competitive world markets that are heavily reliant on English as the language of communication. Chapter 6 looks at the issues surrounding the production of teachers for a global market using the preparation of chemistry teachers as a case study. Some of the important issues that will be highlighted are what frames are appropriate in terms of developing an effective teacher, the difficulties surrounding clinical placements in schools as well as the clear differences between the values systems that operate in different contexts and how that affects the values systems of the discipline. Universities throughout the world demonstrate great similarity between chemistry curriculum and pedagogy courses offered in teacher education programs. Generally, chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies are about preparing teachers to teach chemistry through curriculum organization in chemistry and principles and methods of instruction applied to teaching chemistry. The curriculum organization in chemistry generally translates to teaching to a particular chemistry curriculum eg the curriculum that is local to the university of instruction. For Monash University this would mean the Curriculum Standards and Framework (CSF) and the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) curriculum documents in the Victorian education system in Australia. This becomes clouded in the case of Monash University (and many other universities), which is becoming increasingly “global” in its approach to education and currently offers Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies both on and off campus, creating the situation where off-campus students may not be local but nationally or internationally situated. In this sense then is it possible to create a Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies for the Global Market? In chapter 7, the authors investigate the content and structure of teachers’ pedagogical values that guide their everyday work at school. They have used the process of value clarification with 24 teachers to encourage them to recognize, articulate and express their own values and beliefs related to their professional morality and to their school community. The

x

Mary B. Klein

main goal of the project was to increase the ethical knowledge of the teachers. The project was carried out as a collaborative action research project in which the researchers and teachers worked together. In the first phase of the project the teachers identified 10 theses that should guide their work in the school. This process produced a list of 42 descriptive statements. In the next phase of the project, two researchers investigated and interpreted the teachers’ expressed pedagogical values in their statements by using three-step dialectical procedure. On this interpretative level, in looking for evidence for major conceptualizations the researchers were not interested primarily in statements having an outward form of a principle, but rather in the way such statements operated in structuring school values. The analysis produced three meta school values - social and communal values, relational values, and individual values - and their respective six applied school values – service and inclusion, justice and care; cooperation, autonomy and consideration; excellence, and self-esteem. The values and beliefs identified in this first phase will guide the project to continue the value clarification process with the teachers. In the second phase of the project the teachers will discuss the practical implications of these values to their school community. The whole process of recognizing, articulating and expressing pedagogical values will increase teachers’ ethical knowledge and help them to develop their school towards learning community that acknowledges ethical dimensions of the school ethos.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 1-49

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 1

INTEGRATING TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS: ASSESSMENT, TEACHING, LEARNING, CURRICULUM AND EFFICACY Gavin T. L. Brown∗ University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

ABSTRACT How teachers’ beliefs about assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and efficacy relate to each other is not well understood. The general stereotype proposes a dichotomy between a teacher transmission of surface content for accountability conception and a learner-centred, deep learning assessed for formative purposes approach. Teachers’ conceptions were examined to determine the nature of their connections. A questionnaire survey of over 230 New Zealand primary school teachers used five batteries to measure teachers’ conceptions. Joint and multi-battery exploratory factor analyses of the 22 scale scores revealed four conceptions and average strength of agreement was determined. Teachers strongly agreed with the deep, humanistic and nurturing conception; moderately agreed with their ability to deliver surface learning in accountability assessments, moderately agreed with teaching and curriculum for social reform or reconstruction, and slightly agreed that assessment was bad and could be ignored because it does not improve teaching or learning, is inaccurate, and external factors prevent teachers from making improvement. This pattern revealed New Zealand teachers to be strongly child-centred ∗

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gavin T. L. Brown, Faculty of Education, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Brown is a Senior Lecturer of Research Methodology in the Faculty of Education at the University of Auckland. Since leaving 13 years of secondary and tertiary teaching of English, ESOL, and reading, he has worked as an assessment researcher, at the New Zealand Council for Educational Research and the University of Auckland. He managed the Assessment Tools for Teaching and Learning (asTTle) research and development project for 5 years (see www.asttle.org.nz for details). His research interests include large-scale cognitive and attitude assessment and measurement, research design, information skills, and literacy. He can be contacted at the Faculty of Education, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand or by internet on [email protected].

2

Gavin T. L. Brown with a somewhat positive orientation towards accountability. Teachers’ conceptual makeup was more sophisticated than the stereotypical dichotomy.

INTRODUCTION It is generally agreed that teachers’ beliefs or conceptions about teaching, learning, and curricula influence strongly how teachers teach and what students learn or achieve (Pajares, 1992; Clark and Peterson, 1986; Thompson, 1992 Calderhead, 1996). Calderhead (1996, p. 719) argued that there were five main areas in which teachers have significant beliefs (i.e., beliefs about learners and learning, teaching, subjects or curriculum, learning to teach, and about the self and the nature of teaching) and noted that “such areas, however, could well be interconnected, so that beliefs about teaching, for instance, may be closely related to beliefs about learning and the subject”. Evidence for the interconnection of these beliefs is scarce, yet there is a recurring theme that what teachers believe about one area of instruction (e.g., teaching or curriculum) impacts on practices and conceptions in other important domains (assessment or learning). For example, tertiary lecturers’ conceptions of assessment impact on their understandings about student motivation, curriculum content, student ability, and student learning strategies (Dahlin, Watkins, and Ekholm, 2001). Tittle (1994, p. 151) proposed that teachers “construct schemas or integrate representations from assessments into existing views of the self, of teaching and learning, and of the curriculum, broadly construed”. Delandshere and Jones (1999) argued that teachers’ beliefs about assessment are shaped by how they conceptualise learning and teaching. Many teachers seem to have assessment policies based on their idiosyncratic values and their conceptions of teaching (Cizek, Fitzgerald, Shawn, and Rachor, 1995); while some use a wide variety of seemingly conflicting assessment types because they eclectically held and practiced both transmission-oriented and constructivist models of teaching and learning (Kahn, 2000). Rex and Nelson (2004) suggested that the seemingly inconsistent views of the two teachers they studied could be understood as their preference to act with honour by doing what they deem to be appropriate or feasible in the middle constrained situations of conflict and ambiguity. Studies of teachers’ understanding of the subjects they teach have shown those conceptions affect the way teachers teach and assess (Calderhead, 1996; Clark and Peterson, 1986; Thompson, 1992). For example, in mathematics, different major conceptions of the subject (i.e., relational understanding and instrumental understanding) are claimed to be “at the root of disagreements about what constitutes ‘sound’ approaches to the teaching of mathematics and what constitutes ‘sound’ student assessment practices” (Thompson, 1992, p. 133). Cheung and Wong (2002) have argued that teachers’ conceptions of curriculum affect the content of assessment. Thus, it may be that teachers who believe curriculum is about transmission of traditional academic knowledge (a combination of teaching and curriculum conceptions) may well believe assessment is about student accountability and, thus, tend to use surface-oriented, factual-recall, objectively scored assessments. From these studies, we can infer that the conceptions teachers have of teaching, learning, curriculum, and assessment are interrelated, yet, the nature of those interconnections is relatively unexplored (Dahlin, Watkins, and Ekholm, 2001). The focus of this study is to

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

3

examine how teachers’ conceptions of assessment relate to their conceptions of other significant educational processes (i.e., teaching, learning, curriculum, and self-efficacy). The most common models of how teachers’ instructional conceptions interconnect place those connections along a continuum. One end of the continuum is a nexus of traditional, contentor material-centred curriculum, transmission-style teaching, and summative assessment conceptions. The other end is a nexus of transforming, learning- or student oriented curriculum, facilitative-style teaching, and formative assessment conceptions. For example, Delandshere and Jones (1999) proposed two major foci of teachers’ conceptions to do with learning, curriculum, and assessment. The first conception is a subject-centred approach that emphasises teachers’ transmission of rules and facts assessed for sanction and verification of whether or not the student has learned the content. In contrast, the second conception is a learner-centred approach that emphasises students’ construction of knowledge through learning experiences assessed for the formative purpose of documenting learning and providing feedback. Carr (2001) described, in the context of early childhood education, a model that opposes an accountability-oriented folk approach that focuses on identifiable outcomes with an improvement-oriented alternative approach that focuses on the individualism of how the child develops. Torrance and Pryor (1998) contrasted an undesirable, accountability-oriented, convergent assessment approach to schooling with the more-desired, formative, divergent approach that integrates assessment with teaching through a focus on the individual child’s development. In a similar vein, Philipp, Flores, Sowder, and Schappelle (1994) distinguished evaluation for reporting from assessment used to inform teaching. Figure 1 illustrates this (potentially stereotypical) portrayal of teachers’ conceptions as being at either one end or the other of a single continuum. At one end lies the negatively perceived set of conceptions around teaching is telling, learning is about remembering facts and details, external obstacles hinder teacher effectiveness, curriculum is about traditional academic content, and assessment is summative for accountability. At the other, more positively regarded end, is the conceptual pattern that teaching is learner-centred, learning is about personal understanding, content is student-centred, teachers have the ability to be effective, and assessment is formative and improving. Thus, the most typical assertion is that conceptions of teaching, curriculum, learning, teacher efficacy, and assessment can be grouped into two major conceptual patterns and that these are often falsely characterised as ‘teacher-surface-summative bad, student-deep-formative good’. However, this portrayal of teachers’ conceptions about the nature of curriculum, teaching, learning, assessment, and efficacy may be simplistic and inappropriate. There is evidence that more sophisticated models may better explain what teachers’ conceptions really are. For example, Dwyer and Villegas (1993) described four broad, integrative domains of teacher life. The domains were teaching for student learning, creating an environment for student learning, teacher professionalism, and the organising of content knowledge for student learning. Betoret and Artiga (2004) have developed a four-way integrated categorization of teachers’ instructional beliefs defined by two opposing, bipolar axes (teacher-centred versus student-centred and process-centred versus product-centred). This creates four integrated conceptions about instruction involving beliefs about teaching, learning, and assessment. One conception is the traditional paradigm (teacher-centred approach), the second is the behaviourist paradigm (product-centred approach), the third is a cognitive paradigm (studentcentred approach), and the fourth is a humanist paradigm (process-centred approach). In a similar vein, Brown (2004a) found that a four factor model (i.e., assessment improves

4

Gavin T. L. Brown

teaching and learning, assessment makes schools accountable, assessment makes students accountable, assessment is irrelevant) described teachers’ conceptions of assessment better than the simple two-headed model. These examples suggest that single continua models are insufficient and unlikely to explain how teachers connect assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and their own sense of efficacy. Therefore, one of the ambitions of this study was to examine whether teachers’ conceptions were best described by a two-factor, one continuum model or by a multi-faceted model.

Attitude Agree

Disagree

Conceptions Teaching Learning Child or Personal individual understanding centred

Curriculum Learnercentred

Efficacy Teacher can do

Assessment Formative (divergent) improvement

Teacher or group centred

Content subject centred

Obstacles prevent

Summative (convergent) accountability

Remembering rules & facts

or

Figure 1. Stereotypical Pattern of Teachers’ Conceptions

The study reported in this chapter was conducted within a larger study (Brown, 2002a) in which the nature of primary school teachers’ conceptions of assessment were examined (reported in Brown, 2004a). The impetus for the analysis of teachers’ conceptions of assessment was the finding in the earlier study that teachers had primarily deep conceptions of learning in contrast to their students’ surface conceptions; yet, teachers resorted to surface approaches to teaching because of the importance of students’ passing the end-of-year external examinations. The same study (Brown, 2002a) found that, in the context of interviews with 18 secondary school teachers, 27% of teachers’ statements about curriculum were strongly shaped by the importance of passing examinations or maximising assessment results. When asked about their approaches to teaching, about half of the teachers’ comments focused on using examination preparation approaches (e.g., teaching examination taking techniques) combined with the transmission approaches to teaching and 40% of the recent changes in teaching were classified as being examination preparation combined with teachercontrolled transmission of knowledge. The teachers clearly indicated that external factors such as socio-economic deprivation, lack of job prospects, poor student behaviour or choices, and school timetabling all conspired to prevent them from achieving their curricular or teaching goals. Note that about one-third of those goals were related to passing examinations. Thus, the teachers interviewed in Brown (2002a) appeared to have conflicting understandings of how assessment related to conceptions of teaching, learning, curriculum, and self-efficacy. On the one hand, they emphasised humanistic and academic curriculum conceptions and had developmental and nurturing teaching perspectives. On the other hand, they expressed technological conceptions of curriculum and transmission perspectives of teaching with an explicit attention to increasing students’ qualification assessment results. It appeared that teachers, despite emphasising humanistic and academic approaches to

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

5

curriculum and teaching, were resorting to examination preparation processes because of the importance of the high-stakes assessment system. This early study indicated that fuller examination of how assessment related to these educational processes was warranted. Further, this descriptive, small-scale methodology could not determine how teachers connected those beliefs. Conceptions of learning (Marton and Saljö, 1976; Biggs, 1987; Entwistle, 1997), teaching (Gow and Kember, 1993; Pratt, 1992; Samuelowicz and Bain, 1992; Trigwell and Prosser, 1997; Kember, 1997), curriculum (Eisner and Vallance, 1974; Cheung, 2000), self efficacy (Bandura, 1989; Guskey and Passaro, 1994; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, and Hoy, 1998), epistemology or knowledge (Schommer, 1990; Schraw, Bendixen, and Dunkle, 2002; Wood and Kardash, 2002), and assessment (Brown, 2004a; Stamp, 1987) have been studied. These studies have focused on how teachers’ conceive each domain, but what is less well understood is whether and how those beliefs interconnect with each other to create teachers’ psychopedagogical (Betoret and Artiga, 2004) conceptions. From these, and many other possible conceptions inventories that could have been used, selection had to be made to ensure that participants could complete all the survey instruments. Thus, this study focused only on teachers’ conceptions of learning, teaching, curriculum, and self-efficacy, in conjunction with research into conceptions of assessment. The second major objective of the current study, using a battery of conceptions instruments and a representative sample of teachers, was to examine how teachers’ conceptions about various facets of schooling and education were related. The next section reviews the relevant models of teachers’ conceptions of assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and efficacy. The section after that outlines the measures used, the participants involved, and the results of various factor analyses in a study of New Zealand teachers’ conceptions. The chapter concludes with discussion of implications of these data and future research.

MODELS OF TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS Conceptions of Assessment Assessment is any act of interpreting information about student performance, collected through any of a multitude of means or practices. Assessment, according to the Department of Education in England (as cited in Gipps, Brown, McCallum and McAlister, 1995, p. 10-11) involves “a broad appraisal including many sources of evidence and many aspects of a pupil’s knowledge, understanding, skills and attitudes; or to a particular occasion or instrument….any method or procedure, formal or informal, for producing information about pupils: e.g., [sic] a written test paper, an interview schedule, a measurement task using equipment, a class quiz”. Three major purposes for assessment exist: improvement of teaching and learning, making students accountable for learning partly through issuing certificates, and accountability of schools and teachers (Heaton, 1975; Torrance and Pryor, 1998; Warren and Nisbet, 1999; Webb, 1992). In addition, a fourth conception was reported by Brown (2004a); that is, assessment is fundamentally irrelevant to the life and work of teachers and students perhaps

6

Gavin T. L. Brown

because it is bad for teachers and students, or because it can be safely ignored even if it must be used, or even because it is inaccurate. The major premise of the improvement conception is assessment improves students’ own learning and the quality of teaching (Black and Wiliam, 1998; Crooks, 1988). This improvement has two important caveats; (a) assessment must describe or diagnose the nature of student performance and (b) the information must be a valid, reliable, and accurate description of student performance. In this view, a range of techniques, including informal teacher-based intuitive judgement as well as formal assessment tools, identify the content and processes of student learning, including impediments to learning and unexpected strengths, with the explicit goal of improving the quality of instruction and student learning. A second conception of assessment is assessment can be used to account for a teacher’s, a school’s, or a system’s use of society’s resources (Firestone, Mayrowetz, and Fairman, 1998). This conception uses assessment results to publicly demonstrate that teachers or schools are doing a good job (Butterfield, Williams, and Marr, 1999; Mehrens and Lehmann, 1984: Smith, Heinecke, and Noble, 1999) and imposes consequences for schools or teachers for reaching or not reaching required standards (Firestone, Mayrowetz, and Fairman, 1998; Guthrie, 2002). Two rationales for this conception exist; one emphasises demonstrating publicly that schools and teachers deliver quality instruction (Hershberg, 2002; Smith and Fey, 2000), and the second emphasises improving the quality of instruction (Linn, 2000; Noble and Smith, 1994). The premise of the third conception of assessment is students are held individually accountable for their learning through assessment. This is seen in the assignment of grades or scores, checking off student performance against criteria, placing students into classes or groups based on performance, as well as various qualifications examinations in which secondary age students participate for graduation or entry selection to higher levels of educational opportunity. In New Zealand primary schools, the use of assessment for student accountability focuses much more on determining whether students have met various curriculum objectives (Hill, 2000), the criteria for a given curriculum level (Dixon, 1999), or merit placement in a certain learning group within a class. The certification of students in New Zealand is largely a secondary school activity during the final three years of schooling and there are many significant consequences for individuals dependent on their performance on such assessments, including retention in a year or grade level, graduation, and tracking or streaming (Guthrie, 2002). Together, these uses instantiate a conception wherein assessment is used as a means of making students accountable for learning. The premise of the final conception is assessment, usually understood as a formal, organised process of evaluating student performance, has no legitimate place within teaching and learning. Teachers’ knowledge of students based on long relationship and their understanding of curriculum and pedagogy preclude the need to carry out any kind of assessment beyond the intuitive in-the-head process that occurs automatically as teachers interact with students (i.e., Airasian’s, 1997 ‘sizing up’). Assessment may be rejected also because of its pernicious effects on teacher autonomy and professionalism and its distractive power from the real purpose of teaching (i.e., student learning) (Dixon, 1999). Teachers of English in England welcomed a new National Curriculum in the early 1990s but rejected the accountability assessments because the Key Stage assessments were considered inimical to the learning and teaching values espoused in the curriculum (Cooper and Davies, 1993). It

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

7

may also be that the degree of inaccuracy (e.g., standard error of measurement) published with any formal assessment contributes to teachers’ conception of assessment as irrelevant. The empirical research on teachers’ conceptions of assessment, as opposed to their observed or reported assessment practices (e.g., Dixon, 1999; Gipps, et al., 1995; Hill, 2000; McMillan, Myran, and Workman, 2002; Quilter, 1998) or the literature advising teachers how to use assessment (e.g., Airasian, 1997; Linn and Gronlund, 2000; McMillan, 2001; Mehrens and Lehmann, 1984; Popham, 2000), is limited. Such literature depends largely on case studies of individual teachers or small groups and tends to place teachers’ conceptions on continuum between improvement-oriented, ‘formative’ assessment and accountabilityoriented, ‘summative’ assessment. For example, Garcia (1987) described a Spanish mathematics teacher who believed and practiced assessment for improvement, including seeking out information about the quality of his own teaching, and who at the same time begrudgingly implemented school-sanctioned student accountability assessment that he treated as irrelevant. Philippou and Christou (1997) found, in terms of the mathematics curriculum, that Greek and Cypriot teachers strongly agreed with using assessment for improvement (i.e., diagnosing students’ difficulties, and evaluating the effectiveness of instruction), but were less supportive of assessment for accountability (i.e., assigning grades to students) and disagreed with assessment having a role in modifying the centrally determined curriculum. Warren and Nisbet (1999, p. 517), in a study of Australian teachers’ uses of assessment, found that “primary teachers seemed to use assessment more often to inform the teacher with regard to teaching than to inform the learner with regard to learning and that using assessment for reporting to others was not as important as informing teaching and learning”. Saltzgaver (1983) found, when describing the dominant conceptions of assessment of just one Australian teacher, ten convictions that could be mapped onto the two major assessment conceptions of improvement and irrelevance. Two teachers studied in Michigan exhibited both irrelevance and school accountability conception in their responses to the accountability pressures of high-stakes testing preparation; they prepared their students for the tests while simultaneously believing that the material on the test did not represent valuable curriculum content (Rex and Nelson, 2004). Likewise, in a study of 25 Dutch secondary school teachers’ uses of assessment, it was found that 23 tempered a summative, measurement approach to assessment, at least temporarily, with formative, pedagogical goal adjustments (e.g., giving easy tests, scoring more lightly) in the hope of increasing student motivation and engagement with learning (Bulterman-Bos, Verloop, Terwel, and Wardekker, 2003). Two larger scale studies into teachers’ conceptions that identified more complex arrangements of teachers’ conceptions of assessment have been conducted in Australasia. Stamp (1987) identified three major conceptions of assessment among pre-service teacher trainees in Australia -- cater for need and progress of individual pupils, assessment blocks teachers’ initiative, and a more traditional-academic summative examination. The first conception used assessment in a ‘formative’ way to identify individual student learning needs with the purpose of catering for those individual requirements. The second conception reflected the view that teachers are required to conduct assessment but that assessment gets in the way of students’ creativity and intuition. The third conception revolved around the use of tests and examinations to collect ‘summative’ information about students partly in order to motivate them to compete for more marks. Brown (2004a) identified four major conceptions of assessment among New Zealand practicing primary school teachers (i.e., assessment

8

Gavin T. L. Brown

improves teaching and learning; assessment makes schools and teachers accountable, assessment makes students accountable, and assessment is irrelevant). He found that the surveyed teachers agreed with the improvement and school accountability conceptions, while rejecting the student accountability and irrelevance conceptions and, further, that the strength of teachers’ conceptions was not effected by teacher characteristics (i.e., gender, role, experience) or school characteristics (i.e., size, socio-economic status, location). It is worth noting that this result is consistent with the view that teachers hold simultaneous, plural convictions.

Conceptions of Teaching A number of independently developed models of teachers’ conceptions of teaching (e.g., Gow and Kember, 1993; Pratt, 1992a; Samuelowicz and Bain, 1992; Trigwell and Prosser, 1997) have been compared (Kember, 1997) and show that three major approaches to teaching were found. The first is teacher-centred transmission of content (i.e., knowledge or information), while the second is a student-centred conceptual learning process. The third approach is a bridging one that involves student and teacher interaction or apprenticeship. The complexity of teachers’ mental realities, however, means that many teachers’ conceptions of teaching lay between, as much as at either end of, the more surface-like first approach and the deeper second approach. Kember (1997, p. 263) has argued that these conceptions are not hierarchical but rather “an ordered set of qualitatively differing conceptions” ranging from along the axis of teacher to student centred. Note that this position is similar to the tendency of teachers to hold simultaneously yet contradictory or pluralist convictions mentioned in reference to teachers’ conceptions of curriculum. Gow and Kember (1993) argued that conceptions of teaching affect teaching methods used by teachers, the methods students use to learn, and the learning outcomes students achieve. In other words, teachers who conceive of teaching as being teacher-centred use a transmission of knowledge method (e.g., lecture) and their students acquire a surface reproduction of knowledge. Thus, it is argued that “the methods of teaching adopted, the learning tasks set, the assessment demands made and the workload specified are strongly influenced by the orientation to teaching” (Kember, 1997, p. 270). Ho, Watkins, and Kelly (2001) showed in a study of planned change of teacher conceptions of teaching that teaching practice improved promptly and student learning eventually improved when teachers adopted a more advanced conception of teaching. Jensen, Kauchak, and Rowley (2001) showed in a study of four teacher trainees that the candidate with the most constructivist, deep learning conception of teaching actually learned much more about teaching than the candidate with the most behaviourist, transmission-oriented, surface learning conception of teaching. Samuelowicz (1994) showed that two teachers with differing conceptions of teaching had differing conceptions and practices of assessment. The first teacher, who had a deep, studentoriented conception of teaching, emphasised assessment as a means of improving teaching, providing feedback to students to improve their learning, and as a means of making students accountable. This teacher emphasised higher-order, problem solving, and decision-making processes in assessment tasks. On the other hand, the teacher who was more transmission, teacher-oriented conceived of assessment only as a means of forcing students to be accountable for their learning and emphasised recall of knowledge in assessment tasks.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

9

Research by Pratt and associates (Hian, 1994; Pratt, 1992a; Pratt, 1992b; Pratt, 1997; Pratt and Associates, 1998; Pratt and Collins, 1998; Pratt and Collins, 2001) into teachers’ conceptions about the nature of teaching has developed five perspectives of teaching that take into account the nature of teachers’ intentions, actions, and beliefs. Note that Pratt and associates prefer the term perspectives to conceptions, but these terms are considered synonymous in this study. One perspective incorporates aspects of the social reform or reconstruction conception of curriculum identified by Cheung (2000). Additionally, there are four perspectives that map onto the teacher, student, and apprenticeship points of the teacherstudent continuum. The most teacher-oriented conception, transmission, describes teachers who effectively communicate a well-defined and stable body of knowledge and skills to learners who must master that content. Three other perspectives are more student-oriented views of teaching. Apprenticeship assumes that the best learning happens when students work on authentic tasks in real settings of practice with learners gradually doing more of the work. The developmental perspective begins with the learners’ prior knowledge and works towards restructuring how students think about that content through effective questioning and ‘bridging’ knowledge. The nurturing perspective respects students’ self-concepts and selfefficacy in an effort to support student achievement by caring for the whole person not just the intellect. In the fifth perspective, social reform, teachers view social and structural change as more important than individual learning and so they advocate change in society as the purpose of teaching. This approach to understanding what teaching means to teachers represents a relatively complex model of teachers’ conceptions of teaching.

Conceptions of Learning Learning at all levels requires active mental processing of information, the making of meaningful connections between and among ideas and information, and repetition, practice, and memorisation (Howe, 1998). A powerful model for understanding how teachers conceive of learning is the surface-deep continuum developed in the last quarter of a century by researchers in Scandinavia (Marton and Saljö, 1976), Australia (Biggs, 1987a), and Britain (Entwistle, 1997). Marton’s phenomenographic work (1981) focused attention on what students or learners claimed as their understanding of what learning meant, their intention or purpose for learning, and the processes or strategies by which the learning intention was carried out (Entwistle and Marton, 1984). A taxonomy of learning conceptions was developed that took account of the various surface and deep ways people had of understanding learning. The surface approaches or conceptions included a) remembering things, b) getting facts or details and c) applying information. The ‘surface’ approach to learning is associated with the act of reproducing information that has been attended to, stored in, and retrieved from memory; for example, “in situations where the learner’s aim is to gain new information or add to their store of knowledge” (Howe, 1998, p. 10). The surface intention emphasises coping with course or assessment requirements and is fulfilled by consuming or reproducing information. Further, the surface approach to learning involves learners applying teachable skills or strategies such as underlining, mind mapping, or mnemonics. In contrast, the ‘deep’ approach to “learning is a qualitative change in one’s way of understanding some aspect of reality” (Marton, 1983, p. 291). The deep views included understanding new material for oneself without reference to rewards, perceiving or

10

Gavin T. L. Brown

understanding things in a different and more meaningful way, and developing or changing as a person. The deep intention is achieved by strategies that involve transforming information and integrating it into pre-existing understandings. Learning requires deep (i.e., active processing of information to make meaningful connections) and surface (i.e., use of rehearsal and repetition) strategies, goals, practices and processes. Successful learners seem to understand that both surface and deep processes are legitimately involved in learning and are able to select and implement appropriate strategies (Purdie and Hattie, 1999). However, evidence exists that learning is portrayed and taught as largely a surface set of goals and processes. For example, MacKechnie and MacKechnie (1999) found that the strategies focused on for academically under-prepared students were largely surface skills such as note taking, time and study management, library skills, and reading skills). Anthony (1994, 1997) noted that the surface-oriented requirements of senior secondary school assessments and students’ resistance to engaging in self-regulated construction of knowledge resulted in a surface approach to learning. Brown (2002b) reported that senior secondary school teachers had largely deep conceptions of learning, while their students had largely surface conceptions of learning.

Conceptions of Curriculum Primary school teachers are generalists charged with responsibility for teaching all subjects; thus it is appropriate to examine how teachers conceive what curriculum is. Most generally, curriculum has to do with the answers to such commonplace questions as “what can and should be taught to whom, when, and how?” (Eisner and Vallance, 1974). At least five major orientations to curriculum have been found: (1) cognitive processes or skills, (2) the role of technology, (3) society and social change, (4) humanistic concern for individual development, and (5) academic knowledge or intellectual development (Eisner and Vallance, 1974; Cheung, 2000). These orientations to curriculum explain why teachers emphasise certain topics, clarify the real meaning or intent of curriculum documents, and influence both teacher professional and curriculum development. Note that Cheung and Wong (2002) prefer the term orientation to conception, but fundamentally these labels refer to the same construct. The humanistic conception advocates that the student is the crucial source of all curriculum, the social reconstructionist perceives school as a vehicle for directing and assisting social reform or change, the technological orientation focuses on finding efficient means of reaching planned learning objectives through the use of modern technology, the cognitive processes or skill orientation focuses on the development of key competencies that can be applied to learning virtually anything, and the academic orientation aims at developing students’ rational thinking and skills of inquiry. Despite the seeming antagonistic positions of these conceptions, studies have found that teachers have strong pluralist convictions in which they agree simultaneously with seemingly conflicting conceptions of curriculum (Cheung, 2000; Cheung and Ng, 2000; Cheung and Wong, 2002).

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

11

Teachers’ Conceptions of Efficacy Teacher efficacy refers to teachers’ conviction or belief in their own ability to influence how well students learn or perform. Research into teacher efficacy has been shaped by two major traditions; Rotter’s (1982) internal versus external locus of control and Bandura’s (1989) self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, and Hoy, 1998). Locus of control identifies whether control over outcomes resides within a person (internal) or in activities or circumstances outside the control of the individual (external). Self-efficacy, from Bandura’s social cognitive theory, is belief or confidence in one’s own ability to organise and take action in order to reach a goal. It is a conviction that one can successfully do what is necessary to achieve or produce a desired set of outcomes. High levels of self-efficacy impact positively on cognitive, motivational, selection, and affective processes individuals need to reach goals. For example, positive self- efficacy generates effort to achieve goals, persistence when confronting obstacles, and resilience in face of adverse situations (Pajares, 1996). Teachers’ confidence in their own ability creates initiation of and persistence in courses of action that are capable of creating learning in students (Gibson and Dembo, 1984). Teachers’ sense of their own efficacy as teachers has been related not only to positive teaching behaviours (e.g., lower stress levels, willingness to remain in teaching, and willingness to implement innovations), but also to increased student achievement, student self-efficacy, and motivation (Henson, Kogan, and Vacha-Haase, 2001; Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998). Guskey and Passaro (1994) argued that teacher efficacy consisted of two unrelated major factors: a personal internal agency (“I can”) or a general occupational external agency (“teachers can”). Like Cheung (2000) and Kember (1997), they argued teacher self-efficacy represented two separate beliefs rather than two ends of the one ‘teacher efficacy’ belief. In other words, teachers could have high personal internal agency beliefs (“I am an efficacious teacher), but simultaneously have low external environmental agency beliefs (“Teachers are not efficacious compared to student home and family factors”). Tschannen-Moran, et al. (1998, pp. 231-232) argued that the general teacher efficacy or external belief factor is “a measure of optimism about the abilities of teachers in general to cope with adverse circumstances such as an unsupportive home environment or unmotivated students” and that it “taps teachers’ tendencies to blame the home and the students for student failure”. Other external factors, such as quality of curriculum resources, school leadership, school culture, and so on, may also affect external factor judgements but they are not captured in the present instruments. For example, Delandshere and Jones (1991) argued that their three mathematics teachers took the view that students’ socio-economic conditions and students’ fixed level of ability in the subject absolved the teachers from responsibility for student failure to achieve expected outcomes. Brown (2002a) reported from a series of interviews with 18 secondary school teachers that external factors underpinned 96% of the attributions concerning causes for teachers’ failure to achieve their own teaching goals. They especially focused on poor student motivation and negative attitude towards, or lack of interest in, learning and achievement. Thus, there is evidence that teachers have conceptions about important educational acts, that their conceptions seem to be interrelated, and that they simultaneously have seemingly contradictory conceptions about the nature of learning, teaching, curriculum, self-efficacy and assessment. And yet we have little evidence as to how these various conceptions are

12

Gavin T. L. Brown

interconnected. This chapter reports empirical research into the nature of teachers’ conceptions of teaching, learning, curriculum, assessment, and efficacy in order to examine whether and how those conceptions interconnected. The research was conducted with New Zealand primary school teachers as part of a larger study (Brown, 2004a) into teachers’ conceptions of assessment. The study examines teachers’ responses to a series of questionnaires with factor analysis to determine the inter-connectedness of teachers’ conceptions and speculate as to their meaning.

STUDY OF NEW ZEALAND TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS New Zealand Context In the last two decades, as in other jurisdictions, large structural changes have been initiated in New Zealand schooling and education (Fiske and Ladd, 2000; Crooks, 2002; Levin, 2001). The present New Zealand Ministry of Education (MoE) is a policy only body; while other statutory bodies deal with important functions devolved from the MoE; specifically, the Education Review Office (ERO) was made responsible for quality assurance of schools, the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) was made responsible for secondary and tertiary level qualifications. The New Zealand Curriculum Framework (NCF) consists of seven essential learning areas (i.e., Language and Languages, Mathematics, Science, Social Science, Physical Well-being and Health, Technology, and Arts) each of which has eight hierarchical levels of achievement covering Years 1–13 (primary and secondary schooling) (Ministry of Education, 1993). The goal of NCF policy developments was a seamless education system that wove together curriculum and qualifications from childhood to adulthood. Perhaps the most radical of governance reforms was the making of all schools responsible for their own administration and management, through single-school boards (Wylie, 1997). This means that each of the approximately 2200 primary schools in New Zealand is by legislation self-governing and self-managing, including responsibility for the selection, employment, and further professional development of its own staff and for setting policies within the school to meet Ministry mandated administrative guidelines and educational goals. To balance this relatively free hand, the government has mandated accountability inspections conducted by the Educational Review Office to verify that schools were complying with this legislation. In addition, legislation (the National Educational Goals and National Administrative Guidelines) was enacted that required schools to ensure that students reached expected levels of achievement, especially in literacy and numeracy. The Ministry’s national policy in the primary school sector emphasizes voluntary, schoolbased assessment for the purpose of raising achievement and improving the quality of teaching programmes (Ministry of Education, 1994). There is no compulsory state mandated assessment regime and so all assessment practices are voluntary and low stakes. In the context of self-managing schools, assessment practices are school-based. At the time of the reforms, high proportions of schools reported use in at least one class of the voluntary, standardized Progressive Achievement Tests of language skills while half reported using the same series’ mathematics tests (Croft and Reid, 1991). More recently, it was found that a

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

13

large number of standardized achievement and diagnostic assessment tools were being used in New Zealand primary schools, with most teachers reporting that the use of voluntary diagnostic assessments frequently or always altered the way they taught their students (Croft et al., 2000). There is no official certification consequence for these school-based assessments and it would appear that most teachers assess their students to identify their strengths and weaknesses in progress towards curriculum objectives and to evaluate the quality of teaching programmes (Hill, 2000). A concomitant policy on assessment within primary schools is that it ought to provide clear indicators to all concerned of student performance relative to the outcomes specified in the national eight-level curriculum statements. National testing of primary-age children against the New Zealand standards-based, eight-level curriculum has been mooted, especially at key transition points within the system (Ministry of Education, 1994; New Zealand, 1998). However, unlike England or Australia, such national assessment schemes have not been adopted in New Zealand (Levin, 2001); rather voluntary-use nationally standardized assessment tools (e.g., exemplars, item resource banks, computerised teacher-managed testing tools) have been provided to teachers (Crooks, 2002). Notwithstanding the devolution of professional development responsibility, the Ministry has also funded specialized programmes that focus on improving teachers’ use of assessment for improved learning (e.g., Assessment for Better Learning, Assess to Learn). Crooks (2002) provides further details of the secondary sector assessment policy and system for interested readers. Thus, research into New Zealand primary school teachers’ conceptions of assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and efficacy takes place in a policy and practice context of self-managed, low-stakes assessment for the purpose of improving the quality of teaching and learning. Simultaneously, schools are expected to report student performance against the objectives of various curriculum statements to parent communities, while central agencies seek to obtain evidence and surety that students and schools are meeting expected standards and outcomes. This objective has been assisted by the introduction by the Ministry of various national assessment tools and training innovations focused on assessment for learning and by a continued resistance to traditional forms of national testing. This stands in some contrast to the secondary school context where centrally administered, high-stakes qualifications assessment takes place largely to determine whether students meet various standards. Given this mixed messages around these educational processes it might be expected that teachers would have rather more complex rather than simplistic understandings of how assessment relates to teaching, learning, curriculum, and their own efficacy.

Analysis A general approach combing exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to analyse the data. In the first instance, the purported factor structure for each battery was tested using CFA. Where poor fit was found, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using maximum likelihood extraction method with oblimin rotation (Osborne and Costello, 2005) was conducted to determine the most likely factor structure. The resulting EFA structure, where required, was subsequently tested with CFA to confirm a robust factor set of scale scores for each conception. Then, having established a robust structure of factors

14

Gavin T. L. Brown

and scale scores for each battery, factor analyses of the scale scores was conducted (details below).

Confirmatory Factor Analysis CFA is a sophisticated correlational technique utilizing large data sets to detect and explain relationships among meaningfully related structures (Maruyama, 1998). Because of this power, it is able to go beyond describing an individual factor to establishing the relationships (both strength and direction) between the various factors. Measurement models evaluated with CFA may contain first and second order factors representing the meaningful structures derived from the questionnaire statements to which teachers indicated their degree of agreement. There is general agreement that the more effective measures of fit (i.e., least affected by sample size) are when the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), or Comparative Fit Index (CFI) are greater than .90 and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) is below .08 (Hoyle, 1995; Hoyle and Duvall, 2004). CFA was conducted with AMOS software (Arbuckle, 2003). Sample size is also critical as the number of parameters increases (Browne and Cudeck, 1989; 1993), with numbers greater than 500 recommended for most cases (Chou and Bentler, 1995). Other than the Conceptions of Assessment instrument, all of the instruments described here have N only just over 200 cases. In order to maximise the usability of the data set, when scale scores were calculated based on the factor analyses, all missing at random data, provided that the proportion of such missing data was small, were imputed with the SPSS EM missing values procedure. The EM procedure is a two stage process of estimating the value of missing data and modelling the parameters (i.e., means, standard deviations, and correlations) assuming the missing data are as estimated. This process iterates until the change in estimated values is minimised (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and Black, 1998). The imputed values were inspected to ensure that minimum and maximum values did not exceed the original scale and to ensure that differences in the observed means and standard deviations and the imputed values were minimal. Subsequent joint and multi-battery factor analyses were conducted using EM imputed scale scores with no missing values. Joint and Multi-Battery Factor Analysis Since user interpretations are made at the factor scale score level rather than at the item level it seems appropriate, provided the robustness of each scale is established, to use the scale scores to determine whether there was a meaningful pattern among the scales (Strauman and Wetzler, 1992). Further, if the ratio of cases to variables is low (e.g., less than 20 to 1) (Osborne and Costello, 2005), it becomes useful to treat the battery scale scores as if they were observed variables rather than as a latent factors. The imputation of missing at random data at the scale level would also increase the ratio of cases to variables. Interpretation of scale score based factor was used by Strauman and Wetzler (1992) in their analysis of two self-report measures of psychopathology, where they completed scale-level factor analyses of two measures separately and then combined all the scales of the two measures in one factor analysis. They found that the joint use of the two measures gave more meaningful information to clinicians than separate or individual use of either measure.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

15

Thus, joint factor analysis of scale scores from different batteries or instruments was conducted. Joint factor analysis can be understood as similar to multitrait multimethod analysis (Campbell and Fiske, 1959) where within method and between trait correlations are used to determine whether trait or method facets explain relationships. However, in joint factor analysis, method factors may confound identification of the joint inter-battery factors. The various scale scores used here were not designed to measure the same traits (except for the social reform teaching perspective and the social reconstruction curriculum orientation), and so it would be expected that the between-battery correlations would be lower than the within-battery correlations, indicating a strong method effect. An examination of the interbattery space more appropriately reveals the structure of the connections between instruments and leads to more appropriate understanding of teachers’ instructional conceptions. Multibattery or inter-battery factor analysis takes account of method factors (Cudek, 1982; Tucker, 1958) when constructing interpretations of scale scores from multiple sources. This procedure is appropriate when measurement models for each battery “are well-defined, but in which the traits or other aspects of performance are not so well understood” (Cudeck, 1982, p. 63). The Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) can be used to evaluate the goodness-of-fit for multi-battery factor analysis (Cudeck, 1982). Cudeck (1982) has developed a software application (MBFACT) that has been successfully used in studies using both joint and inter-battery factor analysis (e.g., Finch, Panter, and Caskie, 1999). Additionally, once interpretable joint or multi-battery scale scores are calculated it is possible to determine whether teachers have different strengths of beliefs about the underlying factors or conceptions. A simple and powerful metric for evaluating the size of differences is effect size; this turns difference in means into a proportion of pooled standard deviation (Cohen, 1977). Differences around .40 are considered average (Hattie, 1993), and values greater than .60 are large, while those smaller than .30 are small or verging on nonexistent. “When implementing a new program, an effect-size of 1.0 would mean that approximately 95% of outcomes positively enhance achievement, or average students receiving that treatment would exceed 84% of students not receiving that treatment” (Hattie, 1999. p. 4). Thus, it is possible to tell whether differences in conceptions are noticeable.

Instruments This study used two survey questionnaire inventories in order to reduce participant workload. In other words, a planned missing data design was used (Graham, Taylor, and Cumsille, 2001) such that each participant completed only one of the two survey forms but that there were common items between forms. Form A consisted of a Conceptions of Assessment questionnaire and a questionnaire on how often teachers used different assessment types (which is not reported here). Form B consisted of the Conceptions of Assessment, Conceptions of Teaching, Conceptions of Learning, Conceptions of Curriculum, and Conceptions of Teacher Efficacy questionnaires. This section overviews the instruments and reports the psychometric characteristics of each of the previously published questionnaires used to elicit data from the teachers about their conceptions of learning, curriculum, teaching, teacher efficacy, and assessment. To ease participant workload, for each questionnaire the same response format was used regardless of the format used by the original researchers. It is likely that balanced response

16

Gavin T. L. Brown

anchors will not provide variance when participants are inclined to respond positively to all items because they are deemed equally true or valuable. In other words, if the statement being responded to is something so socially accepted that all participants are likely to agree with it, it is difficult to elicit variance in response data with a balanced rating scale because most respondents will have generally positive affect towards the psychological object. In the case of teacher responses to conceptions of education as in this study, it is likely that they will view all or many conceptions as something they ought to or could agree with. For example, it is highly likely that teachers will simultaneously conceive that assessment makes teachers accountable, holds students accountable, and can improve the quality of teaching. Thus, a positively packed response scale (Lam and Klockars, 1982) was adopted containing four positive response points and two negative response points. The response format required teachers to identify the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with each statement using a 6-point positively-packed agreement-rating scale (Brown, 2004b). The scale responses were ‘strongly disagree’, ‘disagree’, ‘slightly agree’, ‘moderately agree’, ‘mostly agree’, and ‘strongly agree’; each point was scored 1 to 6 respectively. This type of response format is expected to be especially effective when participants are inclined to agree with all statements; as may be the case if teachers hold a plurality of contradictory convictions. Conceptions of Assessment. Brown’s (2004a) Teachers’ Conceptions of Assessment (COA-III) instrument was used. The questionnaire has 50 items in a well fitting measurement model (χ2 = 3217.68; df = 1162; RMSEA = .058; TLI = .967) containing nine factors (Table 1). Table 1. Conceptions of Assessment Factors, Statements, and Psychometric Characteristics Factors and Statements Improvement-Describe Assessment is a way to determine how much students have learned from teaching Assessment establishes what students have learned Assessment identifies student strengths and weaknesses Assessment measures students’ higher order thinking skills Assessment identifies how students think Answers to assessment show what goes on in the minds of students Student Learning Assessment is appropriate and beneficial for children Assessment provides feedback to students about their performance Assessment helps students improve their learning Assessment feedbacks to students their learning needs Assessment is an engaging and enjoyable experience for children Assessment is a positive force for improving social climate in a class Assessment makes students do their best Teaching Assessment is integrated with teaching practice Assessment information modifies ongoing teaching of students Assessment allows different students to get different instruction Assessment changes the way teachers teach Assessment influences the way teachers think Assessment information is collected and used during teaching

Loading

Scale alpha .73

.69 .61 .60 .60 .60 .58 .68 .72 .67 .65 .62 .61 .45 .44 .78 .66 .63 .51 .45 .44 .42

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

17

Table 1. (Continued) Factors and Statements

Loading

Valid Assessment results are trustworthy Assessment results are consistent Assessment results can be depended on Assessment results predict future student performance Assessment is objective Irrelevance Bad Assessment forces teachers to teach in a way against their beliefs Assessment interferes with teaching Assessment is unfair to students Teachers are over-assessing Teachers pay attention to assessment only when stakes are high Ignore Teachers conduct assessments but make little use of the results Assessment results are filed and ignored Teachers ignore assessment information even if they collect it Assessment has little impact on teaching Assessment is value-less Inaccurate Assessment results should be treated cautiously because of measurement error Teachers should take into account the error and imprecision in all assessment Assessment is an imprecise process School Accountability Assessment provides information on how well schools are doing Assessment is a good way to evaluate a school Assessment is an accurate indicator of a school’s quality Assessment keeps schools honest and up-to-scratch Assessment measures the worth or quality of schools Student Accountability Assessment is assigning a grade or level to student work Assessment places students into categories Assessment determines if students meet qualifications standards Assessment is checking off progress against achievement objectives Assessment is comparing student work against set criteria Assessment is completing checklists Assessment is completing checklists Assessment selects students for future education or employment opportunities Factor Intercorrelations I. School Accountability II. Student Accountability III. Improvement IV. Irrelevance

I — 0.48 0.46 -0.13

Scale alpha .63

.76 .69 .66 .43 .43 .65 .64 .62 .61 .48 .41 .68 .81 .79 .71 .55 .44 .78 .89 .62 .38 .79 .76 .71 .71 .61 .59 .81 .66 .64 .60 .59 .51 .46 .46 .44

II

III

IV

— 0.21 0.36

— -0.77

—

There are four correlated major factors (i.e., conceptions of assessment is irrelevant, assessment improves teaching and learning, assessment makes schools and teachers accountable, and assessment makes students accountable) (Table 1). The assessment is

18

Gavin T. L. Brown

irrelevant factor is a second-order factor with three first-order factors (i.e., assessment is bad, assessment is ignored, assessment is inaccurate). Likewise, the assessment improves teaching and learning factor is second-order factor with four first-order factors (i.e., assessment is valid, assessment improves teaching, assessment improves students’ learning, assessment describes student thinking). Mean scale scores on this instrument were shown to be invariant across teacher roles, gender, degrees of information literacy training and degrees of teacher training. Further, mean scale scores did not differ statistically according to school size, type, or socio-economic status.

Conceptions of Teaching Pratt and Collins’ (1998) Teaching Perspectives Inventory identifies five teaching perspectives (i.e., transmission, apprenticeship, developmental, nurturing, and social reform) by enquiring into teaching intentions, actions, and beliefs within each perspective. The full instrument involves 45 statements spread equally over the five perspectives and equally over the three dimensions within each perspective. These perspectives were developed in research with adult education or tertiary level instructors. Table 2. Teaching Perspectives Inventory Factors, Statements and Loadings Factors and Statements Apprenticeship I link the subject matter with real settings of practice or application My intent is to demonstrate how to perform or work in real situations To be an effective teacher, one must be an effective practitioner Development I challenge familiar ways of understanding the subject matter My intent is to help people develop more complex ways of reasoning Teaching should focus on developing qualitative changes in thinking Nurturing I encourage expressions of feeling and emotion My intent is to build people’s self-confidence and self-esteem as learners In my teaching, building self-confidence in learners is priority Social Reform I help people see the need for changes in society I expect people to be committed to changing our society Individual learning without social change is not enough Transmission I make it very clear to people what they are to learn My intent is to prepare people for examinations Effective teachers must first be experts in their own subject areas Note. Inter-factor correlations not available.

Loadings .59 .69 .53 .59 .67 .57 .73 .77 .73 .78 .81 .66 .55 .63 .52

Teacher responses to the TPI have been collected from a number of cross-cultural studies and collected into a database of over 1,000 respondents (Pratt and Collins, 2000). The factor structure was determined using principal component analysis with equamax rotation with reliabilities for each of the five scales ranging from α = .81 to .92. For brevity’s sake, given the large number of responses required by participants completing Form B, the strongest

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

19

loading statement for belief, intention, and action for each perspective was selected (J. B. Collins, personal communication, August 23, 2001). Wording of statements and factors are shown in Table 2; loadings are robust ranging between .5 and .8.

Conceptions of Learning Six items from the Tait, Entwistle, and McCune (1998) Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) were used to measure teacher conceptions about learning. This instrument has six statements that elicit responses along the Marton and Saljo (1976) taxonomy of learning conceptions. Three statements were designed to probe surface conceptions of learning (i.e., Learning is making sure I remember things well, Learning is building up knowledge by getting facts and information, and Learning is being able to use the information I’ve got); while three statements probe deep conceptions of learning (i.e., Learning is developing as a person, Learning is seeing things in a different and more meaningful way, and Learning is understanding new material for myself). Because these items were selected from a larger inventory there was no robust data to indicate the psychometric properties. Brown (2002a) trialed these items in a survey of 81 secondary school teachers using the positively packed response scale. An exploratory maximum likelihood factor extraction with oblimin rotation found two correlated (r = .37) factors. The surface factor contained the ‘making sure I remember things well’ (1.05) and ‘building up knowledge by getting facts and information’ (.42) statements (Cronbach α = .61). The deep factor contained ‘developing as a person’ (.55), ‘seeing things in a different and more meaningful way’ (.88), and ‘understanding new material for myself’ (.62) statements (Cronbach α = .71). These results were consistent with the conceptions of learning identified by Marton and Saljo (1976) and sufficiently robust to warrant use of the instrument. The ‘being able to use information I’ve got’ statement loaded equally on both surface (.18) and deep (.16) factors; this poor fit with either the surface or deep factor was unexpected and suggests that use of information could be seen as either a deep or surface conception. Conceptions of Curriculum Cheung’s (2000) conceptions of curriculum inventory consists of 20 items which are grouped into four major conceptions (i.e., academic, humanistic, technological, and social reconstruction) (Table 3). The statements all have strong loadings on their respective factors and scales had strong internal estimates of reliability (α range .73 to .79). The whole inventory had marginally acceptable fit to the model in Cheung’s (2000) research with teachers (CFI =.90; RMSEA = .086). A later revision to this inventory (Cheung and Wong, 2002) had somewhat better fit (RMSEA = .073), but was unavailable at the time of this research. The inventory was adapted to New Zealand circumstances by making small wording changes. For example, the item about consummatory experience, a term introduced by Eisner and Vallance (1974), was rewritten as “Curriculum should try to provide satisfactory consumer experience for each student”. Conceptions of Teacher Efficacy Guskey and Passaro (1994) reported a revision of Gibson and Demo’s (1984) Teacher Efficacy Scale that has two relatively uncorrelated factors (r = -.23); personal internal agency

20

Gavin T. L. Brown

(“I can”) and a general occupational external agency (“teachers can”). Although estimates of consistency for each factor are not reported Guskey and Passaro showed that item loadings for each factor were generally greater than .40 with only three items loading less than that value. Thus, we can conclude that the items do load consistently on the factors identified. Table 3. Conceptions of Curriculum Inventory Statements, Factors, and Loadings Statements Academic Subjects The basic goal of curriculum should be the development of cognitive skills that can be applied to learning virtually anything. School curriculum should aim at developing students’ rational thinking. Curriculum should require teachers to transmit the best and the most important subject contents to students. School curriculum should aim at allowing students to acquire the most important products of humanity’s intelligence. Curriculum should stress refinement of intellectual abilities. Humanistic Students’ interests and needs should be the organising centre of the curriculum. Curriculum and instruction are actually inseparable and the major task of a teacher is to design a rich learning environment. The ultimate goal of school curriculum should help students to achieve selfactualisation. Curriculum should try to provide satisfactory consumer experience for each student. Teachers should select curriculum contents based on students’ interests and needs. Technological Curriculum and instruction should focus on finding efficient means to a set of predetermined learning objectives. Curriculum should be concerned with the technology by which knowledge is communicated. Learning should occur in certain systematic ways. I believe that educational technology can increase the effectiveness of students’ learning. Selection of curriculum content and teaching activities should be based on the learning objectives of a particular subject. The learning objectives of every lesson should be specific and unambiguous. Social Reconstruction Existing problems in our society should be organising centre of curriculum. Curriculum should let students understand societal problems and take action to establish a new society. Curriculum contents should focus on societal problems such as pollution, population explosion, energy shortage, racial discrimination, corruption, and crime. The most important goal of school curriculum is to foster students’ ability to critically analyse societal problems.

Loading .72 .59 .54 .54 .50 .64 .62 .62 .56 .54

.68 .65 .60 .59 .57 .50 .80 .75 .67 .60

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

21

Tschannen-Moran et al. (1998) further argued that internal factor statements about selfperception of teaching competence are a poor measure of teacher efficacy because the items mix present and future or hypothetical conditions, violating the assumption that self-efficacy is context specific. Thus, the present set of instruments available to measure teacher efficacy are limited and further empirical and theoretical work is needed to improve instrumentation of this construct. Nevertheless, use of the Guskey and Passaro (1994) instrument was justified for the time being. However, for two reasons not all items in that instrument were used. First there was a need to ensure that participants would be able to complete Form B and second, a significant number of the items in the Guskey and Passaro (1994) revision were very similar in wording. Thus, the five most strongly loading items for each scale that provided maximally unique statements about each scale were used (Table 4). The total number of batteries of instruments used in this study was five with a total of 22 scales, and 101 items. Table 4. Teacher Efficacy Statements, Factors, and Loadings Factors and Statements

Internal If a student masters a new concept quickly, this might be because the teacher knew the necessary steps in teaching that concept. When a student gets a better grade than he/she usually gets, it is usually because I found better ways of teaching that student. When a student does better than usually, many times it is because the teacher exerts a little extra effort When I really try, I can get through to most difficult students. If a student in my class becomes disruptive and noisy, I feel assured that I know some techniques to redirect him/her quickly. External I am very limited in what I can achieve because a student’s home environment is a large influence on his/her achievement. Teachers are not a very powerful influence on student achievement when all factors are considered. The hours in my class have little influence on students compared to the influence of their home environment. I have not been trained to deal with many of the learning problems my students have. When a student is having difficulty with an assignment, I often have trouble adjusting it to his/her level.

Loadings

.62 .60 .55 .53 .44

.78 .66 .56 .45 .42

Participants A random, representative sample of 800 New Zealand primary schools was surveyed. In each school, the principal was asked to give a questionnaire to a teacher and another to a leader/administrator of Year 5-7 students (i.e., ages 10 to 13). Readers in jurisdictions outside New Zealand may be concerned by this process of distributing questionnaires to participants

22

Gavin T. L. Brown

by principals. However, given the low-stakes assessment regime and self-governing context of New Zealand schools, it was considered a valid process. An incentive to participants was that they were given confidential results for each questionnaire completed relative to the New Zealand means some 9 months after completion. A total of 525 teachers completed the Conceptions of Assessment instrument, while only between 225 and 237 completed the survey measures on Form B. This return rate was achieved without follow-up or any inducements. The demographic characteristics of the individual teachers in this sample reasonably reflected those of the New Zealand teaching population (Table 5) as determined in the 1998 teacher census conducted for the Ministry of Education (Sturrock, 1999). The participants who completed the Form B were a sub-set of this sample and did not differ in any statistically significant way from the larger sample. Thus, the participants in this study were from a relatively homogenous sample of New Zealand primary school teachers and sufficiently representative of the New Zealand population of primary school teachers on which to base generalizations (Brown, 2004a). Table 5. Key Demographic Characteristics Comparison Characteristic

Sample Size NZ European Female Long Service

1998 Teacher Census

2001 CoA-III Study

2001 Instructional Conceptions Study

23,694 87% 71% 49%a

525 83% 76% 63%

235 83% 77% 66%

Note: aThis figure averaged for both primary and secondary sectors as separate sector information was not available.

The 235 teachers were for the most part (a) New Zealand European (83%), (b) female (77%), (c) highly experienced with 10 or more years teaching (66%), (d), reasonably well trained with two or more years training (82%), and (e) equally split between teachers (51%) and managers or senior teachers. Table 6. Participants by School Characteristics Characteristic Socio-economic status (DECILE) Low Middle High Missing School type Contributing Primary Full Primary Intermediate Missing

Frequency

Percent

81 79 61 14

34.5 33.6 26.0 6.0

103 106 24 2

43.8 45.1 10.2 .9

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

23

Table 6. Participants by School Characteristics (Continued) Characteristic Community population type Urban Main Urban Secondary Urban Rural Minor Urban Rural Missing School size Large (>350) Medium (121-350) Small (<=120) Missing School ethnic mix Majority (>26% European) Minority (<=25%) Missing Total

Frequency

Percent

134 123 9 85 25 60 16

57.0

36.1

52 101 68 14

22.1 43.0 28.9 6.0

178 43 14 235

75.7 18.3 6.0 100.0

6.8

As per design, the vast majority of the teachers were employed in contributing or full primary schools (89%) (Table 6). About one-third were employed in low socio-economic status (SES) schools, while over a quarter worked in high SES schools. This distribution represented a very acceptable sampling of the distribution of teachers by school SES. Just over half of the teachers worked in large urban area schools and just over 40% worked in medium-sized schools. Three-quarters of the teachers worked in schools whose students were predominantly of New Zealand European or Pakeha ethnicity (i.e., more than 75% of the roll—using procedure described in Hattie, 2002). Thus, data in this study were from a relatively homogenous population of full and contributing primary school teachers, largely representative of the New Zealand population, except for an over-representation of teachers in small schools.

Results Before examining the connections between the assessment conception and the other conceptions the psychometric characteristics of each conceptions scale was investigated. In the case of two instruments, alternative models were needed to generate close fit to the data. It should be noted that these alternative models and subsequent analyses are different to those reported in Brown (2003); in that study the model created by the various authors was accepted even though poor CFA fit statistics were reported. This study advances that research by reanalysing the Teaching Perspectives Inventory and the Conceptions of Curriculum data, identifying a different factor structure, and taking the revised scales into joint and multibattery factor analyses of scale scores.

24

Gavin T. L. Brown

Conceptions of Teaching A second-order factor structure was tested and it was found that the statements all had strong loadings on their four respective factors but the whole inventory had poor fit to the model (χ2 = 296.65; df = 85; TLI = .68, RMSEA = .069) and was inadmissible due to negative error variance. Instead of the hierarchical model, an inter-correlated model was found to have good fit using the same 15 statements (χ2 = 277.062; df = 80; TLI = .68; RMSEA =.069) (Figure 2). Critical Analysis of Societal Problems

e17

.52 Social Reconstruction

.70

Focus on Societal Problems

.91 .58

Existing Problems in Society

e18 e19

.88

.56

Understand & Take Action for New Society

e21

Existing Problems Organising Centre

e20

Refine Intellectual Abilities

e1

.65 .13 .58

Academic

Transmit Best & Important Content

e3

.63 Acquire Important Products of Humanity

e4

.54 .13 Specific & Unambiguous Learning Objectives

.47 .74

Technological

e11

Efficient Means of Predetermined Learning Objectives

e14

.73

.39

.44 Learning Objectives of Particular Subject

.44

e15

Educational Technology Improves Learning

Based on Student Needs & Interests

.63 Humanistic

.77

Student Interests & Needs

e16

e6

e8

.54 Design Rich Learning Environment

Figure 2. CFA Result for Revised Conceptions of Curriculum

e9

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

25

Table 7. Conceptions of Teaching Results Teaching Perspectives Scales Statements

Apprenticeship Link to Real Settings Show How to Perform in Real Situations Effective Practitioner Average Developmental Challenge Familiar Ways of Understanding Develop More Complex Ways of Reasoning Qualitative Changes in Thinking Average Nurturing Express Feeling and Emotion Build Self-Confidence and Self-Esteem Build Self-Confidence Average Social Reform See Need for Societal Change Committed to Change Society Social Change Needed Average Transmission Prepare for Examinations Very Clear What to Learn Be Experts in Own Subject Areas Average Scale Correlations I. Apprenticeship II. Developmental III. Nurturing IV. Social Reform V. Transmission

Loading on Scale

M

SD

5.06 4.50 5.20 4.92

.69 1.17 .92 .93

.51 .49 .51

4.56 4.98 4.56 4.70

.88 .97 1.07 .97

.54 .61 .69

5.01 5.70 5.58 5.43

.85 .64 .67 .72

.58 .63 .71

4.29 3.60 3.72 3.87

1.10 1.25 1.34 1.23

.64 .84 .76

2.24 4.80 3.06 3.37

1.10 .94 1.40 1.15

.55 .25 .60

II .87 1.00

III .71 .64 1.00

IV .52 .76 .32 1.00

Table 7 shows the 15 statement means, standard deviations, and CFA scale loadings for the four scales and the scale internal consistency estimates and scale inter-correlations. As might be expected with so few items loading on each scale the estimates of internal consistency were not consistently high but the items and scales were kept in order to reflect the differing conceptions of teaching. The Apprenticeship scale (3 items) had an average score of 4.92 or mostly agree, and strong correlations with the Developmental and Nurturing scales. The Developmental scale (3 items) had an average score of 4.70 or mostly agree, and strong correlations with all other scales (range .64 to .76). The Nurturing scale (3 items) had an average score of 5.43 or half-way between mostly agree and strongly agree, and weak

26

Gavin T. L. Brown

correlations with Social Reform and Transmission scales. The Social Reform scale (3 items) had an average score of 3.87 or moderately agree, and moderate to strong correlations with Apprenticeship, Developmental, and Transmission scales. The Transmission scale (3 items) had an average score of 3.37 or close to slightly agree, and moderate to strong correlations with all scales except for Nurturing which was very weak (r = .20). Thus, five conceptions of teaching were found, with teachers expressing most agreement with the Nurturing conception and least agreement with the Transmission conception.

Conceptions of Learning The data fit to the two factor model was excellent (χ2 = 10.59; df = 8; TLI = .955; RMSEA = .025), while intercorrelation of the two factors was moderate (r = .39, p<.01). The Surface scale (2 items) had a moderate internal estimate of consistency (α=.58) and an average score of 3.85 or moderately agree, while the Deep scale (4 items) had a similar level of internal consistency (α=.61) and an average score of 5.15 or mostly agree. Thus, a deep and a surface conception of learning were found with teachers agreeing noticeably more with the Deep rather than Surface conception. Conceptions of Curriculum A two-level factor structure was tested and it was found that the statements all had strong loadings on their four respective factors but the whole inventory had poor fit to the model (χ2 = 556.88; df = 185; TLI = .745, RMSEA = .092) and was inadmissible due to negative error variance. As a consequence, reanalysis of the Cheung instrument resulted in dropping several items and changing the higher order structure. The revised model had four first level factors that were correlated with each other (Figure 3) and had acceptable fit characteristics (χ2 = 208.80; df = 84; TLI = .859, RMSEA = .080). Table 8 shows the 15 statement means, standard deviations, and CFA scale loadings for the four scales and the scale internal consistency estimates and scale inter-correlations. The Social Reconstruction scale (5 items) had good internal consistency (α=.85), an average score of 3.02 or slightly agree, and very low correlations with the technological and humanistic scales. The Academic scale (3 items) had moderate internal consistency (α=.65), an average score of 3.87 or nearly moderately agree, and moderate correlations with all three other scales. The Technological scale (4 items) had moderate internal consistency (α=.67), an average score of 4.53 or half-way between moderate and strongly agree, and moderate correlations with the Academic and Humanistic scales. The Humanistic scale (3 items) had moderate internal consistency (α=.66), an average score of 4.93 or moderately agree, and moderate correlations with the academic and technological scales. Thus, four conceptions of curriculum were found, with teachers expressing most agreement with the Humanistic conception and least agreement with the Social Reconstruction conception. The moderate agreement with the Academic conception of curriculum may be indicative of the lack of discipline-related degrees held by the participants (only 77 had 3 or more years of pre-service training).

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions Link to Real Settings

.51

27

e6

.49

Apprenticeship

.51

Show How to Perform in Real Situations

e7

e9

Effective Practitioner .87 .54 .61 .71

Developmental

Challenge Familiar W ays of Understanding

e10

Develop More Complex W ays of Reasoning

e11

.69 Qualitative Changes in Thinking

e12

.64 .52 Express Feeling & Emotion

.58 Nurturing .48

.76

.63

Build Self-Confidence & Self-Esteem

e13

e14

.71 Build Self-Confidence

e15

.32

.72

.64 .20

Social Reform

.84

See Need for Societal Change

e16

Committed to Change Society

e17

.76 Social Change Needed

e18

.65

.25 Transmission

.55

Very Clear W hat to Learn Prepare for Examinations

e19 e20

.60 Be Experts in Own Subject Areas

e21

Figure 3. CFA Result for Revised Teaching Perspectives Inventory

Conceptions of Teacher Efficacy The two first order factor model was tested and found to have good overall fit 2 (χ = 131.74; df = 31; TLI = .58; RMSEA = .074). The intercorrelation of the two scales was zero (r = .00, p=.95). The internal consistency estimates for both scales were identical at a moderate α = .65. The average score for the internal efficacy was 4.18 or moderately agree, while the average for external efficacy was 2.69 or half-way between disagree and slightly

28

Gavin T. L. Brown

agree. Thus, two conceptions of teacher efficacy were found, with teachers expressing more agreement with the conception that they have internal efficacy to overcome learning obstacles and disagreeing with the conception that external factors prevent them from being efficacious. Table 8. Revised Conceptions of Curriculum Results Conceptions of Curriculum Scale and Statements

Social Reconstruction Critical Analysis of Societal Problems Focus on Societal Problems Existing Problems in Society Existing Problems as Organising Centre Understand and Take Action for New Society Average Academic Refine Intellectual Abilities Transmit Best and Important Content Acquire Important Products of Humanity Average Technological Specific and Unambiguous Learning Objectives Efficient Means of Predetermined Learning Objectives Learning Objectives of Particular Subject Educational Technology Improves Learning Average Humanistic Based on Student Needs and Interests Student Interests and Needs Design Rich Learning Environment Average Scale Correlations I. Social Reconstruction II. Academic III. Technological IV. Humanistic

M

SD

λ

3.12 3.03 2.79 2.76 3.42 3.02

1.08 1.21 1.02 1.02 1.03 1.07

.52 .70 .91 .88 .58

3.51 4.03 4.06 3.87

1.17 1.18 1.13 1.16

.65 .58 .63

5.04 4.16 4.49 4.42 4.53

1.04 1.17 1.08 .97 1.07

.47 .74 .73 .44

4.69 4.86 5.25 4.93

1.16 1.09 .93 1.06

.63 .77 .54

Scale α

.85

.65

.67

.66

I —

II .56 —

III .13 .54 —

IV .13 .40 .44 —

In summary, we can conclude from the individual battery analyses that this representative group of primary teachers agreed most with the following conceptions: assessment improves the quality of teaching and learning, teaching nurtures children, learning means deep transformation of understanding, curriculum is humanistic, and teachers can effect learning changes.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

29

Integrating Various Teachers’ Conceptions Unanswered by these separate analyses is the question of how the various conceptions related to each other. Did the teachers conceive that assessment could be used to improve deep learning while nurturing children? Were internally efficacious teachers those who believed in nurturing teaching and humanistic curriculum? Were external barriers to successful teaching associated with accountability approaches to assessment? To determine how the scales were related to each other, a multi-battery EFA on the various battery scale scores was undertaken. To determine how the teacher participants were related to each other, a hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted. Between these two approaches, patterns within items and people could be identified.

Patterns in Items—How Scale Scores Related to Each Other Generally, the correlations between the various scale scores were higher within batteries (average Pearson r = .28) than between batteries (average Pearson r = .18), except for the two efficacy scales which had a correlation of only .04 (Table 12). The scale reliabilities were acceptable to good especially considering that only two or three items make up six of the scales. The exception is the Transmission approach to teaching which was a candidate for potential removal in future analyses. The multi-battery factor analysis, using maximum likelihood estimation and direct quartimin oblique rotation, produced a four factor model that had good fit (TLI = .92) (Table 10). This approach showed very similar structure to the traditional joint EFA, with all but two of the scale scores loading on the same factors. The multi-battery analysis removed the two teaching perspectives scale scores of transmission and developmental approaches from the social reform or reconstruction factor; a result that clearly highlighted the trait similarity of these two scales across their different methods and which made for easier interpretation. The intercorrelations between the four conceptions factors were low, meaning the four factors were largely independent of each other. The strength of agreement of teachers to each factor was calculated according to the original response agreement scale values ranging between 1 and 6 (Table 14). Note the two negatively loading items on factor 2 were reverse scored in subsequent analyses in order to give them the same negative meaning. Teachers agreed with factor Deep Humanistic Nurturing the most and the factor Bad Assessment Ignored That Does Not Improve Teaching and Learning had the lowest scores; factors Surface Accountability Transmitted and Social Reform had very similar values. Effect sizes between the four factors, calculated for the differences in the mean factor scores (Table 11), indicated that all differences were large except between the factors Surface Accountability Transmitted and Social Reform. These values indicated that not only were the factors independent of each other but that the teachers also responded to them quite differently. The multi-battery factor solution was evaluated with CFA but poor fit statistics were found (N = 233; χ2 = 846.05; df = 205; RMSEA = .116; TLI = .63). Clearly, further work needs to be done to improve our understanding of how these scales relate to each other. Nevertheless, this pattern of results gives us a potentially powerful insight into teachers’ thinking.

Table 9. Instructional Conceptions Scale Correlations and Reliabilities Scales

Teaching 1. Nurturing 2. Apprenticeship 3. Transmission 4. Social Reform 5. Development Learning 6. Deep 7. Surface Efficacy 8. External 9. Internal Assessment 10. Bad 11. Ignore 12. Inaccurate 13. Valid 14. Describe 15. Improve Teaching 16. Improve Learning 17. School Accountability 18. Student Accountability Curriculum 19. Social Reconstruction 20. Academic 21. Technological 22. Humanistic

1

2

Teaching 3

4

5

Learning 6 7

(.67) .39 .17 .28 .46

(.50) .32 .36 .50

(.37) .44 .49

(.78) .57

(.64)

.54 .16

.40 .22

.15 .43

.23 .21

.41 .16

(.61) .31

(.58)

-.18 .15

-.02 .33

.09 .37

.03 .27

-.09 .19

-.08 .21

.09 .27

(.65) .04 (.65)

-.07 -.05 .13 .08 .22 .24 .24 .13 .08

-.08 -.10 .12 .14 .29 .31 .35 .32 .23

.10 .06 -.04 .34 .39 .13 .20 .40 .46

.09 .16 .16 .20 .14 .10 .17 .31 .22

-.06 -.01 .11 .20 .26 .23 .28 .28 .25

-.06 -.04 .14 .11 .29 .34 .25 .08 .15

.02 -.03 .11 .28 .30 .19 .19 .36 .41

.31 .25 .09 -.07 -.10 -.17 -.18 .03 .19

.14 .24 .27 .42

.26 .34 .37 .23

.42 .41 .27 .06

.53 .30 .16 .06

.32 .38 .33 .12

.06 .26 .21 .26

.22 .37 .27 .15

.07 -.00 -.02 -.04

Note: Scale alpha reliabilities in brackets. Within-battery correlations in bold.

Efficacy 8 9

Assessment 13 14 15

10

11

12

.08 .07 .07 .28 .31 .2 .25 .38 .29

(.68) .61 .28 -.28 -.33 -.39 -.42 -.08 .32

(.78) .28 -.32 -.33 -.45 -.45 -.09 .18

(.63) -.31 -.22 -.11 -.18 -.04 .09

(.73) .60 .42 .57 .45 .30

(.78) .65 .66 .49 .31

.32 .41 .18 .15

.14 .02 .14 .03

.08 .01 -.21 -.02

.19 .23 .05 .11

.22 .35 .34 .13

.11 .41 .48 .22

16

17

18

Curriculum 19 20 21

22

(.68) .66 (.79) .34 .44 (.81) .12 .13 .41 (.75) .07 .33 .41 .26

.20 .29 .38 .25

.35 .44 .33 .17

.31 (.85) .39 .47 (.65) .32 .14 .40 (.67) .18 .13 .28 .38 (.66)

Table 10. Multi-battery EFA Results for Conceptions of Teaching, Learning, Curriculum, Teacher Efficacy and Assessment Multi-battery Factor Analysis Scales

11. Ignore 10. Bad 12. Inaccurate 16. Improve Learning 15. Improve Teaching 8. External 18. Student Accountability 7. Surface 20. Academic 3. Transmission 17. School Accountability 21. Technological 13. Valid 14. Describe 9. Internal 4. Social Reform 19. Social Reconstruction 1. Nurturing 22. Humanistic 6. Deep 5. Development 2. Apprenticeship

Ignore Bad Assessment, Not Improve Teaching and Learning

Surface Accountability Transmitted

Social Change

Nurturing Deep Development

.83 .77 .49 -.43 -.34 .23 .19 -.01 .04 -.01 -.13 -.11 -.31 -.32 .02 .06 .03 .00 .04 .00 -.02 -.05

.04 .11 .04 .14 .18 .17 .50 .50 .48 .46 .43 .35 .35 .35 .24 .00 .12 -.07 .15 -.02 .04 .09

.08 .00 .08 .11 -.03 -.00 .01 .04 .08 .20 .20 -.07 .10 -.04 .13 .72 .59 .07 -.12 .05 .27 .16

.28 .01 .28 .17 .17 -.17 .02 -.00 .28 -.15 .00 .29 -.03 .17 .05 .09 -.07 .39 .38 .37 .29 .27

Table 10. Multi-battery EFA Results for Conceptions of Teaching, Learning, Curriculum, Teacher Efficacy and Assessment (Continued) Inter-factor Correlations I II III IV

1.00

-.08 1.00

.02 .39 1.00

-.19 .26 .23 1.00

Note. The strongest loadings are shown in bold.

Table 11. Multi-Battery EFA Factor Results

Number of Scales Alpha Estimate of Internal Consistency M SD Effect Size Differences I. Bad Assessment Ignored II. Surface Accountability Transmitted III. Social Reform IV. Deep Humanistic Nurturing

Bad Assessment Ignored

Surface Accountability Transmitted

Social Reform

Deep Humanistic Nurturing

6 .74 2.92 .53

9 .84 3.67 .52

2 .69 3.45 .81

5 .75 5.02 .47

—

1.43 —

.79 .33 —

4.20 2.73 2.45 —

Table 12. Mean Scale Scores by Teacher Conceptual Cluster

4.29

5.20

5.44

4.85

2.99

4.04

5.54

4.99

3.87

4.50

4.94

5.40

4.41

3.61

4.08

5.40

5.05

2.96

3.14

4.56

5.23

3.66

2.25

3.44

5.29

4.58

3.27

3.82

4.44

4.95

3.62

3.08

3.81

5.63

5.14

3.52

4.16

4.98

5.26

4.04

2.60

4.01

5.44

4.91

3.36

3.88

4.69

5.14

3.86

2.88

3.82

Hum.

4.10

Tech.

5.53

Acad.

5.67

Soc. Recon.

3.23

Stud. Acc.

3.00

Schl. Acc.

2.95

Impr. Lrng.

Int.

4.74

Impr. Tchg.

Ext.

3.99

Desc.

Surf.

2.93

Valid

Deep

2.50

Inac.

Devel.

4.43

Curriculum

Ign.

Soc. Ref.

4.99

Assessment

Bad

Trans.

Teacher Efficacy

Appren.

1 (32) 2 (17) 3 (26) 4 (19) 5 (55) 6 (84) Total (233)

Learning

Nurt.

Clus. (N)

Teaching Perspectives

2.8 7 2.4 1 3.7 4 2.0 4 3.0 0 2.3 4 2.7 1

2.6 1 1.5 4 3.4 0 1.6 8 2.4 0 1.9 6 2.2 6

3.8 0 3.8 0 4.3 7 3.7 7 3.6 4 3.6 9 3.7 8

2.3 8 4.1 9 3.0 6 2.9 5 3.2 0 3.7 3 3.3 1

3.0 7 4.7 2 3.8 1 3.7 6 3.5 6 4.3 3 3.9 0

3.6 8 4.9 1 4.0 8 4.5 8 3.8 1 4.7 1 4.2 9

3.1 0 4.7 4 3.5 0 3.9 8 3.5 1 4.2 6 3.8 5

1.9 0 3.8 8 3.0 2 2.4 1 2.6 4 3.3 0 2.8 9

2.8 6 4.2 3 4.2 3 2.9 4 3.3 0 3.6 3 3.5 0

2.3 3 3.7 6 3.2 5 2.4 3 2.9 8 3.2 3 3.0 2

2.9 2 4.8 2 4.1 3 3.6 7 3.4 8 4.2 7 3.8 7

3.9 9 5.3 9 4.6 2 4.4 6 4.0 8 4.8 2 4.5 2

4.7 7 5.4 9 5.0 5 4.5 3 4.5 5 5.1 8 4.9 3

Note. Bold figures represent mostly agree or greater; italic figures represent less than slightly agree; underlined figures represent disagree.

34

Gavin T. L. Brown

Assess AccSch

Assess Valid Assess Describe

Learn Surface T.Eff. Internal

Assess AccStud

.64 .51

.68 .71 .54

Curric. Tech

.52 .57

.66

Curric. Acad TPI Transmission

.59

e7

Surface Acc. Trans. Assess Bad

.54

Assess Ignore

e1

e2

.58

.97

.22 Assess Inaccurate

Bad Assess Ignored

-.62

.24

T.Eff. External

e3

e4

.78 .85 Assess Tchg Imp

Teachers' Conceptions e6

Assess Lrng Imp

e5

e27

.63 TPI Nurture

e17

.68 .65

Deep Humanistic .59 Nurturing

Learn Deep

.40 Curric. Humanist .66

e19

.68 TPI Apprentice

e20

e16

TPI Development

.72

Social Reform e26

e18

TPI Reform

.74 Curric. Recon.

Figure 4. Multi-battery Factor Analysis of Teachers’ Integrated Conceptions

e23

e22

e25

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

35

The first factor (Bad Assessment Ignored that Does Not Improve Teaching and Learning) involved scales from assessment, curriculum, and efficacy and was interpreted to mean assessment is bad and can be ignored because it does not improve teaching or learning, it is inaccurate, is associated with a technological curriculum approach, and external factors prevent teachers from making improvement. Teachers only slightly agreed with this factor (Figure 4) clearly suggesting that they fundamentally did not agree with assessment systems that did not support improvements in teaching and learning. This is an interesting affirmation of the large body of literature that argues high-stakes national assessment has negative impacts on teachers, curriculum, and teaching (Cannell, 1989; Cooper and Davies, 1993; Delandshere and Jones, 1999; Firestone, Mayrowetz, and Fairman, 1998; Hamilton, 2003; Kohn, 1999; Noble and Smith, 1994; Smith and Fey, 2000; Smith and Rottenberg, 1991). These teachers appeared to recognise that such systems must be resisted and it may be legitimately inferred that if assessment assisted improvements in education then it would not be considered bad or ignored. The second factor (Surface Accountability Transmitted) involved scales from assessment, curriculum, teaching, and efficacy and was understood to mean that a teacher would be confident that he or she could deliver surface learning through direct transmission and technological means of academic material for school and student accountability purposes and that the results would describe in a valid fashion that kind of learning. Teachers gave moderate agreement to this conception and what is of most concern here is the association of accountability assessments with surface learning. It is probably not the case that the portrayal of external high-stakes assessments as being fundamentally measures of basic fact and procedures is a function of teacher prejudice; it is probably the case that such assessments are surface (Hamilton, 2003; National Research Council, 2001). Further, as long as teachers conceive of externally mandated assessments as measuring only surface academic material (whether developers have been successful in transforming such assessments or not), it may well be that the ambitious goals of reforming education through educational assessment (e.g., Resnick and Resnick, 1989) are doomed. The third factor (Social Reform) involved scales from teaching and curriculum only and clearly focused on the role of instruction and curriculum to reform or reconstruct society through a deliberate focus on social issues and problems. This result is consistent with the notion that these two scales measure the same trait, despite being derived from different methods. Teachers only moderately agreed with this conception; a response reminiscent of claims that schools are agents of social reproduction not transformation (Bourdieu, 1974; Harker, 1982). The fourth factor (Deep Humanistic Nurturing) involved scales from teaching, curriculum, and learning and was interpreted to mean that teachers associated deep learning with nurturing, developmental, apprenticeship teaching and humanistic curriculum. Teachers had the highest level of agreement for this conception, mostly agreeing. This factor is very similar to Betoret and Artiga’s (2004) cognitive or student-centred paradigm and Kember’s (1997) student-centred conceptual learning approach. What is of concern here, in what may be seen as the most stereotypical view of what primary school instruction is about, is the absence of any of the assessment conceptions within this factor. This analysis suggests that teachers profoundly believed that such deep transformative learning can not be assessed; a matter of some serious concern for both assessment developers or publishers and policy officials.

36

Gavin T. L. Brown

Patterns in People—How Teachers Related to Each Other An examination of how the conceptions related to each other was done by examining how the teachers could be classified using the scale scores. This analysis examines the pattern of distribution of the conceptions both in their scale and factor conditions—it answers the question of what patterns of conceptions can be found among teachers. Hierarchical cluster analysis of between-groups linkages across the 22 conceptions scale scores, using squared Euclidean distances, led to six clusters of teachers based on their responses across the scales (Table 12). Discriminant analysis with the 22 scale scores correctly placed 87.1% of the 233 teachers in their original clusters and 68.2% of the 233 teachers were correctly placed in their original clusters using just the four multi-battery factor scales. Thus, there was considerable accuracy in using these scales or factors to assign teachers and administrators to clustered conceptual patterns. Table 13. Multi-Battery Factors by Teachers’ Conceptual Clusters Multi-Battery Factors Ignore Bad Surface Assessment, Not Social Accountability Improve Teaching Change Transmitted and Learning

Nurturing Deep Development

Cluster

N

1

32

M

L

L

M

2

17

L

M

M

H

3

26

M

M

M

H

4

19

L

M

L

M

5

55

M

M

M

M

6

84

L

M

M

H

Cluster Description

Cautious, traditionalist, child-centred, antiassessment Progressive, childcentred, deep learning, positive users of assessment Child-centred, developmental, deep learning, assessment tolerant Conservative, childcentred, antiassessment, capable Conservative, childcentred, deep learning, no to accountability assessment Holistic, child-centred, capable, deep learning, users of assessment

Most values fell between slightly agree (3.0) and mostly agree (5.0) and thus those below or above those values are useful in determining the meaning of each cluster. There were six scale scores that fell in the same range for all clusters and thus these scales were not useful for discriminating among the teachers (i.e., all had high values for the Nurturing perspective on teaching; all had middle values for Internal teacher efficacy, Inaccurate, Describe, Improve

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

37

Teaching, and Improve Learning conceptions of assessment). The remaining 16 scale scores were useful in describing the mental conceptions of the six clusters of teachers. The multibattery factor analysis results were mapped onto these clusters and mean scores were classified by whether they were Low (less than 3.0), High (more than 5.0), or Medium (between 3.0 and 5.0). Six clear patterns of factor scores were evident across the clusters (Table 13). When viewed in two dimensions (based on the first two canonical discriminant functions only—these accounted for 91.8% of variance with 22 scales and 98.5% of variance with four multi-battery factors), two major axes through the cluster centroids became apparent (Figure 5). The vertical axis was understood to reflect at the positive end a positive orientation towards assessment and the negative end reflected a negative orientation towards assessment. The bubbles used to represent each cluster are placed at the cluster centroid and are drawn relative to the number of teachers in each cluster; in other words the larger the bubble the more teachers represented by the cluster of conceptions. The first horizontal axis placed cluster 1 at the most negative point, clusters 5 and 6 in the middle region, and cluster 2 at the most positive point. The second horizontal axis cut through the middle of the first axis and had cluster 3 at the most positive point and cluster 4 at the most negative point. The horizontal axis represented at the negative end a cautious or conservative position with the positive end characterised by a progressive approach to education.

Attitude 6.0 Strongly Agree

Integrated Conceptions Teaching Learning

Curriculum

Efficacy

Assessment

Deep learning, humanistic curriculum, nurturing teaching 5.0 Mostly Agree 4.0 Moderately Agree 3.0 Slightly Agree

Surface learning, accountability assessment, transmission teaching, effective Social reform/reconstruction curriculum & teaching

2.0 Disagree

Bad (not improving) assessment ignored

1.0 Strongly Disagree Figure 5. Hierarchical Clusters of Teachers’ Conceptions

Holistic, Child-Centred, Capable, Deep Learning, Users of Assessment Cluster 6 was the largest cluster (N = 84, 36%) and was at the centre point of the teachers’ conceptual patterns. These teachers agreed with Apprenticeship and Developmental teaching perspectives, Deep views of learning, and Humanistic curriculum, while disagreeing with External teacher efficacy and the Bad conception of assessment. This cluster consisted of

38

Gavin T. L. Brown

holistic, child-centred teachers who do not see assessment as bad, nor do they believe external factors prevent them from making sure students learn deep processing. In terms of the multibattery factors, the teachers mostly agreed with the deep, humanistic, development factor and slightly agreed with the factor to do with ignoring bad assessment that is not linked to improving teaching and learning.

Conservative, Child-Centred, Deep Learning, no to Accountability Assessment Cluster 5, the next biggest group (N = 55, 24%) were somewhat more negative than cluster 6, in that they explicitly rejected the Social Reconstruction approach to curriculum and the use of assessment for School Accountability, while like the first cluster, they agreed with the Deep view of learning. This cluster was characteristic of politically conservative, childcentred teachers who valued deep learning and who disagreed with the use of assessment to make schools and teachers accountable. The teachers in this cluster fell between slightly and moderately agree for all four multi-battery factors. Cautious, Traditionalist, Child-Centred, Anti-Assessment Cluster 1, the third largest (N = 32, 14%) were the most negative disagreeing with the Transmission and Social Reform perspectives of teaching, the Surface view of learning, the Academic approach to curriculum. Further, they disagreed with both the School and Student Accountability conceptions of assessment and, though agreeing that assessment was not bad, they did not agree assessment was Valid. Cluster 1 appeared to be made up of very cautious, traditionalist, child-centred teachers who were opposed to assessment in general. This cluster of teachers was noted primarily for its relatively negative position (i.e., slight agreement) towards the surface accountability transmitted and social reform multi-battery factors. Progressive, Child-Centred, Deep Learning, Positive Users of Assessment At the opposite end of the same spectrum was Cluster 2, the smallest (N = 17, 7%). These teachers agreed with Apprenticeship and Developmental perspectives of teaching, Deep views of learning, and both Humanistic and Technological approaches to curriculum. They disagreed the conception that assessment was Bad. This cluster represented progressive, child-centred teachers who used assessment for multiple purposes with the goal of achieving deep learning. This cluster of teachers agreed with the deep humanistic development multibattery factor and disagreed with the ignoring bad assessment that is not linked to improving teaching and learning factor. Child-Centred, Developmental, Deep Learning, Assessment Tolerant Cluster 3, the fourth largest (N = 26, 11%) were closest to Cluster 5, and agreed with the Apprenticeship and Developmental perspectives on teaching, Deep learning, and Humanistic teaching. This group of teachers focused on child-centred, development of deep processing, while tolerating assessment. This cluster of teachers had strong agreement about the deep humanistic development multi-battery factor. Conservative, Child-Centred, Anti-Assessment, Capable Cluster 4, the second smallest (N = 19, 8%), were closest to Cluster 1. They agreed with the Apprenticeship perspective on teaching and Deep views of Learning, but their

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

39

conceptions were largely negative. They disagreed with the Transmission perspective of teaching, the social Reconstruction approach to curriculum, and did not agree that External obstacles impacted on their efficacy. They also disagreed with both Accountability conceptions of assessment, and did not agree that assessment was Valid or Bad. This cluster consisted of child-centred, conservative teachers who were opposed to accountability uses of assessment, rejected the validity of assessment and telling approaches to teaching, and were confident that they could overcome external obstacles to learning. This cluster of teachers disagreed with two of the multi-battery factors: ignoring bad assessment that is not linked to improving teaching and learning and social reform.

CONCLUSION It is argued from these analyses that teachers’ conceptions of curriculum, teaching, learning, teacher efficacy, and assessment group into four meaningful factors and that this

40

Gavin T. L. Brown

sample of teachers exhibited six different patterns of conception. The first factor, was a strong agreement that deep learning is child-centred; the second, was a moderate agreement that accountability assessment of surface learning could be achieved through direct instruction. The third factor was a moderate agreement that education should be about social change and reform. The fourth factor was a disagreement with the conception that assessment was bad for teaching and learning and could be ignored. Cluster analysis of those four factors meaningfully identified six different mindsets which were arranged on two axes—a cautious/conservative to progressive scale and a pro to anti-assessment orientation. The six clusters were described as, in descending order of size: (6) holistic, child-centred, capable, deep learning, users of assessment; (5) conservative, child-centred, deep learning, no to accountability assessment; (1) cautious, traditionalist, child-centred, anti-assessment; (3) child-centred, developmental, deep learning, assessment tolerant; (4) conservative, childcentred, anti-assessment, capable; and (2) progressive, child-centred, deep learning, positive users of assessment. Simple opposites did not explain how teachers melded assessment, teaching, learning, and assessment into their conceptual understanding. These factors are largely uncorrelated and independent of each other, supporting Cheung and Wong’s (2002) suggestion that teachers hold apparently contradictory or pluralistic conceptions simultaneously. That the teachers had moderately positive attitude towards successfully teaching for surface accountability assessment and that they had only slight agreement toward the conception that assessment was bad and could be ignored, while they strongly agreed with deep, humanistic, and nurturing teaching clearly indicated that the simplistic dualism of the stereotype was insufficient to describe teachers’ conceptions. The traditional child and learner-centred perception of primary school teachers is just inadequate to capture the rich set of conceptions these teachers held; they also believed they could deliver success on surface accountability assessments while resisting the effect of assessment on their deep learning intentions. The model proposed by Betoret and Artiga (2004) found more support in this study in that this analysis also found two axes with four resulting quadrants. However, it is argued that this study’s axes are not equivalent conceptually to that found by Betoret and Artiga. The conservative-progressive axis and the pro/anti-assessment axis in this analysis is not obviously equivalent to their student/teacher-centred axis and product/process-centred approaches. Nevertheless, an interesting future study would be to integrate the Betoret and Artiga approach with that used here. It seems highly likely that the impact and power of assessment needs to be taken into account when understanding what teachers’ conceive of educational activities. This analysis clearly indicated that New Zealand teachers do have multiple responses to the accountability and policy systems of New Zealand. Clearly, there were teachers who reflected the accountability conformity approach documented by Hill (2000) and Locke and Hill (2003), for example clusters 6 and 3, and yet similar teachers were clearly uncomfortable with such use of assessment, to wit clusters 5 and 4. What this study provides is a means of efficiently classifying teachers into orientations with reasonable accuracy and the identification of multiple patterns of conception. These results are tentative in that much larger data sets are needed to permit analysis with all observed variables rather than the currently used 22 latent variables. Future research may well include a wider range of possible conceptions, including at least epistemology, feedback, motivation, ability, personality, and school subjects. There is also a need for greater

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

41

understanding of the realities underlying the model proposed here by EFA; the fit of that model to the data could be improved. Additionally, it would be useful to identify a meaningful measure of teacher effectiveness so that a structural equation model of how teachers’ conceptions relate to student learning outcomes could be developed and tested. The method of measuring the quality of student outcomes on the surface-deep axis was used in identifying effective teachers (Bond, Smith, Baker, and Hattie, 2000). This suggests that rather than focus simply on total scores or grades that the architecture of student learning could be used as a relatively objective measure of teacher effectiveness. With such a measure and sample size, a full SEM analysis of teachers’ instructional conceptions could be conducted and any difference in conceptions between expert, competent, and novice teachers could be detected. It should also be noted that this study has identified factoral structure issues with Cheung’s Conceptions of Curriculum and Pratt’s Teaching Perspectives Inventory batteries that merit further investigation and resolution. The relatively benign tolerance of accountability assessments (i.e., not associated with bad or ignore conceptions) as exhibited by clusters 2 and 3 may be a function of the lowstakes school-based assessment systems operating in New Zealand. A modification to that policy and practice context may well lead teachers to adjust their conception of how assessment, teaching, learning, and efficacy interrelate—in other words, their sense that assessment is bad may increase. Certainly developers of large-scale accountability assessment systems would pay to make a serious effort to ensure that deep learning is clearly measured and reported by their assessments and not assume that accountability pressures are sufficient to persuade teachers of the validity of the assessments. It may well be that teachers who agree and comply with the surface accountability conception produce students who demonstrate surface rather than deep learning outcomes. However such compliance should not be taken to mean that teachers believe those assessments measure core values of classroom life; that is deep learning, improved quality of teaching, and student-centred development. An important suggestion from this research is that the development of national assessment policy should be accompanied by research into teachers’ conceptions. The engagement of teachers’ belief systems about assessment has been a fundamentally neglected aspect in effective professional development (Hargreaves and Fullan, 1998). More generally, it is assumed that teachers’ reasoning for their practices, which are their means of solving educational problems, is resistant to modification because research-based training often misses the issues relevant to teachers and because new interventions are not understood as needing to compete for belief (Robinson, 1998; Robinson and Walker, 1999). In other words, introducing a policy or innovation without taking into account the reasons and beliefs teachers have for their current practices is unlikely to be successful. This study has exposed important patterns in how teachers’ conceptions of assessment, teaching, learning, curriculum, and efficacy are inter-related and these findings can be used to guide further research around the development of appropriate policies and assessments.

42

Gavin T. L. Brown

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to acknowledge the financial assistance of the University of Auckland and thank Professor John Hattie for his supervision. An earlier version of this article was presented at the NZARE/AARE conference in Auckland 2003. Professor Robert Cudeck, Ohio State University, is thanked for supplying his MBFACT software.

REFERENCES Airasian, P. W. (1997). Classroom assessment (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Anthony, G. (1994). Learning strategies in the mathematics classroom: What can we learn from stimulated recall interviews? New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 29(2), 127–140. Anthony, G. (1997). Task demands and instructional support in mathematics: Influences on strategic learning behaviours of secondary students. set: research information for teachers, (2), 6. Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). AMOS (Version 5). [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters Corp. Asch, R. L. (1976). Teaching beliefs and evaluation. Art Education, 29(6), 18-22. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175-1184. Barnes, D. (1976). From communication to curriculum. London: Penguin Press. Betoret, F. D., and Artiga, A. G. (2004). Trainee teachers' conceptions of teaching and learning, classroom layout and exam design. Educational Studies, 30(4), 355-372. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Research monograph. Melbourne: ACER. Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Educational Assessment: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-74. Bond, L., Smith, T., Baker, W. K., and Hattie, J. A. (2000). The certification system of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: A construct and consequential validity study. (Research Report). Greensboro, NC: University of North Carolina, Center for Educational Research and Evaluation. Bourdieu, Pierre (1974). The school as a conservative force: scholastic and cultural inequalities. In J. Eggleston (Ed.) Contemporary Research in the Sociology of Education, (pp. 32-46). London: Methuen. Brown, G. T. L. (2002a). Teachers' Conceptions of Assessment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, NZ. Brown, G. T. L. (2003, December). Teachers’ instructional conceptions: Assessment’s relationship to learning, teaching, curriculum, and teacher efficacy. Paper presented to the joint annual conference of the Australian and New Zealand Associations for Research in Education (AARE/NZARE), Auckland, NZ. Brown, G.T.L. (2002b). Student beliefs about learning: New Zealand students in Year 11. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 6(1), 110-114.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

43

Brown, G.T.L. (2004a). Teachers’ conceptions of assessment: Implications for policy and professional development. Assessment in Education: Policy, Principles and Practice, 11(3), 305-322. Brown, G.T.L. (2004b). Measuring attitude with positively packed self-report ratings: Comparison of agreement and frequency scales. Psychological Reports, 94, 1015-1024. Browne, M. W., and Cudek, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445-455. Browne, M. W., and Cudek, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models, (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Bulterman-Bos, J., Verloop, N., Terwel, J., and Wardekker, W. (2003). Reconciling the pedagogical goal and the measurement goal of evaluation: The perspectives of teachers in the context of national standards. Teachers College Record, 105(3), 344-374. Butterfield, S., Williams, A. and Marr, A. (1999) Talking about assessment: mentor-student dialogues about pupil assessment in initial teacher training, Assessment in Education, 6(2), pp. 225-246. Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner and R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709-725). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan. Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56, 81-105. Cannell, J. J. (1989). How public educators cheat on standardized achievement tests. Albuquerque, NM: Friends for Education. Carr, M. (2001). Assessment in early childhood settings: learning stories. London: Paul Chapman. Cheung, D. (2000). Measuring teachers' meta-orientations to curriculum: Application of hierarchical confirmatory analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 68(2), 149-165. Cheung, D., and Ng, P.-H. (2000). Science teachers' beliefs about curriculum design. Research in Science Education, 30(4), 357-375. Cheung, D., and Wong, H-W. (2002). Measuring teacher beliefs about alternative curriculum designs. The Curriculum Journal, 13(2), 225-248. Chou, C.-P., and Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle, (Ed.). Stuructural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. (pp. 37—55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cizek, G.J., Fitzgerald, S., Shawn, M. and Rachor, R.E. (1995) Teachers' assessment practices: Preparation, isolation and the kitchen sink, Educational Assessment, 3, pp. 159179. Clark, C., and Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. (3rd ed., pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan. Cooper, P., and Davies, C. (1993). The impact of national curriculum assessment arrangements on English teachers’ thinking and classroom practice in English secondary schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(5/6), 559-570. Croft, A. C. and Reid, N. A. (1991). How often and for what purposes are NZCER tests used in primary and secondary schools? Wellington, NZ: NZCER. Croft, A.C., Strafford, E. and Mapa, L. (2000). Stocktake/evaluation of existing diagnostic tools in literacy and numeracy in English. Wellington, NZ: NZCER.

44

Gavin T. L. Brown

Crooks, T. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438-481. Crooks, T. J. (2002). Educational assessment in New Zealand schools. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 9(2), 237–253. Cudeck, R. (1982). Methods for estimating between-battery factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17, 47-68. Dahlin, B., Watkins, D. A., and Ekholm, M. (2001). The role of assessment in student learning: The views of Hong Kong and Swedish lecturers. In D. A. Watkins and J. B. Biggs (Eds.), Teaching the Chinese learner: Psychological and pedagogical perspectives. (pp. 47-74). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, Comparative Education Research Centre. Delandshere, G., and Jones, J. H. (1999). Elementary teachers’ beliefs about assessment in mathematics: A case of assessment paralysis. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(3), 216–240. Dixon, H. (1999). The effect of policy on practice: an analysis of teachers' perceptions of school based assessment practice. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Massey University, Albany, NZ. Dwyer, C. A., and Villegas, A. M. (1993). Guiding conceptions and assessment principles for The Praxis Series: Professional assessments for beginning teachers. (Research Report RR-93-17). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Eisner, E. W., and Vallance, E. (1974). Conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Entwistle, N. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, and N. Entwistle (Eds.). The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education. (2nd ed.). (pp. 3–22). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Entwistle, N., and Marton, F. (1984). Changing conceptions of learning and research. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, and N. Entwistle (Eds.). The experience of learning. (pp. 211–231) Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Finch, J. F., Panter, A. T., and Caskie, G. I. L., (1999). Two approaches for identifying shared personality dimensions across methods. Journal of Personality, 67(3), 407-438. Firestone, W. A., Mayrowetz, D., and Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(2), 95–113. Fiske, E. B. and Ladd, H. F. (2000). When schools compete: a cautionary tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Garcia, E. (1987, April). An ethnographic study of teachers' implicit theories on evaluation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association., Washington, DC. Gibson, S., and Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582. Gipps, C., Brown, M., McCallum, B., and McAlister, S. (1995). Intuition or evidence? Teachers and national assessment of seven-year-olds. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Gow, L., and Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 20–33.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

45

Graham, J. W., Taylor, B., J., and Cumsille, P. E. (2001). Planned missing-data designs in analysis of change. In L. M. Collins and A. G. Sayer (Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change. (pp. 335–353). Washington, DC: APA. Guskey, T. R., and Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of construct dimensions. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 627-643. Guthrie, J. T. (2002). Preparing students for high-stakes test taking in reading. In A. E. Farstrup and S. J. Samuels (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.), (pp. 370—391). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hamilton, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education, 27, 2568. Hargreaves, A., and Fullan, M. (1998). What's worth fighting for out there? New York: Teachers College Press. Harker, R. K. (1982). Bourdieu and education. New Zealand Cultural Studies Working Group Newsletter. 4, 37-49. Hattie, J. A. (2002). Schools like mine: Cluster analysis of New Zealand schools. (Tech. Rep. No. 14). Auckland, NZ: University of Auckland, Project asTTle. Heaton, J. B. (1975). Writing English language tests. London: Longman. Henson, R. K., Kogan, L. R., and Vacha-Haase, T. (2001). A reliability generalization study of the Teacher Efficacy Scale and related instruments. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(3), 404-420. Hershberg, T. (2002). Comment. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings Papers on Education Policy: 2002. (pp. 324-333). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Hian, C. H. (1994). Operationalization and prediction of conceptions of teaching in adult education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. Hill, M. F. (2000). Dot, slash, cross: How assessment can drive teachers to ticking instead of teaching. set: Research information for teachers, (1), 21-25. Ho, A., Watkins, D., and Kelly, M. (2001). The conceptual change approach to improving teaching and learning: An evaluation of a Hong Kong staff development programme. Higher Education, 42, 143-169. Howe, M. J. A. (1998). Principles of abilities and human learning. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In R. H. Hoyle, (Ed.). Stuructural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. (pp. 1–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hoyle, R. H., and Duvall, J. L. (2004). Determining the number of factors in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In D. Kaplan (Ed.). The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 301-315). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jensen, J. W., Kauchak, D., and Rowley, M. L. (2001, March). Teacher candidates' beliefs: Implications for practice. Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Dallas, TX. Kahn, E. A. (2000). A case study of assessment in a grade 10 English course. The Journal of Educational Research, 93, 276-286.

46

Gavin T. L. Brown

Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics' conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255-275. Kohn, A. (1999). The schools our children deserve: Moving beyond traditional classrooms and "tougher standards". New York: Houghton Mifflin. Lam, T.C.M., and Klockars, A.J. (1982). Anchor point effects on the equivalence of questionnaire items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19(4), 317—322. Levin, B. (2001) Reforming education: From origins to outcomes. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Linn, R. L., and Gronlund, N. E. (2000). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (8 ed.). New York: Macmillan. Linn, R.L. (2000) Assessments and accountability, Educational Researcher, 29(2), pp. 4-16. Locke, T. and Hill, M. F. (2003). The impact of changes in the nature of teachers’ work on teacher professionalism. Research Report. Hamilton, NZ, The University of Waikato. MacKechnie, R., and MacKechnie, C. (1999). How helpful are introductory study skills programmes? Thoughts on the experience of one programme in Hamilton, New Zealand. Paper presented at the HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, Australia, July, 1999. Marton, F. and Saljo, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. I – outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 42, 4-11. Marton, F. (1983). Beyond individual differences. Educational Psychology, 3(3 and 4), 289– 303. Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McMillan, J. H. (2001). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective instruction (2 ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. McMillan, J. H., Myran, S., and Workman, D. (2002). Elementary teachers' classroom assessment and grading practices. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 203-213. Mehrens, W. A., and Lehmann, I. J. (1984). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Ministry of Education. (1993). The New Zealand curriculum framework: te anga marautanga o Aotearoa. Wellington, NZ: Learning Media. Ministry of Education. (1994). Assessment: policy to practice. Wellington, NZ: Learning Media. National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. New Zealand. (1998). Assessment for success in primary schools: green paper. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education. Noble, A. J., and Smith, M. L. (1994). Old and new beliefs about measurement-driven reform: "The more things change, the more they stay the same". CSE Tech. Rep. 373. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, CRESST. Osborne, J. W., and Costello, A. B. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation, 10(7). Retrieved July 15, 2005, from http://pareonline.net /getvn.asp?v=1-and n=7 Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

47

Philipp, R. A., Flores, A., Sowder, J. T., and Schappelle, B. P. (1994). Conceptions and practices of extraordinary mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 155-180. Philippou, G., and Christou, C. (1997). Cypriot and Greek primary teachers' conceptions about mathematical assessment. Educational Research and Evaluation, 3(2), 140-159. Popham, W. J. (2000b). Modern educational measurement: Practical guidelines for educational leaders (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Pratt, D. D. (1992a). Conceptions of teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 42(4), 203-220. Pratt, D. D. (1992b). Chinese conceptions of learning and teaching: A westerner's attempt at understanding. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 11(4), 301-319. Pratt, D. D. (1997). Reconceptualizing the evaluation of teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 34, 23-44. Pratt, D. D., and Associates. (1998). Five perspectives on teaching in adult and higher education. Malabar, FL: Krieger, Publishers. Pratt, D. D., and Collins, J. B. (1998). Teaching Perspectives Inventory. [On-line]. Retrieved March 15, 2001, from http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/DPtpi.html Pratt, D. D., and Collins, J. B. (2001, June). The Teaching Perspectives Inventory (TPI). Paper presented at the Adult Education Research Conference, Vancouver, BC. Purdie, N., and Hattie, J. (1999). The relationship between study skills and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Australian Journal of Education 43, (1), 72–86. Quilter, S. M. (1998). Inservice teachers' assessment literacy and attitudes toward assessment. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. Resnick, L. B., and Resnick, D. P. (1989). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. Washington, DC: National Commission on Testing and Public Policy. Rex, L.A. and Nelson, M. C. (2004). How teachers’ professional identities position highstakes test preparation in their classrooms. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1288-1331. Robinson, V. M. J. (1998). Methodology and the research-practice gap. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 17-26. Robinson, V. M. J., and Walker, J. C. (1999). Theoretical privilege and researchers' contribution to educational change. In J. S. Gaffney and B. J. Askew (Eds.), Stirring the waters: The influence of Marie Clay (pp. 239-259). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Rotter, J. B. (1982). Social learning theory. In N. T. Feather (Ed.). Expectations and actions: Expectancy-value models in psychology (pp. 241–260). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Saltzgaver, D. (1983). One teacher's dominant conceptions of student assessment. Curriculum Perspectives, 3, 15-21. Samuelowicz, K. (1994). Teaching conceptions and teaching practice: A case of assessment. In R. Ballantyne and C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice (pp. 343-353). Brisbane, Aus: Queensland University of Technology, Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research. Samuelowicz, K., and Bain, J. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers. Higher Education, 24, 93-111. Schommer, M. (1990). The effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504.

48

Gavin T. L. Brown

Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., and Dunkle, M. E. (2002). Development and validation of the epistemic belief inventory (EBI). In B. K. Hofer and P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal Epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 261-276). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Scriven, M. (1991). Beyond formative and summative evaluation. In M. W. McLaughlin and D. C. Phillips (Eds.), Evaluation and education: At quarter century (Vol. Part II, pp. 19– 64). Chicago: NSSE. Smith, M. L., and Fey, P. (2000). Validity and accountability in high-stakes testing. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 334–344. Smith, M. L., and Rottenberg, C. (1991). Unintended consequences of external testing in elementary schools. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 10, 7–11. Smith, M.L., Heinecke, W. and Noble, A.J. (1999) Assessment policy and political spectacle, Teachers College Record, 101(2), pp. 157-191. Stamp, D. (1987). Evaluation of the formation and stability of student teacher attitudes to measurement and evaluation practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Aus. Strauman, T. J. and Wetzler, S. (1992). The factor structure of SCL-90 and MCMI scale scores: Within-measure and interbattery analyses. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27(1), 1-20. Sturrock, F. (1999). Teacher census: Preliminary report. Unpublished Report. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education, Demographic and Statistical Analysis Unit. Tait, H., Entwistle, N. J., and McCune, V. (1998). ASSIST: A reconceptualisation of the Approaches to Studying Inventory. In Rust, C. (Ed.), Improving Student Learning: Improving Students as Learners (pp. 262-271). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development. Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. (pp. 127–146). New York: Macmillan. Tittle, C. K. (1994). Toward an educational psychology of assessment for teaching and learning: Theories, contexts, and validation arguments. Educational Psychologist, 29, 149-162. Torrance, H., and Pryor, J. (1998). Investigating formative assessment: Teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Trigwell, K., and Prosser, M. (1997). Towards an understanding of individual acts of teaching and learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 241–252. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., and Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248. Tucker, L. R. (1958). An inter-battery method of factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23(2), 111136. Warren, E., and Nisbet, S. (1999, July). The relationship between the purported use of assessment techniques and beliefs about the uses of assessment. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education and Research Group of Australasia (MERGA), Adelaide, SA. Webb, N. L. (1992). Assessment of students' knowledge of mathematics: Steps toward a theory. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 661-683). New York: Macmillan.

Integrating Teachers’ Conceptions

49

Wood, P., and Kardash, C. (2002). Critical elements in the design and analysis of studies of epistemology. In B. K. Hofer and P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge (pp. 231-261). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Wylie, C. (1997). Self-managing schools seven years on: what have we learnt? Wellington, NZ: NZCER.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 51-72

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 2

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING IN INITIAL TEACHER EDUCATION: THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TEACHING SELF IN THE PROFESSIONAL ARTISTRY OF TEACHING Sylvia Yee Fan Tang1 The Hong Kong Institute of Education, China

ABSTRACT Teachers’ professional learning is conceived as the construction of the teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching in this chapter. This chapter seeks to examine the complex dynamics of preservice student teachers’ professional learning in various arenas of professional learning, namely pre-training influences, coursework of the teacher education programme, and the student teaching context. Through the in-depth examination of two cases of student teachers’ learning-to-teach journeys, this chapter illustrates an integrated framework with “teaching self”, “teaching repertoire”, and “framing” as central themes to enrich our understanding of teacher professional development in its early phase. The recognition of the central role the teaching self plays in professional learning implies that those involved in the teacher education process, namely teacher education faculty and school mentors, need to engage with student teachers as persons and their emerging teaching selves. When preparing and structuring quality professional learning experiences for student teachers, teacher education faculty and school mentors have to work with student teachers’ life histories, their construction of teacher knowledge and the challenge and support they face. The development of institute-school partnership structure and culture in initial teacher education will also facilitate the provision of quality professional learning experiences for student teachers.

1 The Hong Kong Institute of Education 10 Lo Ping Road, Tai Po, New Terrietories, Hong Kong SAR, China Tel:+852 2948 7590, Fax:+852 29487619, E-mail:[email protected]

52

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

INTRODUCTION The quality of preservice student teachers’ learning in fieldwork has been a major concern in initial teacher education (Beck & Kosnik, 2002; Clark, 2002; LaBoskey & Richert, 2002). This chapter presents a framework for an integrated understanding of the complex dynamics of student teachers’ professional learning in fieldwork. Through the in-depth examination of two cases of student teachers’ learning-to-teach journeys, the chapter seeks to explore what constitutes quality learning experiences for student teachers. The exploration of student teachers’ professional learning will probably contribute to the knowledge base of teacher education and shed light on practices in initial teacher education.

THE TEACHING SELF, FRAMING AND THE TEACHING REPERTOIRE Preservice student teachers’ professional learning can be understood from the perspective of personal-professional development of teachers (Bullough, 1991; Bullough, Knowles & Crow, 1991; Cook-Sather, 2001; Higgins & Leat, 2001; Kagan, 1992; Nias, 1989; Raymond, Butt & Townsend, 1992). Tang (2002) regards teachers’ professional learning as the construction of the teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching. The teaching self, with its embedded “teaching repertoire”, drives the “framing” process in the learning-to-teach journey (Tang, 2004). In understanding professional learning, the teaching self, the framing process, and knowledge construction in the teaching repertoire are important concepts to be examined (Tang, 2002). Bullough et al (1991) define the teaching self as a self-image comprising a cluster of meanings through which the teacher makes sense of his or her self as a teacher. Nias (1989) highlights the importance of understanding the core self in the exploration of the construction of the teaching self. While the teaching self tends to be situated and contextualized, the core self is “a well-defended, relatively inflexible substantial self into which we incorporate the most highly prized aspects of our self-concept and the attitudes and values which are most salient to it” (Nias, 1989, p.26). The core self is interwoven with the formation of the student teachers’ teaching self as the personal values incorporated in the core self plays an important part in the way they conceptualize and carry out their work. Kagan (1992), Britzman (1991), and Bullough’s (1992) work highlight the dynamics of dissonance and resonance between the core self and teaching self in the learning-to-teach process. Tension generated by dissonance between the core self and teaching self might foster growth, while the development of a satisfying teaching self probably implies restoring resonance between the core self and teaching self. “Framing” is central to the understanding of professional learning. Building on Schon’s (1983, 1987) work on reflection, framing is understood as a process which describes the interaction between practitioners and practice situations in the artistry of professional practice. The dynamic nature of such interaction can further be understood in the light of Eraut’s (1995) notion of reflection as “a metacognitive process in which the practitioner is alerted to a problem, rapidly reads the situation, decides what to do and proceeds in a state of continuing alertness” (p.14).

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

53

Bullough et al (1991) highlight the central role which the teaching self plays in the process of framing. In the context of teachers’ early professional development, a welldeveloped, coherent, fit-to-situation conception of self-as-a-teacher offers student teachers a relatively firm, but inevitably partial, base upon which they begin to build richer, fuller, and more powerful meanings. These productive meanings are useful for framing and responding to problems and thereby shaping teaching situations student teachers face mostly during the fieldwork. Conversely, student teachers who possess a weak, confused and contradictory conception of self-as-a-teacher are more likely to frame teaching situations unproductively in their fieldwork. Embedded in the teaching self is the teaching repertoire which represents a repertoire of examples, images, understandings and actions (Schon, 1983; Griffiths, 2000) that can be utilized in the framing process. The framing process, understood in terms of reflection, also contributes to the growth of professional knowledge (Eraut, 1995; Griffiths, 2000). In teachers’ early professional development, the teaching repertoire is developed through student teachers’ active construction and reconstruction of knowledge (Borger & Tillema, 1996) from many different sources, including personal reflections of their own practice, others’ practice, information from educators, literature, mentors, peers and pupils (Duquette & Cook, 1999; Oosterheert & Vermunt, 2001).

THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TEACHING SELF IN THE ARENAS OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING Student teachers’ construction of the teaching self (with its embedded teaching repertoire) can be understood as the framing process through which individual student teachers interact with the various arenas of professional learning, namely pre-training influences, the coursework and the fieldwork of the teacher education programme. Student teachers’ initial teaching self has been developed long before they formally start the teacher education programme. They have been unintendedly constructing their initial teaching self and their teaching repertoire under the “apprenticeship of observation” (Lortie, 1975). They bring to teacher education a wealth of initial knowledge about teaching drawn from their lives as school pupils (Calderhead, 1991; Tomlinson, 1995) and “a plethora of unarticulated and unexamined beliefs about teaching, learning, and the self as teacher that require scrutiny” (Bullough & Gitlin, 1995, p. 25). Passion for the subject and close relationship with positive teacher models are some of the factors constituting a strong initial teaching self in student teachers. The teacher education programme constitutes an important arena in which student teachers develop their teaching self, construct different forms of knowledge and build their teaching repertoire. In broad terms, the curriculum of most teacher education programme includes coursework in the higher education institution (HEI) setting and fieldwork in the school context. In most programmes, coursework covers different components: general education, subject matter studies (whether taught concurrently or consecutively with other studies), foundation of education studies, and methods studies (Ben-Peretz, 1995; Gimmestad & Hall, 1995; Stuart & Tatto, 2000). Student teachers tend to be exposed to more theoretical

54

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

forms of knowledge about teaching in coursework, which contributes to the construction of their teaching repertoire. Fieldwork constitutes a significant arena where student teachers construct their teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching. Tang (2003) argues that fieldwork takes place in three facets of the student teaching context, namely the action context (Eraut, 1994); the socio-professional context (McNally, Cope, Inglis & Stronach, 1997); and the supervisory context (Slick, 1998). The process of framing takes place in the action context in which student teachers interact with practice situations in the authentic tasks of teaching. Pupils are the “critical reality definer” (Riseborough, 1985; cited in Bullough et al., 1991) who validates student teachers’ professional competence or makes them feel inadequate (Nias, 1989). In the socio-professional context, student teachers get in touch with the practical knowledge of teachers and their fellow student teachers. In the interaction with members of the teaching community, they come to define for themselves what it means to be a teacher (Samaras & Gismondi, 1998). Tang (2003) finds that student teachers enter into four different types of relationship with the socio-professional context of schools – “detachment”, “affiliation”, “engagement”, and isolation”. Among these four types of socio-professional relationship, student teachers tend to have productive learning experiences in affiliated and engaged socio-professional contexts where the scope and intensity of interaction with practitioners and the wider school life expand.

Challenge High

Low

Retreat

Growth

Tension Dissonance

From tension to equilibrium From dissonance to resonance

Stasis

Confirmation Equilibrium Resonance

Support Low

High

Figure 1 Challenge, support and the construction of the teaching self in the student teaching context (Tang, 20032)

2

Reprinted from Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(5), Challenge and support: The dynamics of student teachers' professional learning in the field experience in initial teacher education, p.493, Copyright (2003), with permission from Elsevier.

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

55

In the supervisory context, the tertiary supervisor helps bridging theoretical and practical forms of knowledge (Lyle, 1996; Stones, 1987). The contradictory nature of teaching supervision in terms of the dual functions of facilitating student teachers’ learning and assessing their teaching (Slick, 1997; Wubbels, Korthagen & Brekelmans, 1997) may have certain impact on student teachers’ teaching self. Building on the work of Daloz (1986), Martin (1996), McNally and Martin (1998), as well as Gipe and Richard (1992), Tang (2003) argues that the various forms of challenge and support offered by the action context, the socio-professional context, and the supervisory context contribute to the dynamics between individual student teachers’ core self and teaching self. Figure 1 presents the four possibilities of this complex dynamics. An appropriate mix of challenge and support is conducive to professional growth - student teachers move from a state of tension characterized by dissonance between the core self and teaching self to a state of equilibrium with resonance between the core self and teaching self restored.

THE STUDY The review of literature provides the basis for making sense of preservice student teachers’ learning experiences in the study reported in this chapter. The qualitative study was conducted in the context of a two-year sub-degree initial teacher education programme for secondary school teachers in Hong Kong, with the examination of seven student teachers’ professional learning journeys over two years. The programme consists of five domains of study: Academic Studies, Curriculum Studies, General Education, Professional Studies and Practicum. The first four domains take place in the HEI and the Field Experience part of the Practicum takes place in placement schools in the form of teaching block in the second semester of both years of study. Each student teacher took two subjects – a Main Study and an Additional Study, with Academic Studies and Curriculum Studies included in each subject. Schools are providers of placement sites, and there is no formal mentoring arrangement in the placement. Student teachers’ interaction with the various people in the socio-professional context of the schools depends very much on individuals’ personalities and the teacher subculture of the schools. Each student teacher was supervised by three tertiary supervisors – two subject supervisors and one Practicum supervisor. Methodological and data triangulation (Janesick, 1994; Patton, 1990; Stake, 1995) were employed to capture the complex dynamics of student teachers’ professional learning. A series of in-depth interviews was conducted with the student teachers to trace their professional learning experiences at different points over two years from 1998 to 2000. Interviews were conducted with school teachers in the second year of the study and tertiary supervisors in both years. Supervisory conferences between student teachers and tertiary supervisors were audio-recorded in the first year of the study. Field observation was conducted with every student teacher in the schools in both student teaching periods. The teacher education curriculum documents, including field experience guidelines, were collected to provide a general understanding of the features of the teacher education programme and the field experience arrangements. Journals were also collected to provide the student teachers’ reflective accounts of their professional development. A focus group interview was conducted for the purpose of respondent validation in which the student

56

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

teachers gave feedback to the author’s initial interpretation of their professional learning experience. Early and ongoing data analysis contributed to the progressive focusing of the research by shaping the research direction and informing later data collection. While recognizing the interactive relationship between data collection and data analysis, the following is a brief description of the data analysis procedures. The coded data in each case were clustered with reference to the four main areas of exploration: the development of the teaching self; pre-training influences; the coursework of the teacher education programme; and various facets of the student teaching context. Categories were generated from the coded data in each area. The constant comparative method was used. Incidents from a case were compared to the categories generated from the previous case(s), and connections were made between the categories on the basis of putting together the data in the four areas of exploration in new ways. Through this process, an integrated framework for understanding the complex dynamics of professional learning gradually emerged (Tang, 2004). The framework provides a useful analytical tool for understanding the common themes in student teachers unique learning-to-teach journeys.

AN INTEGRATED UNDERSTANDING OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING AS CYCLES OF FRAMING The integrated framework depicts preservice student teachers’ professional learning as cycles of dynamic interaction of the teaching self, knowledge construction in the teaching repertoire and the student teaching context. The teaching self governs the framing process which in turn impacts on the construction of the teaching self. The strength of the teaching self drives whether the framing is productive or not. Reading & acting in practice situations

Teaching self Teaching repertoire

Construction of practical knowledge embedded in teaching

Student teaching context

“Talk back” to the teaching self

Figure 2. The basic cycle of framing (Tang, 20043) 3

Reprinted from Research Papers in Education, 19(2), The dynamics of school-based learning in initial teacher education, p.197, Copyright (2004), with permission from Routledge.

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

57

A basic cycle of framing runs as follows. The teaching self governs the drawing of knowledge from its embedded teaching repertoire, which stores various forms of knowledge constructed by the student teacher in the arenas of professional learning, to read and act in practice situations in the student teaching context. The student teacher’s acts in the practice situations are based on the meanings attached to the situations. Acting in practice situations is indeed the enactment of practical knowledge embedded in the student teacher’s own practice. In response to the student teacher’s acts, the practice situations “talk back” to the teaching self, which further shapes the framing and enactment of practical knowledge in later practices. Framing goes on as cycles, with the construction and reconstruction of the teaching self as well as the enrichment of the teaching repertoire with practical knowledge embedded in teaching. In this way, the framing process depicts the dynamic interaction between the teaching self and the various arenas of professional learning. In the rest of this chapter, Frances and Suki’s learning-to-teach journeys will be presented to illustrate how the integrated framework (Tang, 2004) provides theoretical understanding for student teachers’ learning experiences in fieldwork. In each of the cases, the portrayal begins with a brief introduction of the contextual information of the student teacher’s professional learning. Then the learning-to-teach journeys are portrayed in terms of the construction of the teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching. The themes “teaching self”, “teaching repertoire”, “framing” run through the cases portraying the dynamics of student teachers’ professional learning in the various arenas of professional learning. The indepth understanding of the two cases helps examine what constitutes quality professional learning experiences in fieldwork in initial teacher education.

FRANCES: THE REJUVENATION OF THE DAMAGED TEACHING SELF Frances took Chinese Language and English Language as her Main Study and Additional Study in the teacher education programme. Her first student teaching took place in a boys’ school while the second took place in a co-educational school. Pupils in both schools had average academic ability. As shown in this section, Frances’ professional learning journey was characterized by a “downward spiral” in her first student teaching experience, followed by the rejuvenation of the damaged teaching self with her ride on an “upward spiral” in a more enabling context in the second student teaching period.

A Vague Initial Teaching Self and a Narrow Teaching Repertoire Frances entered the Programme with an unsophisticated notion of herself being suitable for the relatively less complicated human relationships in the teaching profession, which did not constitute a strongly held sense of self as a teacher. Frances had the first half of primary education in Xia Men (a coastal city in Mainland China) and she had Putonghua-medium education in Hong Kong until her sixth form. Putonghua was her mother tongue, and she learned the Chinese Language subject in Putonghua medium. Her pre-training life experiences did not provide her with a strong

58

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

subject matter knowledge base for teaching the two language subjects. Her superficial learning in coursework contributed to her narrow teaching repertoire, when she headed for her first student teaching experience. The assignment of teaching two language subjects was a great challenge to her in the first student teaching period, as she needed conscious thinking in switching language in her teaching.

Challenge, Support and Unproductive Framing in the First Student Teaching Context The high-risk action context in the first student teaching period posed a great challenge to Frances. With a weak teaching self and a narrow teaching repertoire she found herself inadequate to face the challenges of the action context in the first student teaching period. To her, the action context was high-risk as she had to cope with pupils’ discipline problems, and she occasionally felt “tongue-tied” in her language use in classroom teaching. Frances was in the quest of continued support from various agents in the socioprofessional context. Emotional support from peers, while helpful, was far from being adequate to back her up in face of the great challenges. “I talked to my classmates today and asked them for suggestions. They said that the Institute seemed to ‘throw us out’ for a month…. If we encounter any problem, say, there are many problems during student teaching, it seems that we don’t have anyone to ask for advice. It’s difficult to speak to supervisors as they are always busy. Talking to regular teachers may be problematic. It is nothing to do with relationship. Perhaps the regular teacher’s methods are different from ours. So it’s useless to talk to them…. We seem to be isolated without any help. We only discuss with each other. ‘How would you do this? What can I do?’ Sometimes we think hard. Sometimes we lose appetite in our meals. ‘What can I do? What can I do?’” (First interview with Frances in first STP (student teaching period))

In the midst of helplessness, Frances did receive occasional support from tertiary supervisors. She found the Practicum supervisor’s support in the teaching supervision visit very useful. The Practicum supervisor’s pre-observation conference with Frances made her more certain and focused on her teaching. She was empowered with the supervisor’s rather “personalistic” or “student-centred” conferencing approach in the post-observation conference. Frances hoped to receive more support from tertiary supervisors. She requested one of her other supervisors to adopt a similar supervisory approach and another to pay an additional visit to give close coaching to her teaching. Due to scheduling problems, both supervisors rejected her request. In the absence of the much needed support, Frances’ situation was worsened with the overwhelming challenge in the supervisory context. Frances’ sense of self as a teacher was threatened when both the Chinese Language and English Language supervisors “failed” her teaching, with strong criticizms and demands that had to be addressed within a few days. She had to face three additional supervisory visits (two conducted by the second supervisor of Chinese Language and one by the second supervisor of English Language) which all took place in the last week of the student teaching period. The unsupportive conferencing approach of some of these supervisors disempowered her sense of self as a teacher.

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

59

“Some supervisors gave too many negative comments in their supervision. I consider that they had substantial effect on student teachers since adverse comments would tremendously destroy our confidence. As you know, confidence is important to teachers.” (Interview with Frances after second STP)

Apart from the additional demands from tertiary supervisors, Frances faced a heavy workload of teaching two language subjects. All these caused extreme fatigue to her. She found the various demands on her overwhelming and her performance failed to improve, though she tried hard. She was disempowered and lost much of her confidence in teaching. “Everything pressed on me all of a sudden that I didn’t know how to manage. As a result, every piece of work submitted by me [to the supervisors] was unsatisfactory. Unsatisfactory submission always brought unsatisfactory feedback that went with further adverse effect – a vicious circle!” (Interview with Frances after first STP)

Frances was trapped in the vicious circle of poor performance, negative feedback from tertiary supervisors, negative feeling about teaching ability and negative feeling about her self as a teacher. Frances ended up with great self-doubts about her ability to teach both language subjects. She experienced great tension within herself and dissonance between her core self and teaching self. Without adequate support to face the overwhelming challenges of the highrisk action context and the demands of teaching supervision, retreat from learning was evidenced. The threat to the teaching self and unproductive framing went side by side. As pointed out by the Chinese Language and Practicum supervisors, hesitation was observed in her lesson and Frances was aware that the rhythm of her teaching was problematic. Frances’ unproductive framing was characterized by her failure in reacting effectively to the “talk back” of the teaching situations in the action context. She felt confused with her inadequacy in attending to, and managing, the complexity of teaching efficiently. “… I seem not doing the best. Sometimes I cannot manage the rhythm of the whole lesson. In particular, I lack the capacity to handle sudden changes in the lesson.” (Second interview with Frances in first STP) “Sometimes I found that I said something wrong when I was speaking. Then I found the steps of the lesson very confusing…. My plan was not to do the exercise on ‘opposites’. Yet I don’t know why I told pupils to do it. It seems that I did it without much thinking.” (Second interview with Frances in first STP)

The Reconstruction of the Damaged Teaching Self The negative experiences in the first student teaching period damaged her teaching self, which posed a threat to both her core self and teaching self. “Not being easily defeated” was one of the most highly prized aspects of her inner core. To maintain a stable self-image, Frances protected those attitudes which were expressive of the values by which she defined herself (Nias, 1989). This drove her to combat the previous threats so as to confirm her sense of self as a person “not being easily defeated”. This driving force was reinforced by her growing awareness of her suitability for the teaching profession, which was derived from her

60

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

sense of self-as-teacher in her interaction with pupils. The urge to restore resonance between her core self and teaching self was the driving force for Frances’ reconstruction of her teaching self. “One is keen to make improvement and learn from his / her defeating experience…. It may also be due to my personality. I’m rather reluctant to admit defeat as I never consider myself inferior to others. Having completed student teaching last year, I repeatedly comforted myself by saying ‘I’m competent, I’m competent’. I consider that there isn’t a big gap between my personality and my competence in taking up the teaching career…. I consider myself very kind and I like the profession. It’s because I love my pupils…. I enjoy working with people rather than facing documents all the day.” (Interview with Frances after second STP)

Challenge, Support and Productive Framing in the Second Student Teaching Context The second student teaching context provided a reasonable level of challenge and the corresponding support, which helped Frances reconstruct her teaching self. Her learning in coursework contributed to her growing teaching repertoire from which she could draw useful reference when facing the practice situations. The low-risk action context was characterized by highly motivated and well-behaved classes. This gave her adequate mental space to frame the pedagogical aspect of teaching. Frances received good support from the regular English Language teacher and her peer in the affiliated socio-professional context. Through engaging in professional dialogue with the regular teacher, Frances gained lots of insights from the regular teacher’s exemplary practice, which expanded her own teaching repertoire. The teacher’s practical knowledge became an important source of knowledge, from which Frances drew direct reference. “Well, I did learn something from the regular teacher. As the pupils told me, she could even make use of a piece of paper and a pen to teach well. Her posture and gesture contribute to her teaching as well. I copy her practice and it really works.” (Second interview with Frances in second STP)

Frances’ teaching repertoire was further enriched through engaging in professional dialogue with her peer. Her peer was described by the Chinese Language tertiary supervisor as a competent and outstanding student teacher and she had a positive influence on Frances’ professional learning. She established a collaborative working relationship with the latter. Frances gradually developed a “co-enquirer” relationship (Furlong & Maynard, 1995) with her peer in which they worked together to experiment on teaching strategies in their own classes. “As with my peer, we had quite frequent contact. We always discussed once there’s no lesson for both of us. Since both of us taught Chinese Language, we used to discuss the use of new teaching approaches. Occasionally, we tried the new approaches in our own classes…. She might have tried it before and advised me whether the approach did work or not.” (Interview with Frances after second STP)

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

61

The supervisory context also offered good support to Frances. She gained access to more theoretical forms of knowledge from tertiary supervisors. In particular, she received much support from her Chinese Language tertiary supervisor who just happened to be her second supervisor in the previous student teaching period. Before the student teaching period, the supervisor provided supplementary readings to facilitate Frances’ emotional involvement with the passages that she was going to teach. This was a great help to Frances’ preparation work. In teaching supervision, the supervisor gave advice to Frances on pedagogical principles and gave positive comments on Frances’ improvement in classroom performance over the previous student teaching period. This helped confirming Frances’ sense of self as a teacher. “Yes, I am more confident in teaching. I know what a competent teacher should do. Say, how I could prepare the lesson, how I could react to pupils during the lesson and how I could encourage them. I think I could handle them quite well this year..… The Chinese Language supervisor told me that I am more calm this year. ” (Second interview with Frances in second STP)

The appropriate mix of challenge and support in the enabling student teaching context enhanced the development of Frances’ teaching self which drove productive framing. Productive framing took place in the form of fluency in activating knowledge from a rich teaching repertoire to frame teaching, and flexibility in making pedagogical decisions to meet pupils’ needs. Frances’ increasing fluency in activating knowledge from a rich teaching repertoire was evidenced in her teaching of the poem “Swallows” in Chinese Language. From her memories of pedagogical practices left by her previous schooling experience, Frances drew direct reference to her secondary school teacher’s focus on “filial piety” in the teaching of the poem. She also activated the knowledge about Chinese Language lesson planning and affective education she learned in the coursework of the teacher education programme. As mentioned previously, Frances gained access to the Chinese tertiary supervisor’s more theoretical forms of knowledge related to affective education. Her peer also gave her advice on the choice of popular songs as teaching aid for illustrating filial piety. Her father’s (a retired Mainland Chinese Language teacher) advice contributed to her subject matter knowledge about the poet and the metaphorical writing style in the poem. Pupils’ positive feedback was an important form of “talk back” to reinforce Frances to continue with her way of framing teaching. Frances’ productive framing was further revealed in her growing flexibility in adapting teaching methods to make learning interesting for pupils. She seemed to be more ready to consider the “talk back” of teaching situations, compared to her previous student teaching experience. Her changing use of teaching vocabulary in English Language illustrated that she was more ready to consider pupils’ needs and interests in her teaching. “My teaching is much better than last year. I adopt a variety of teaching methods…. I modify some traditional methods of teaching and make them interesting.” (Second interview with Frances in second STP) “Last year, I looked up the vocabulary in the dictionary and explained to pupils as the way the dictionary did. In contrast, in this student teaching period, I explain as a lay person rather than adopt the technical language of the dictionary. I cite examples as well…. I now realize that pupils won’t understand at all if I explain in the manner like a dictionary. It could be easier for

62

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang them to understand if I speak in simple English…. I realize that citing examples really help the pupils understand the subject content…. I tend to use some other examples relevant to their own experience.” (Second interview with Frances in second STP)

The Teaching Self Riding from the Downward Spiral to the Upward Spiral Frances’ weak sense of teaching self and narrow teaching repertoire made her feel extremely insecure and fraught with self-doubts in the first student teaching period. Frances was on a negative spiral and extremely vulnerable. As Bullough et al (1991) argue, Frances rode a slowly revolving spiral downward towards deepening frustration. Her confused or vague conception of herself as a teacher made it difficult to frame teaching productively; her inability to frame teaching productively and respond to problems made it more difficult to develop a coherent sense of self as a teacher, and so on around and around, and down. The reconstruction of the teaching self in the second student teaching period was made possible by the facilitating student teaching context. In contrast to the previous negative experiences, Frances rode an upward spiral towards increasing satisfaction. Frances felt her improvement and a new sense of direction in her work. Instead of being overwhelmed by a myriad of demands, she felt that she was more focused and worked with a clearer goal in mind when preparing lessons. Her greater sense of direction drove her to frame teaching productively with her expanding teaching repertoire. Productive framing paved the way of developing an increasingly coherent sense of self as a teacher, which was revealed in her feelings of being natural and fluent in class. She developed greater resonance between her teaching self and core self. “I consider that my student teaching performance showed improvement comparing to that of last year. Also, this year I used more teaching methods and began to master the pedagogy learnt at the Institute…. I became more fluent and natural in my presentation in class. I managed to grasp the focus in teaching. In respect of preparation, I was more well-prepared than in last year. It’s probably one of the reasons for my increase in confidence this year.” (Interview with Frances after second STP)

SUKI: THE GROWTH OF THE PE TEACHING SELF Physical Education (PE) and Civic Education were Suki’s Main Study and Additional Study in the teacher education programme. In the two student teaching periods, she was placed in two girls’ schools, each with high academic ability pupils. As illustrated in this section, Suki’s entered the teacher education programme with a strong initial PE teaching self. Her teaching self directed her professional development and she rode on an upward spiral in which her satisfying sense of self as a teacher drove productive framing of teaching which in turn confirmed her sense of self as a teacher and so on. This upward spiral gradually built up her coherent sense of self as a PE teacher.

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

63

A Strong Initial PE Teaching Self and the Growing Teaching Repertoire Suki brought a clear image of herself as a teacher, with a specific PE identity, to the teacher education programme. Her love of PE and competence in sports had been developed in primary and secondary school years, with many positive experiences in sports competition and sports leadership. In her secondary school years, she developed close relationship with her PE teacher who influenced her decision to become a teacher. Her strength in subject matter knowledge and her passion for the subject formed the basis of her well-developed teaching self from the very beginning of her learning-to-teach journey. Suki’s well-developed teaching self governed the construction of knowledge which constituted her growing teaching repertoire in the learning-to-teach journey. She exercised her active agency in the construction of her own teacher knowledge by making sense of her encounters in pre-training experiences, the teacher education programme and the student teaching contexts. Suki was more engaged with knowledge construction in the subject context of PE as compared to Civic Education. Her construction of teacher knowledge in the PE subject context began in her school years. Her strong subject knowledge base in PE constituted her rich initial teaching repertoire mainly in the area of PE teaching. Memories of previous teachers’ ways of dealing with individual differences, memories of her learning experiences in PE were examples of Suki’s pupil-oriented knowledge about teaching PE. Her involvement as a volleyball team leader in her secondary school years contributed to the initial teaching repertoire in the form of practical knowledge embedded in previous practice. Suki’s learning in coursework contributed to the expansion of her teaching repertoire. She found that PE teaching was of greatest practical relevance to her fieldwork. Her construction of practical knowledge embedded in teaching was characterized by the enactment of the practical principles she had learned in coursework, and the incorporation of the “talk back” of practice situations. As she navigated along the professional learning journey, this transformation of her learning in coursework into practical knowledge involved less conscious deliberation. She felt the intuitive and implicit nature of the transformation. The external body of propositional knowledge about teaching was internalized and the “knowing that” had been transformed and embedded into the “knowing how” in her PE teaching. “I just try it. There’s never been a standard set of methods available for one to choose in coping with different sports activities. Say, in teaching volleyball, how does one stimulate pupils’ interests despite their predominant perception of boredom towards it? So it all depends on our own thinking based on the guide provided in the Institute. These methods were explored through pondering.” (Interview with Suki after second STP) “There must be [influence from the Institute on my teaching] but I can’t think of any now…. It’s because the lecturers must have talked about the cases of pupils, how to respond and how to handle. There must be.” (First interview with Suki in second STP)

64

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

Challenge, Support and Productive Framing in the First Student Teaching Context The action context in the first student teaching period was relatively low in risk, thus facilitating the learning of professional artistry. Suki received an appropriate teaching assignment in terms of autonomy with relatively low workload. The classes she taught were well-behaved and motivated to learn, which freed her from investing heavily in pupils’ discipline problems and allowed her to concentrate on the pedagogical aspect of teaching. Being the “critical reality definer” for teachers (Riseborough, 1985; cited in Bullough et al, 1991), pupils served as an important reference group to affirm Suki’s image of self as a teacher. Pupils’ positive response to her facial expression, eye contact and instructions in the immediate class settings “talked back” to her in the process of framing. This gave her a feeling of finding “herself” in the class settings and a feeling of recognition as someone valuable (Nias, 1989). This initial sense of finding herself “at ease” in the class setting was an important driving force for her professional learning. “I do think that I’m like a teacher! In fact, pupils make me have confidence. Apart from my preparation, when I work with them, they can do what I have planned. So it reflects what I have planned can work. Therefore, I’m confident to plan something for pupils to do and learn…. Moreover, initially, I think that I myself seem to grin cheekily. When I teach PE, I have some facial expression and eye contact to make pupils listen to me and follow my instructions.” (First interview with Suki in first STP)

The affiliated socio-professional context provided a psychologically safe environment in which Suki could engage in personal-professional interaction with her peer and regular teachers. Suki had a peer who taught PE and English Language in the same school. Her personal relationship with the peer, and the shared position as a student teacher in the same subject area, were important to her emotional well-being as well as professional learning in PE teaching. She engaged in ongoing dialogue on the pedagogical aspect of teaching with her peer. The psychologically safe context was further enhanced by the presence of supportive regular teachers. The regular PE teacher was supportive in providing an enabling context for Suki and her peer. The friendly informal interaction, the offer of a helping hand, and the readiness to engage in professional dialogue, allowed Suki to gain access to the regular teacher’s practical knowledge about teaching and contributed to Suki’s sense of self as fitting into the school context. “Luckily, for PE, there are only my peer and I who are from the Institute. We talk with each other about our first lesson. We both feel each other’s support so that we have a sense of security. She reminds me as we know what the other teaches. She reminds me if I have prepared properly. I also remind her as well…. I become more comfortable psychologically and feel the presence of a person beside me giving suggestions.” (First interview with Suki in first STP) “I think the regular teachers are very kind because they are very willing to help student teachers…. We stayed after school to play ball games once or twice…. I feel they are concerned with student teachers…. The teacher I know best is the regular PE [and panel] teacher because we have much contact.…. We think he is always ready to give support and so we have very good relationship. Sometimes he shared with us his teaching experience and we would consult him on the handling of various difficult situations. I believe that if we could

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

65

have a good regular or panel teacher, he would help boost our confidence and give us a clear briefing. Then I will not feel confused as to where the things are stored or how to deal with difficult situations. I should say he helps us a lot.” (Interview with Suki after first STP)

In the supervisory context, Suki’s satisfying sense of self as a teacher was further confirmed by the PE and Civic Education tertiary supervisors’ positive feedback to her teaching. Both of them gave feedback on subject pedagogy with an attempt to facilitate Suki to link her learning in coursework and fieldwork. Suki developed a satisfying sense of self as a teacher in the first student teaching context. The low-risk class setting in which pupils were generally well-behaved provided Suki a wide range of perceptual attention, and made it possible for her to activate a range of knowledge fluently. It gave adequate mental space for her to focus her conscious decision-making on experimenting novel methods. It also created a psychologically secure environment in which she felt at ease, which was important for the less conscious acts in the framing process. With productive framing in the form of fluency in drawing reference from the richness of the teaching repertoire, Suki was able to negotiate a satisfying place in the action context in a fitting way.

Challenge, Support and Productive Framing in the Second Student Teaching Context Suki carried her satisfying teaching self into the second student teaching context. The practical knowledge learned and the satisfying sense of self experienced in the first student teaching period helped Suki face the second student teaching period with confidence. Like what Suki experienced in the previous year, Suki’s positive experience in PE teaching in the action context confirmed her sense of self as a teacher. Suki received an appropriate mix of challenge and support in the engaged socioprofessional context. She participated in the wider school life by taking up subject-related responsibility in volleyball team training. Her role as a PE teacher expanded from merely teaching in class settings to coaching school teams. This allowed her to construct practical knowledge embedded in practice in subject-related activities beyond class settings and enriched her teaching repertoire. The great sense of belonging to the volleyball team strengthened her sense of self as a PE teacher. While the extra challenge gave her good learning opportunities, Suki received very good support from the regular PE teacher. She built up a personal and professional relationship with the regular PE teacher. The professional dialogue between the two covered a variety of aspects, including pedagogical and interactional aspects of teaching PE, running sports teams, career path of a PE teacher and many other topics. However, the enabling factors in the second student teaching context tended to skew towards PE and facilitated Suki’s professional learning in PE teaching and the development of her sense of self as a PE teacher. Suki’s growing sense of self as a PE teacher drove her productive framing in the form of increasing sophistication in her teaching. While Suki continued to activate and integrate a range of knowledge from her rich teaching repertoire in PE teaching, her framing became more sophisticated: increasingly “differentiated” and “integrated” (Tomlinson, 1995). The effective handling of individual differences was a piece of evidence that her framing became

66

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

more “differentiated”, as she was more sensitive to detailed features and demands of the practice situations. “There may be a great difference between the better pupils and those who are afraid of the ball. If pupils were afraid of the ball, I would ask them to let the ball bounce on the ground before they hit it. They do not need to hit it at once… If their performance was better, they could try to practise it with a greater distance. I just want them to have the sense that they could pass the ball to the other side of the net….” (First interview with Suki in second STP)

The feeling of being at ease made Suki’s professional learning more “integrated”. She made a holistic appraisal of the teaching situations and was able to use economical “chunks” of a range of knowledge in her actions. She seemed to get things together more readily and automatize reading-and-reacting in her teaching (Tomlinson, 1995). She became capable of attending to and managing the complexity of teaching efficiently. “I've got experience and the topic I teach this year is something familiar to me as I taught it last year. I find teaching much easier this year…. Everything is much smoother. I need not think much and I know what the next step is. I only have to refer to the lesson plan just before the lesson….. I feel relaxed this year.” (First interview with Suki in second STP)

The major challenge Suki faced in her second student teaching was the use of EMI (English Medium of Instruction). Initially, there was a big gap between her strongly held meanings that militated against the use of EMI and the placement school’s EMI language policy. Despite having strongly held meanings against EMI, Suki was flexible and reconstructed her strongly held meanings and framed the EMI issue in productive and fitting ways. When she found that she could manage to speak English fluently in class, with occasional use of Chinese, she felt much more at ease. Pupils’ engagement with learning “talked back” to her and helped her come to the view that teaching Civic Education in English supplemented by Chinese was the most appropriate pedagogical practice. While her attempt to teach in EMI was an initiative to fit into the demands of the context, the supplement with Chinese in her teaching was in some sense shaping the context and making it more fitting to her reconstructed meanings. She compared the reshaping of the context to “deliberately adjusting the hurdle to a lower level” in her metaphor of “hurdle” for professional learning. Through the mediation of her teaching self, productive framing took place as she was able to close the gap between her strongly held meanings and the demands of the context in a fitting way. “I could be relaxed with the use of English and I no longer worried about it. I taught Civic Education in English throughout the lesson and used Cantonese for the final part [of the lesson] as required. I just took it easy and dared not force myself to use English in a compulsory manner. I never restrained myself from saying a word in Cantonese. I’ve already unloaded my burden about it. So I feel relaxed…. They, in fact, enjoyed using Cantonese as it was their mother tongue…. I’m free to teach in either English or Cantonese so long as I consider it appropriate…. I think I’ve already adjusted it. EMI, in fact, could be regarded as a very high hurdle…. It’s really considered as a very high hurdle…. But I’ve deliberately adjusted it to a lower level.” (Interview with Suki after second STP)

In contrast to her experience in PE teaching, Suki experienced stagnancy in her professional learning in the Civic Education context. On the one hand, Suki’s strong sense of

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

67

self as a PE teacher was probably inadequate to drive her to exercise her active agency in coping with the constraint she faced – the teaching assignment which involved an EPA (Economic and Public Affairs) topic “Population” with an EPA textbook despite the subject being called Civic Education. Suki perceived this unfamiliar topic as too factual and uninteresting, and she lacked the initiative to make use of the Civic Education pedagogy she learned in coursework in working on the teaching assignment. There was a lack of challenge and support in the socio-professional context with regard to civic education. Though she had a peer teaching the same subject in the school, she did not find that her peer facilitated her professional learning. The absence of a professional dialogue with the regular teacher and the lack of input from the tertiary supervisor also did not provide an adequate challenge to stimulate professional growth. She was left to “sink or swim” on her own in a context of inadequate challenge and support from the various agents, which impeded growth and a state of stasis resulted. “My peer and I are extremely different. There is no stimulation at all. We simply [exchange information about our own teaching and] know more about each other.” (Second interview with Suki during second STP) “For Civic Education, I had very little contact with the regular teacher on the one hand, and on the other hand, no supervisor came to observe my lesson nor did I have any contact with them. So I just worked in my own way. I was absolutely helpless and there was nothing to stimulate my creativity. I therefore regard my learning as stagnant this year.” (Interview with Suki after second STP)

Confirmation of Sense of Self as a PE Teacher In both student teaching periods, Suki appeared to know who she was and expressed her self in a way that built desirable and educationally defensible relationships with pupils and directed her professional development intelligently (Bullough & Gitlin, 1995). The beginning of the first student teaching experience made her “be other than self” to some degree, in order to function in institutionally valued ways in the school context (Bullough & Gitlin, 1995). A stern-looking image seemed to be a necessary part of a PE teacher. Suki was “acting out” her teaching self so as to establish her initial image as a teacher in pupils’ minds. She attempted to negotiate a productive and satisfying place in the student teaching context (Bullough et al, 1991). “I myself always laugh. I worry that pupils will think that I am too casual. I think that at the beginning I should not laugh too much. At least, this lets them know when they can play with me and when they should pay attention in class.” (Interview with Suki before first STP)

Productive framing in the pedagogical and interactional aspects of teaching gave Suki a great sense of personal competence (Nias, 1989). Suki gradually established her image as a teacher in pupils’ minds. Productive framing leading to psychic rewards confirmed Suki’s sense of self as a teacher which drove further productive framing. She entered a spiral upward towards increasing satisfaction: her strong sense of self as a teacher enabled her to frame teaching productively, further reinforcing a coherent sense of self as a teacher, and so on.

68

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang “I could build up a very good relationship with pupils… Also, teaching is a satisfying experience. I now realize that standing in front of the class for some 60-80 minutes in the lesson, what they did was based on every word of my instructions.” (Interview with Suki after first STP) “Pupils were willing to listen to me and follow my instructions. Another thing that cheers me up is that some pupils requested me to stay on to teach them. Why did I say that I feel myself like a teacher? I know it from pupils’ feedback. Perhaps when I say I feel like a teacher but pupils don’t think so. Given pupils’ responses, I have a strong feeling of being like a teacher because I could see that they knew how to act as instructed.” (Interview with Suki after first STP)

Suki’s student teaching experience in the first year was characterized by her successful negotiation of a place in the school and a set of relationships that provided a satisfactory level of security and belonging, respect and self-esteem, and a sense of personal competence (Bullough et al, 1991). This successful negotiation appeared in the second year as well. Perhaps this successful negotiation enabled her to feel good about herself as a teacher despite facing the challenge of EMI, as well as stagnancy in teaching Civic Education. Her productive framing in PE teaching, her sense of belonging to the volleyball team, her personal-professional relationship with the regular PE teacher all contributed to her increasingly strong sense of self as a PE teacher. In the absence of parallel enabling factors in Civic Education, it is little wonder that her teaching self became skewed towards that of a PE teacher. The upward spiral of productive framing, psychic rewards and her coherent sense of self reached a new height in the second student teaching period. Her great sense of competence in instilling pupils’ interest in learning PE – “changing the impossibility” – empowered her coherent sense of self as a PE teacher. She could win pupils’ affection both towards her as a person and the PE subject and she made sense of her self as a means to foster pupils’ interest in PE. The student teaching experience brought resonance between her core and teaching selves as a PE teacher. She strongly felt that she was a PE teacher, with her core and teaching selves bonded. “It is pupils’ acceptance as shown in their writing in notes and autograph album. They told me that they had changed from disliking PE lesson to enjoying it. I considered it’s invaluable to earn such an affirmation. I succeeded in changing the impossibility…. it’s most important that they changed from disliking the lesson to enjoying it, no matter who the teacher was. That’s my most pleasant experience…. Some pupils might be very quiet and inactive. Being able to change them from inactivity to vitality during PE lessons, I got the utmost satisfaction…. It’s more difficult than making them like me. Even I managed to earn their favour by treating them in a friendly way, they might not be interested in PE lessons. Now it’s their enjoyment in PE that made me even happier.” (Interview with Suki after second STP)

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Frances and Suki’s cases have illustrated student teachers’ professional learning in terms of the complex dynamics between the teaching self, the teaching repertoire and the framing process. Though the empirical work presented in this chapter was conducted with a limited sample student teachers in a particular programme context, the integrated and holistic

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

69

framework which shows the dynamic interaction between student teachers and the three arenas of professional learning can be used for further research on professional learning with student teachers of more diverse backgrounds and in other programme and institute-school partnership contexts. This study has highlighted the central role the teaching self plays in professional learning. This calls for the recognition of student teachers’ voices in shaping their own professional learning journey. This implies that those involved in the teacher education process, namely teacher education faculty and school mentors need to engage with student teachers as persons and their emerging teaching selves. Student teachers have to be facilitated to sharpen their self-awareness (Trotman & Kerr, 2001) and engage in systematic reflection to make sense of their own professional development. The empirical findings of this study probably illuminate that when preparing and structuring quality professional learning experiences for student teachers, teacher education faculty and school mentors have to work with student teachers’ life histories, their construction of teacher knowledge and the challenge and support they face. Firstly, teacher education faculty and mentors need to work with student teachers’ life histories rather than against them (Trotman & Kerr, 2001). In line with Collay (1998), Sikes and Troyna (1991) as well as Woods and Sikes’ (1987) argument, life histories can be used as a resource for the development of the emerging teaching self. Attempts need to be made to facilitate student teachers to navigate their professional learning from what they bring to the formal teacher education process such that they can gradually construct their teaching selves and teacher knowledge in the growing teaching repertoire. Secondly, the recognition that student teachers’ life histories, the coursework and fieldwork of the teacher education programme contribute to student teachers’ construction of teacher knowledge implies that the teacher education programme has to be designed to allow student teachers to tap knowledge from these different sources systematically. Teacher education faculty and school mentors need to be aware of the knowledge that student teachers possess at different points of their professional learning journey and sponsor their active agency in constructing their own teacher knowledge from a variety of sources on the basis of their existing knowledge. This would involve facilitating student teachers to gain access to, integrate and interrogate different forms of knowledge from various sources in the coursework and fieldwork of the teacher education programme. Thirdly, teacher education faculty and school mentors need to be aware that an appropriate mix of challenge and support is most beneficial to student teachers’ professional learning. They need to be careful in structuring appropriate challenge and support for individual student teachers at different points of the latter’s professional learning journey. Giving an appropriate mix of challenge and support would help student teachers construct and reconstruct their teaching selves in their continued professional development. Finally, collaboration between teacher education faculty and school mentors probably leads to better engagement with student teachers’ emerging teaching selves gradually constructed in their learning experiences encountered in different parts of the teacher education programme. Mutual understanding of and / or even joint work on the life histories brought by student teachers, their construction of teacher knowledge from various sources and the challenge and support they face enable teacher education faculty and school mentors to work more effectively on student teachers’ professional learning. Perhaps Edwards’ (1995) suggestion of pedagogical partnership can shed light on the collaboration between teacher education faculty and school mentors. To support this pedagogical partnership, the

70

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

development of institute-school partnership structure and culture is necessary. The formal establishment of partnership structure involves the delineation of roles and responsibilities in initial teacher education. This sets the platform for the development of partnership culture. To develop partnership culture, the preparation for teachers to take up mentoring responsibilities and teacher education faculty to take on an expanding role of setting the tone of the pedagogical partnership will help foster growth-producing experiences for student teachers.

REFERENCES Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2002). Components of a good practicum placement: Student teacher perceptions. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 81-99. Ben-Peretz, M. (1995). Curriculum of teacher education programmes. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education, (2nd ed., pp. 543546). New York: Pergamon. Borger, H., & Tillema, H. (1996). Flexible knowledge acquisition: Learning to use knowledge in student teaching. Journal of Professional Studies, 3(2), 25-34. Britzman, D. P. (1991). Practice makes practice: a critical study of learning to teach. Albany: State University of New York Press. Bullough, R. V., & Gitlin, A. D. (1995). Becoming a student of teaching. New York and London: Garland. Bullough, R. V., Jr. (1991). Exploring personal teaching metaphors in preservice teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 37-42. Bullough, R. V., Jr. (1992). Beginning teacher curriculum decision making, personal teaching metaphors, and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(3), 239-252. Bullough, R. V., Knowles, J. G., & Crow, N. A. (1991). Emerging as a teacher. London and New York: Routledge. Calderhead, J. (1991). The nature and growth of knowledge in student teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(5/6), 531-535. Clark, C. M. (2002). New questions about student teaching. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 77-80. Collay, M. (1998). Recherche: Teaching our life histories. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(3), 245-255. Cook-Sather, A. (2001). Between student and teacher: Learning to teach as translation. Teaching Education, 12(2), 177-190. Daloz, L. A. (1986). Effective teaching and mentoring. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Duquette, C., & Cook, S. A. (1999). Professional development schools: preservice candidates’ learning and sources of knowledge. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 45(2), 198-207. Edwards, A. (1995). Teacher education: Partnerships in pedagogy? Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(6), 595-610. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London and Washington , DC: Falmer Press. Eraut, M. (1995). Schon shock: A case for reframing reflection-in-action. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 9-21.

Professional Learning in Initial Teacher Education

71

Furlong, J., & Maynard, T. (1995). Mentoring student teachers: The growth of professional knowledge. London: Routledge. Gimmestad, M. J., & Hall, G. E. (1995). Structure of teacher education programmes. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 548-552). New York: Pergamon. Gipe, J. P., & Richard, J. C. (1992). Reflective thinking and growth in novices’ teaching abilities. Journal of Educational Research, 86(1), 52-57. Griffiths, V. (2000). The reflective dimension in teacher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 33(5), 539-555. Higgins, S., & Leat, D. (2001). Horses for courses or courses for horses: What is effective teacher development? In J. Soler, A. Craft, & H. Burgess (Eds.), Teacher development: exploring our own practice (pp. 57-68). London: Paul Chapman and the Open University. Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 205-219). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129-169. LaBoskey, V. K., & Richert, A. E. (2002). Identifying good student teaching placements: A programmatic perspective. Teacher Education Quarterly, 29(2), 7-34. Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lyle, S. (1996). The education of reflective teachers? A view of a teacher educator. Journal of Teacher Development, 5(2), 4-11. Martin, S. (1996). Support and challenge: conflicting or complementary aspects of mentoring novice teachers? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 2(1), 41-56. McNally, J., Cope, P., Inglis, B., & Stronach, I. (1997). The student teacher in school: Conditions for development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(5), 485-498. McNally, P., & Martin, S. (1998). Support and challenge in learning to teach: The role of the mentor. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 26(1), 39-50. Nias, J. (1989). Primary teachers talking. London: Routledge. Oosterheert, I. E., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). Individual differences in learning to teach: Relating cognition, regulation and affect. Learning and Instruction, 11(2), 133-156. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Raymond, D., Butt, R., & Townsend, D. (1992). Contexts for teacher development: Insights from teachers’ stories. In A. Hargreaves & M. B. Fullan (Eds.), Understanding teacher development (pp. 143-161). New York: Teachers College Press. Riseborough, G. F. (1985). Pupils, teachers’ careers and schooling: An empirical study. In I. F. Goodson (Ed.), Teachers’ lives and careers (pp. 202-265). London: The Falmer Press. Samaras, A. P., & Gismondi, S. (1998). Scaffolds in the field: Vygotskian interpretation in a teacher education program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(7), 715-733. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Aldershot, UK: Arena. Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Sikes, P., & Troyna, B. (1991). True stories: A case study in the use of life history in initial

72

Sylvia Yee Fan Tang

teacher education. Educational Review, 43(1), 3-16. Slick, S. K. (1997). Assessing vs. assisting: The supervisor’s roles in the complex dynamics of the student teaching triad. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(7), 713-726. Slick, S. K. (1998). The university supervisor: A disenfranchised outsider. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8), 821-834. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. London: Sage. Stones, E. (1987). Teaching practice supervision: bridge between theory and practice. European Journal of Teacher Education, 10(1), 67-79. Stuart, J. S., & Tatto, M. T. (2000). Designs for initial teacher preparation programs: An international view. International Journal of Educational Research, 33(5), 493-514. Tang, S. Y. F. (2002). From behind the pupil's desk to the teacher's desk: A qualitative study of student teachers' professional learning in Hong Kong. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 30(1), 51-66. Tang, S. Y. F. (2003). Challenge and support: The dynamics of student teachers' professional learning in the field experience in initial teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(5), 483-498. Tang, S. Y. F. (2004). The dynamics of school-based learning in initial teacher education. Research Papers in Education, 19(2), 185-205. Tomlinson, P. (1995). Understanding mentoring: Reflective strategies for school-based teacher preparation. Buckingham and Philadelphia: Open University Press. Trotman, J., & Kerr, T. (2001). Making the personal professional: Pre-service teacher education and personal histories. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7(2), 157172. Woods, P. C., & Skies, P. J. (1987). The use of teacher biographies in professional selfdevelopment. In F. Todd (Ed.), Planning continuing professional development (pp. 161180). London: Croom Helm. Wubbels, T., Korthagen, F., & Brekelmans, M. (1997). Developing theory from practice in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24, 75-90.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 73-95

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 3

THE CENTRALITY OF PCK IN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PRIMARY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TEACHERS: TOWARDS SCHOOL-WIDE REFORM Alister Jones and Judy Moreland University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

ABSTRACT This chapter describes a model for pedagogical content knowledge that was developed and informed by sustained classroom based research. The model is discussed in the context of technology education and the changes that occurred in classroom practice when it was used as the basis for professional development. However this is only part of the story. Although change in classroom practice occurred for all teachers from a range of schools involved in the research and development project, there was one school that changed its practices on a school-wide basis. This chapter explores the characteristics of pedagogical content knowledge that can inform professional development programmes and the way professional developers and schools can work together to bring about school-wide change. In 1998 an exploratory project was begun in a local primary school. Six years later significant changes are evident in the way the school approaches teaching, learning and assessment in science and technology education. This chapter has attempted to explore the factors that contributed to these changes. The introduction of this model of pedagogical content knowledge in association with effective teacher development has been shown to have a positive impact on teaching and student performance in technology. Also it has become apparent that introducing teachers to these components of pedagogical content knowledge generally is beginning to lead to enhanced teaching, learning and assessment in other curriculum areas.

74

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland The roles researchers played in the school were important. The researchers were seen as having credibility as classroom teachers, researchers and experts. In the classroom the researchers blended in but were able to offer support and guidance where necessary. They were also aware of teacher difficulties when making changes at the school level. The researchers have continued to play an informal role in the school in terms of being a focus point for exploring ideas.

INTRODUCTION This chapter describes a model for pedagogical content knowledge that was developed and informed by sustained classroom based research. The model is discussed in the context of technology education and the changes that occurred in classroom practice when it was used as the basis for professional development. However this is only part of the story. Although change in classroom practice occurred for all teachers from a range of schools involved in the research and development project, there was one school that changed its practices on a school-wide basis. This chapter explores the characteristics of pedagogical content knowledge that can inform professional development programmes and the way professional developers and schools can work together to bring about school-wide change.

EFFECTIVE TEACHERS The key purpose of the professional development of teachers is to develop more effective practitioners. Effective classroom practitioners have a broad understanding of curriculum aims and objectives, have a wide range of pedagogical strategies; have high expectations of all students; know students well; provide effective feedback; recognize student success; have sound content knowledge of the subject and understand what it means to make progress (Gipps, 1999; Porter & Brophy, 1988; Wragg, Wragg, Hayes & Chamberlain, 1998). Where teachers’ subject knowledge is weak, confidence levels to teach that subject are low, leading to restricted classroom practices (Harlen, 1999). In contrast, sound content knowledge seems to have a positive effect on planning, assessment, implementation of curriculum and curriculum development. Harlen and James (1997) comment that teachers cannot provide experiences and activities that guide student progress toward the understanding of ideas if they themselves do not know what the ideas are. If teachers have generally sound pedagogical skills they rely on them to carry them through difficult aspects of the subjects they teach, but this can limit student learning in the area. Gess-Newsome (1999) notes that teachers with well-developed pedagogical skills still experience difficulty in responding appropriately to student ideas when they move outside their area of content expertise. Subject knowledge of each discipline is often not enough though, as this knowledge can be rather fragmentary in nature, particularly in relation to teaching. Teachers with a strong overview and a structure of inter-related ideas are able to make more connections to draw on during teaching and learning situations. Askew, Brown, Rhodes, Johnson and Wiliam (1997) found no relationship between teachers’ level of subject qualification and student progress in mathematics. Instead there was a strong correlation with their pedagogical

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

75

content knowledge. While much teacher education and professional development research in the past has focused on the importance of teachers’ subject knowledge, the research often did not distinguish between abstract content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Black, Harrison, Lee, & Wiliam, 2001). Ties between teachers’ subject knowledge, how that is transformed for classrooms and assessment ability have been acknowledged (Bell & Cowie, 1997; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Sadler, 1998; Shulman, 1987). When teachers are unsure of the nature of the discipline and its structure they are not well equipped to guide learning in it or assess that learning. Good knowledge of the subject matter enables teachers to construct learning hierarchies, which provide a blueprint for devising assessment procedures (Carr, McGee, Jones, McKinley, Bell, Barr, & Simpson, 2000). As Fleer (1999) comments: It can be expected that the way the learning context is structured is likely to be as a direct result of the teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and philosophy about how children think and learn (p. 275). Gipps and Brown (1999) argue that teachers require a range of pedagogical strategies to suit a range of situations. To choose the most appropriate strategy they need to know the understandings students have reached in order to engage in formative assessment. Underlying this is good content knowledge and good pedagogical content knowledge. They equate this blending of formative assessment, student understandings and pedagogic strategy to Shulman’s (1987) act of pedagogic reasoning. Transformations of the subject matter as understood by the teacher into aspects relevant and applicable to their students are required. Duschl and Gitomer (1997) also declare that successful facilitation of student-teacher conversations requires a reasonable grasp of the subject matter being explored. Teachers need to develop a clear sense of the conceptual terrain they are exploring and will also need to have a pedagogical sense of the likely understandings the students will bring to a domain. With sufficient content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers can respond to students productively.

DEFINING PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Making sound decisions about what and how to teach, termed by Shulman (1987) as ‘pedagogical reasoning’, requires sound subject knowledge, an expansive teaching repertoire and extensive pedagogical knowledge. The comprehensive framework includes knowledge of content, general pedagogy, curriculum, learners, educational contexts and educational ends. Pedagogical content knowledge is important for this identifies the distinctive bodies of knowledge for teaching. Shulman examines how the various kinds of teacher knowledge are used. Pedagogical content knowledge is a complex blending of pedagogy and subject content and includes aspects related to an understanding of what is to be taught, learned and assessed, an understanding of how learners learn, an understanding of ways to facilitate effective learning, and an understanding of how to blend content and pedagogy to organize particular topics for learners. Shulman describes pedagogical content knowledge as ‘the most useful forms of content representation . . . the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations . . . the ways of representing and formulating the subject that makes it comprehensible for others’ (p.9). Not only do teachers need to understand

76

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

content and purpose; they must be able to transform the content knowledge so that it becomes pedagogically powerful. In elaboration of Shulman’s original notion of pedagogical content knowledge GessNewsome (1999) suggests five overlapping categories: conceptual knowledge, subject matter structure, and nature of the discipline, content-specific teaching orientations and contextual influences. Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko (1999) emphasized that pedagogical content knowledge results from the transformation of other domain knowledge. Their model of pedagogical content knowledge includes teacher’s orientation to teaching the subject, knowledge of subject curricula, knowledge of assessment, knowledge of student subject area understanding and knowledge of instruction strategies. Grossman (1990) suggests there are four central components to pedagogical content knowledge; knowledge and beliefs about purpose, knowledge of student conceptions, curricula knowledge and knowledge of instructional strategies. Cochran, deRuiter and King (1993) describe four components: knowledge, environmental contexts, pedagogy, and subject matter. The characteristics of pedagogical content knowledge common to all these definitions are knowledge of subject matter, students, curriculum, and associated pedagogy. Previous research and models of pedagogical content knowledge have tended to overplay specific subject pedagogical content knowledge and underplay strategies to develop pedagogical content knowledge generally, Most work in pedagogical content knowledge has been carried out in secondary schools and in particular subject areas (Appleton, 2003). From our classroom based research and associated teacher professional development research in primary schools we believe that definitions of pedagogical content knowledge do not provide an adequate description of it for primary school teachers.

TOWARDS A MODEL OF PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE Teachers’ understanding of the nature and purpose of the discipline strongly influences their personal pedagogical content knowledge i.e. what they highlight as important for particular students, in particular contexts. Subjects taught in schools are a representation of that subject rather than the subject itself. The nature of the subject or discipline from a socio cultural perspective will include also the ways of knowing and knowledge generation. Stetsenko and Arievitch (2002) describe the seminal work of Piotr Gal’perin, one of Vygotsky’s students and colleagues, who argued that teachers should organize their work around the most abstract and coherent principles that characterize a particular domain of knowledge. These principles are the core conceptual tools, the internalization of which enables students to think powerfully about a whole range of phenomena. This means that the teachers need to have a sense of the nature of the discipline, its organizing concepts and its tools. This includes also cultural notions of language concepts and the mediation of tools and frameworks. Stetsenko and Arievitch (2002) highlight that Gal’perin’s theory emphasizes that to understand the development of the mind, one needs not only to observe how children participate in practices and make use of cultural tools, but also to construct instructional procedures that specially provide students with tool use, in which the evolving histories and functions of the tools are made explicit.

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

77

In considering the components of a more robust and comprehensive model for pedagogical content knowledge, we also need to consider what is meant by subject matter. We would see subject matter as being associated with the nature of the discipline, the structure of the big ideas (including notions of the progression), the conceptual and procedural knowledge of the subject and technical aspects. Notions of progression are combined with understanding the conceptual and procedural ideas as well as how students might progress. Therefore progression or ‘where to next?’ is a combination of the discipline structure and learning within that. A sociocultural perspective on learning and pedagogical content knowledge provides insights into the importance of teachers developing robust pedagogical content knowledge. A review of the literature on teaching, learning and assessment indicated the importance of pedagogical content knowledge alongside pedagogical knowledge. The emerging sociocultural notions of teaching, learning and assessment highlight the importance that the culture/discipline plays in teaching and student learning. Drawing from a sociocultural perspective (Stetsenko and Arievitch, 2002), what we know about effective teachers (Dalton and Tharp, 2002), research on pedagogical content knowledge (Gess-Newsome, 1999) and our own classroom research in the area (Jones and Moreland, 2001) we argue that pedagogical content knowledge has seven constructs: • • • • • • •

Nature of the subject and its characteristics; Conceptual, procedural, societal and technical aspects of the subject; Knowledge of the curriculum, including goals and objectives as well as specific programmes; Knowledge of student learning in the subject, including existing knowledge, strengths and weaknesses and progression of student learning; Specific teaching and assessment practices of the subject, e.g. authentic, holistic, construct reference; Understanding the role and place of context; Classroom environment and management in relation to the subject e.g. managing resources, equipment and technical management.

We now discuss these components of pedagogical content knowledge with reference to classroom-based research and professional development conducted over a two-year period in the developing area of technology education. Although the work was carried out in the curriculum context of technology education, evidence to date suggests that this research has transferred to other curriculum areas such as science, environmental education, social studies (Jones & Moreland, 2003).

NATURE OF THE SUBJECT AND ITS CHARACTERISTICS When the teachers had an understanding of the characteristics of the discipline, they developed more secure guidelines for thinking about what was important in the learning activities and the intended learning. For example, teachers were able to choose more suitable tasks for developing student learning in technology and could more readily identify

78

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

technological learning goals on which to base their teaching and assessment practices. By understanding the characteristics of the subject, the teachers were better able to identify general aspects of technology and differentiate between the technological areas. They were more able to audit existing classroom activities for their technological consistency - for example ‘is this more a language activity, or a science activity than a technology one?’ (Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones & Northover, 2001). They arranged a series of activities for the students and did not focus on building on students’ conceptual understanding or procedural abilities.

CONCEPTUAL, PROCEDURAL, SOCIETAL AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE SUBJECT The teachers’ developing conceptual and procedural technological knowledge enabled them to identify specific learning goals, and they began to move with more confidence between the characteristics of technology and the specific technological learning outcomes. The shift in focus from providing a technology experience to providing opportunities for students to develop particular technological learning outcomes was significant. They became focused on the technological learning of their students. Teachers demonstrated greater confidence with formative interactions, particularly in relation to providing appropriate and descriptive feedback to the learners. Direction was given where deemed appropriate, which led to more considered and purposeful interactions. Not only was there more emphasis on providing feedback and assistance to students to develop particular technical skills, there was also more emphasis on conceptual, procedural and societal aspects than on social and managerial aspects. The teachers put value on their increased capacity for identifying specific and overall learning outcomes rather than just activities; identifying procedural, conceptual, societal and technical learning outcomes; questioning using technological vocabulary and concepts; and, allowing for multiple outcomes. There was encouragement for students to seek divergent solutions. Teachers also began developing understandings related to aspects of progression, including linking and enhancing technological learning from one unit to the next. Teacher understanding of progression was also reflected in task selection and development. Tasks were identified to develop particular technological conceptual and procedural aspects rather than just providing a variety of experiences in different technological areas (Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones & Northover, 2001; Jones, Moreland & Chambers, 2001).

KNOWLEDGE OF THE CURRICULUM Teachers needed to be aware of what was highlighted in the curriculum as valuable for technology. Interaction between curriculum knowledge and subject knowledge assisted teachers to think about the goals and objectives as well as specific programmes for their students. There was a linking between the characteristics of the subject, the specific conceptual and procedural aspects and the curriculum objectives. This is a transformational process from subject to curriculum to classroom. When teachers just relied on curriculum

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

79

objectives to define their teaching, they found it difficult to think of teaching in detailed conceptual and procedural terms. A curriculum objective focus for teaching resulted in teachers providing students with experiences in different technological areas rather than focusing on developing any degree of sophistication or complexity in student learning (Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones & Northover, 2001).

KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENT LEARNING IN THE SUBJECT Teachers needed to be aware how they build on students’ conceptual and procedural understandings and their strengths and weaknesses in technology e.g. the teachers were unaware of the difficulties students’ encountered when they tried to envisage their thinking in 2 or 3-dimensions and when making models. The teachers were not sure about how to approach the teaching of drawing and were unsure of the role of graphicacy in promoting technological learning. Teachers were uncertain whether students were capable of matching their imaginative abilities with representational skills. However, when teachers modeled drawing in front of students and when they used drawing as a tool to represent ideas, students used drawing to develop ‘designerly thinking’ and behaviours. When teacher support was provided students showed a strong correlation between what they intended to do and what they produced (Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones & Northover, 2001). There is a need to give direct instruction in technical skills to assist student learning. Hidden dilemmas related to the status of practical work needs to be addressed. There is acknowledgement that procedural knowledge is not simply acquired through doing, it needs to be planned for and taught. For example, young students need to be introduced to the different genres of drawing in order to develop useful designs. When teachers value student drawings and foster graphicacy through instruction, drawing becomes a powerful tool for students to make sense of the world. Further to identifying what students bring to lessons is knowing how students progress in their technology learning. In technology education, where progression in learning may be thought to consist of dealing with a greater number and a more complex array of variables, the development of sophisticated feedback skills by teachers is critical to the enhancement of student learning. If learning is to be enhanced then teachers need to be knowledgeable about the next learning steps and how to guide students to get there (Jones and Moreland, 2003).

SPECIFIC TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT PRACTICES OF THE SUBJECT Knowing about the most appropriate ways to teach and assess particular subjects impacts on student learning in the subject. As Moreland, Jones and Northover (2001) found teachers met difficulties when they applied more general teaching and assessment to technology, even when they had some technology curriculum knowledge. When the teachers had more detailed knowledge of the subject and the curriculum they were able to design appropriate teaching and assessment strategies e.g., transfer strategies, construct referenced assessment. They could use a variety of ways to explore, develop and focus students’ technological thinking

80

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

e.g. flow diagrams illustrating processes and stages to encourage student reflection, to encourage iteration between different phases, and as a means to look forward. Often in technology classes the design process is treated as a series of steps (McCormick, 2000). This can be characterized as posing and thinking about the problem, clarification, thinking of alternatives, implementation and evaluation and can become ritualized with lessons structured around it. It is a ritual that does not affect student thinking. Students undertake the process, often tidying up portfolios or work after the event, as they are required to show the development of ideas. A ‘veneer of accomplishment’ is apparent (Lave, 1988). Hence, how teachers’ structure lessons strongly affects how students undertake technological processes (Jones & Carr, 1993). Teacher knowledge of technological problem solving processes is therefore important. For example, in our study when teachers worked alongside students, cueing them to think about materials, material qualities, fixing and joining devices and mechanisms before they started design drawings, students worked iteratively between thinking, designing and making (Moreland & Jones, 2000). How to effectively teach and assess particular ideas in a subject ‘is not a solely pedagogical question; it impacts very considerably on the nature of the subject matter’ (Barnett & Hodson, 2001, p433). Technological learning is enhanced when students are engaged with authentic activities (Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989). However, in technology many classroom activities have students beginning from scratch, rather than reflecting actual technological problem solving, which usually involves modification and adaptation of existing technologies (Hennessy, McCormick & Murphy, 1993). Earlier research in New Zealand indicated that very few activities developed by teachers reflected principles of real technological practice (Jones & Carr, 1993). Knowing about culturally purposeful authenticity where classroom technology is reflective of the technology world outside the classroom, and personal authenticity where the student is involved and the learning meaningful, become important in teaching and assessing technology appropriately.

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE AND PLACE OF CONTEXT The use of technological problems and contexts can be an important way to introduce subject-related ideas. Teachers need to know the appropriate subject related contexts for their students. For example, in our classroom research we have found that if problems were too openly defined, or there is limited teacher and student understanding of the context, learners may lose their way. Equally problematic were overly constrained tasks, as teacher overspecification led to lack of student ownership and control (Moreland & Jones, 2000). Like Fleer (1999) we believe students should be involved in setting the technological agenda, for this gives the tasks more personal meaning and buy-in to the students. This is not to say that anything goes. Developing technological capability should be organized so students learn in terms of procedures, concepts and skills in a structured, rather than haphazard, way (Anning, 1994). When students in our study were encouraged to see the issues surrounding any technological decision, they became involved in meaningful decision-making (Jones, Moreland & Chambers, 2001). Teachers therefore need to involve children in problemsolving tasks where the value positions are made clear to them and presented in a way to which they can relate. To teach in context is to bring relevance to an activity. In technology

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

81

the context may also be a vehicle for bringing design ideas into the open. By considering the user considerations, for example, the task becomes richer and student decision-making more meaningful. Knowledge construction in technology must be learnt in context as in these circumstances students develop tacit ‘doing’ knowledge (Solomon & Hall, 1996).

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT AND MANAGEMENT IN RELATION TO THE SUBJECT The classroom culture and student expectations influence the way students carry out activities. In a practical subject like technology the classroom environment and management practices impact on students’ learning. An environment that is supportive and challenging fosters positive attitudes of self-esteem and motivation and these help to create the conditions in which technological capability can thrive. Students therefore need opportunities to work on tasks within their capability but at the same time stretch them, where risk taking and failure are seen as positive and beneficial. It is vital for students to be engaged in technological learning that is within or just beyond their reach. This challenges students to extend into new understandings in order to achieve success (Kimbell, Stables & Green, 1996; Stables, 1997). In our research we found that when students are given support to find out how things work, to make things work, and to create and express themselves they will have better chances to develop technological capability (Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones & Northover, 2001; Jones, Moreland & Chambers, 2001). Teachers as more knowledgeable and technically competent can assist student development through intervention and modeling of ideas and skills. This may accelerate students’ acquisition of ideas and skills (Anning, 1997).

USING THE PCK MODEL IN A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME An underpinning principle for successful professional development is building a sense of community between teachers and between teachers and researchers/professional developers (Bell & Gilbert, 1996; Fullan & Hargreaves 1992; Jones, Mather & Carr, 1994). In this research, as teachers and researchers were working at the leading edge of their knowledge and skills, building a co-operative, supportive, innovative community between both groups was integral. The relationship was one of open discourse, with communication orientated towards understanding and respecting perspectives of others (Rogoff, Matusov & White, 1996). Successful change is more likely to happen in schools where teachers interact with one another and with personnel from outside the school who are also involved in the change (McGee, 1997). Our programme centred on teachers trying out new ideas, so support and guidance were necessary for keeping morale positive and helping teachers to test ideas. Researchers acted as a catalyst and support for teachers’ learning (Bell & Gilbert, 1996; Treagust & Rennie, 1993). Effective leadership is an integral ingredient in the mix for promoting successful teacher change (Jones & Compton, 1998; Rennie, 2001; Treagust & Rennie, 1993). An extended

82

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

timeframe also facilitates teacher change (Bell & Gilbert, 1996; Treagust & Rennie, 1993). The three years gave time for researchers and teachers to plan modifications, trial ideas and reflect on success. Opportunities for analysing and presenting research findings, granted scope for rethinking and synthesizing ideas (Bell & Gilbert, 1996). Our programme avoided the shortcomings of one-shot in-service courses, with no follow-up opportunities (McGee, 1997). In sum, building collaborative, co-operative inquiry community, providing support and guidance and allowing time for trailing ideas and reflecting were key principles underpinning the research and development approach. Firstly we highlight the three-year research programme and the changes that occurred in the school within that time frame. The main focus of the paper reports on the factors that contribute to positive teacher and school involvement in the research process, including the culture of the school, the choice of participants, impact on teacher practices, the nature of the research and professional development and the ways the researchers worked in the school.

MOUNTVIEW SCHOOL’S THREE YEAR RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT Mountview School is a primary school (years 1-6) with 440 students and 17 classes. An ongoing-positive relationship between the school and the researchers developed during a 1998-2000 technology education research project. Mountview School has since invited the researchers back to contribute to electronics education, environmental education and science developments.

The First Year The original technology study was undertaken over three years (1998-2000). In 1998 teachers’ current technology classroom practices were examined (Moreland & Jones, 2000). It was found that though teachers could identify suitable technological tasks they had difficulty identifying suitable technological learning outcomes and associated technological knowledge. They saw technology as a subject that required their students to be involved in practical activities. Therefore many student tasks were hands-on, drawing, making and testing centred. When teachers focused on tasks organizing practical tasks, teacher feedback also focused on the tasks, and feedback to enhance learning at the conceptual and procedural level was minimized. Teacher-student interactions were often praise-based related to task completion and social and managerial aspects rather than related to enhancing students’ technological understanding. The lack of critique of students’ conceptual and procedural understanding minimized detailed guidance for ongoing work. Therefore teachers had difficulties making student-learning statements that were useful for future teaching and learning.

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

83

The Second and Third Years In 1999 and 2000 an intervention was used to enhance teachers’ technology pedagogical content knowledge. Strategies included reflecting on case studies of their own and others classroom practice; using a planning framework; involvement in workshops; providing classroom support; involvement in teacher agreement meetings; using student portfolios; and summative profiling. The intervention focused on moving teachers away from thinking about technology as a series of tasks defined solely by the broad curriculum achievement objectives. Teachers’ planning and teaching difficulties in 1998 had related to a minimal understanding of significant underlying concepts and procedures. The subsequent 1999-2000 use of a planning framework and the development of a more detailed, complex and sophisticated knowledge base in the different technological areas impacted on teachers’ practices. As technology education is concerned with complex and interrelated problems that involve multiple conceptual, procedural, societal and technical variables (Jones, 1997), a planning framework in accordance. It included a specific task definition, overall dimensions of technology (knowledge, capability and societal) and specific learning outcomes in terms of technological concepts, procedures, societal aspects and technical skills. It reinforced the notion of the nature of technology and linked strongly with curriculum objectives. Teachers were encouraged to think in terms of the task as whole rather than in isolated aspects. The new planning strategies compelled teachers to articulate intended learning outcomes in concise technological terms. By articulating multiple learning outcomes teachers were able to deduce their knowledge requirements for teaching technology as well as deducing specific learning goals for students. They developed a mental framework for making decisions about what needs to be included when teaching technology. Professional development workshops were undertaken throughout the two intervention years and built on each other. Between the workshops the teachers trialed ideas in their classrooms. On-going facilitation provided vital support during the workshops and when teachers had returned to their classrooms. The final workshops had a reflective focus with teachers sharing and evaluating their classroom programmes and student learning. They identified guidance elements for other primary teachers planning, teaching and assessing technology. In classrooms the team emphasized the need to identify and focus on specific learning goals. The teachers required continuing advice and direction related to this. Support material, modeling appropriate learning outcomes and clear instructions about desired outcomes was provided. Suitable learning outcomes were made known to teachers on an ongoing basis. The adherence to specific learning outcomes compelled teachers to move from thinking about technology just in terms of suitable activities. The struggle teachers demonstrated meant support strategies became a crucial feature. One-to-one, ongoing support in classrooms and the collaborative workshop atmosphere were important. When teachers’ foundations were shaken and feelings of uncertainty surfaced it was crucial that researchers were understanding, supportive and appreciative of their efforts.

84

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

TEACHER CHANGE Enhanced pedagogical content knowledge was noticeable where teachers moved from using general technology concepts to more specific concepts within different technological areas. Teachers’ developing conceptual and procedural knowledge enabled them to write specific learning goals, and they began to move with more confidence between the global dimensions of the nature of technology and the specific technological learning outcomes. At the outset teachers also identified specific technological learning goals for assessment. They chose more suitable tasks with the potential to develop student technological learning. The shift in focus from providing technology experiences to providing opportunities for developing particular technological learning outcomes was significant. By investigating a range of learning outcome possibilities, then selecting particular learning outcomes meant teachers pursued a more appropriate approach to technological planning and learning. Students’ technological learning became the focus. Teachers were also increasingly cognisant of unexpected and negotiated learning outcomes and were better prepared to allow students to pursue such outcomes. Teachers demonstrated greater confidence with formative interactions, particularly in relation to providing appropriate technology feedback. Focus on social and managerial aspects and activities received less attention. Instead considered direction was appropriately given, leading to more considered and purposeful interactions. There was descriptive feedback, more emphasis on conceptual and procedural aspects, and assistance to develop particular technical skills. Teachers also began developing understanding of progression aspects linking technological learning from one unit to the next and linking tasks within units. Tasks were identified to develop particular technological conceptual and procedural aspects rather than just providing a variety of experiences in different technological areas. The use of the frameworks enabled teachers to differentiate between the different levels of student learning and to justify the differentiation. The teachers also noticed more effective student learning in technology. Many of the teachers commented that the intervention had a direct influence on other subjects, especially with their planning and formative interactions. They had moved from thinking about progression in terms of a series of activities to examining the conceptual and procedural aspects of student learning. The focus on more precise formative interactions enhanced student learning. Students showed effective understandings about the nature of technology and conceptual and procedural aspects, used a larger variety of more appropriate technological vocabulary, and showed effective understanding of task purposes. They were able to identify their own technology knowledge gaps, were highly motivated and interested in technology and showed effective knowledge transfer between tasks and from other curriculum areas. For full details of the analysis of student work see Jones and Moreland (2001).

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

85

INVESTIGATING THE FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO POSITIVE TEACHER/SCHOOL INVOLVEMENT IN THE RESEARCH AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The factors that contribute to positive teacher/school involvement in the research process were investigated from Mountview School’s perspective through interviewing four staff in 2003. The participants were the principal (I), assistant principal (D), a senior teacher involved in the original project (L) and a senior teacher who used ideas from the technology project but more particularly in science (M). The interviews focused on participants’ reflections of the research and development in the school and impacts on technology teaching, other curriculum areas and the school in general. Interviews were informal, individual, audio taped and 30-60 minutes long. The transcripts were analysed according to themes. The findings indicate that several factors contributed to Mountview’s sustained involvement and change. These include the culture of the school, the strategic choice of teacher participants, the positive impact of the research, the nature of the research and the researchers’ ways of working.

CULTURE OF THE SCHOOL The culture of Mountview School was seen as an important factor in sustaining the project for three years. It was described as one that allowed teachers to show initiative, take risks, question, examine and reflect. For example: The culture in the school allows us to take risks, encourages us to keep thinking and reflecting but I am never satisfied (M) The principal commented on building a trustworthy, supportive school culture focusing on developing curriculum knowledge, self-examination and questioning, risk taking, reflective attitudes. Knowing the curriculum and being reflective about the processes. We build up a culture of constantly questioning, being aware, being reflective. So other people can see what they are doing. If you are going to put people on the line there needs to be trust and you have to have a culture in the school where taking sensible risks is supported. (I) Associated with these aspects was a research and change driven school culture where teachers are encouraged to examine educational research and research their own practice. We are a research driven school. Why are we doing this? Who says? Do we agree? We are trying to develop teachers who are researchers of their own practice. Not just reflective practitioners (I) The expectation of research and professional development involvement was part of being a teacher in the school and this culture meant that researchers and professional developers were welcomed. In terms of creating the culture,the staff saw the principal as crucial. The principal was seen as being focused on teaching and learning as well as being an effective leader. Principal is interested in developing staff in terms of teaching and learning (M)

86

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

The principal is crucial . . . We are very lucky. We have a principal that is pushing us to think and challenge – a leader in that way. She supports the teacher, seeing the potential and getting alongside them and valuing them – giving them that confidence (D) Associated with the leadership of the principal was the way senior management advocated involvement in research and encouraged reflective practice. Management is a strong advocate and what I learnt I transferred it into my own teaching School organisation in terms of management structure and the encouragement of monitoring and evaluation was also seen as an essential for supporting innovation. Look at teams, look at bonds. Some members of the team have changed – it is also about ownership, here our lead teachers work with a team. We monitor what we do each year and look at what we need to change and what we need to refine. (I) Although only four Mountview teachers were involved in the initial three-year programme, the changes were incorporated into whole school planning and reporting systems. The culture of sharing information in the school as well as team planning assisted the dissemination process. The four were enthusiastic about the approach and the outcomes were presented to a wider audience in the school. The assistant principal commented: We shared with other teachers about what we were doing. It then went to our long term planning using the framework and we did it together and then got debate going. We had a structure in the school to feed the research findings into planning. The ideas we were developing in the research I took back into my area. I was leading the junior area. I took it to the whole junior area. We had a resource person – I knew whom to go to help. We invited her into a four-hour meeting and she was able to articulate what we needed. We used the research people in a wider context. The relationship had built up. The other teachers then said, ’I could do this’. (D) The research project outcomes were making a difference for the teachers and their students involved in the project, so other teachers were encouraged to take up some of the ideas. For example: In introducing other teachers they wanted to know what was going on and teachers that came back were motivated and focused about they were doing and why. The other teachers were pretty nosy. It is like all good things – if someone has it the others want it. There is a culture of sharing – looking at the successes, for example, the shade cloth – seeing it work. The other teachers were saying ‘I don’t want to be left out or left behind’. Particularly when the teachers were getting this respect and they were getting results. (D)

STRATEGIC CHOICE OF TEACHER PARTICIPANTS When Mountview School was invited to take part in the programme the school selected the teachers. Although involvement was voluntary, it would appear the school was strategic in terms of who they identified to participate. As commented: The key thing was we had all key areas represented there. We looked at who went. I had overall responsibility for assessment and Science and Technology. It gave me an overview, impacted in terms of assessment including changes in the school. (D) Part of the success of the research project and the on-going relationship was the commitment of the teachers who were involved in the research project from 1998. The staff

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

87

who were asked and decided to be involved were seen to be successful classroom teachers and professional, reflective practitioners. For example: I remember this teacher saying she did this fantastic unit and then finding from the class observation and case studies by the researcher that it was not technology. She was quite stunned, but she had the professionalism and reflective nature to say what do I need to change, as opposed to shutting down. (D) The staff is a capable group of teachers and all of them had to do some unlearning to do some new learning. (I)

THE IMPACT OF THE RESEARCH ON TEACHERS’ PRACTICES The 1998-2000 programme had a positive impact on teachers’ technology planning, teaching and assessment practices and a subsequent impact on science. As noted earlier, the planning framework impacted on teachers’ practices. Their planning focused on the nature of the subject, specific conceptual and procedural aspects and on student learning progress. This planning focus for technology has transferred to science planning and also impacted on teachers’ reporting to parents.

A Planning Focus on the Nature of the Subject and Specific Conceptual and Procedural Aspects An important aspect in the technology project was getting teachers to focus on the characteristics or nature of technology and specific conceptual and procedural aspects when planning. Teachers commented on the significance of this to their practice. In unpicking technology the characteristics of technology and through the planning stage of it. The conceptual and skill aspects (M) It focuses on what were the characteristics of technology and then how do we teach it. D) I now believe in the technology curriculum for what it can do for students. I got more specific learning out of my large tasks, more assessment and more direction as a result of that planning (L) The planning framework with its focus on the nature of the subject and the conceptual and procedural aspects had a significant impact on the planning and teaching in the school. The teacher not involved in the technology research commented on her new focus on learning and the resulting enhancement of student learning: I feel so much more comfortable about this format . . . I think it defines the task and then builds on learning. It’s thinking about learning in a more structured way rather just ending up with the product. The learning for the children is much more prolific . . .. It made me think about what I had to develop with the children . . .. It’s that thinking about learning really (M) The planning framework was perceived as helping them become better teachers by getting them to focus on what they might teach. It makes you a better teacher; it’s not the end point that it is important but what they are developing. Now I think this is what I might teach and I think of it as a guide but we might end up several steps along the way from what I thought (D)

88

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

Planning Focus on Student Learning Progress In planning, the student learning opportunities were now not thought of in terms of activities or as curriculum coverage but in terms of student learning progress. For example: The planning framework was crucial because it moved you away from thinking about learning as a series of activities. Thinking about helping children to progress in their learning (L)

TRANSFER TO SCIENCE PLANNING The aspect of thinking about a subject’s characteristics when planning learning outcomes has now transferred to teachers’ science planning practices. The strength is in terms of identifying and focusing on the characteristics of science and the intended learning outcomes. We are now focusing on the essential nature of the subject like technology now through to science. Can we generalize this to science, technology and social studies or are we just thinking about generalized stuff? Are we doing science or are we doing science activities? Transferred to other subject because it started a way of thinking it was looking at the essentials of the subjects If I am thinking this ways in technology why not try this in science, it works for me. I haven’t driven it has driven itself. (I) The format of the model is really good and reshaping the model into a workable format in science, adds to the depth of teacher knowledge. When you are integrating it maintains the integrity of the learning, like you identify the science learning the technology learning and as learning. And I think this model pins points this is science or technology and together you end up with all this learning rather than activities. This work really challenged us to think what is it we want children to learn and we looked at the pro and cons of it. (M) The planning framework in science was seen to be helpful in terms of thinking about student learning and enhancing the formative interactions that might enhance that learning. I felt a lot of science was back in thinking about activities and coverage rather than learning. The formative aspects were not apparent that formative interaction became such a major part. I think it clarified the way children learn and as teachers the way we need to approach that learning because it makes better sense of the curriculum documents in many ways and the outcomes of those documents. Outcomes based form of learning . . . we are now thinking this what we want the children to learn and this is how we are going to approach that learning. . . Change in emphasis more and more formative and is making time for those discussions, so to help children’s learning to the next step. I always believed children could do more that what we thought and this allowed us to improve on what children can do. Taking it beyond that comprehension recall level (M) The reason that the research project and outcomes had an impact across the school was seen to be because of the focus on learning outcomes, rather than activities or curriculum coverage. I was surprised how it went across the school. Yet what is happening is that the work in technology has transferred to other curriculum areas. It’s the focus on learning outcomes and the context for learning. We moved from thinking about an activity to learning outcomes. (D)

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

89

Impact on Reporting to Parents The focus on students’ learning, intended learning outcomes and progression also influenced school reporting to parents. School report focus now in terms of actual learning rather than traditional generalized comments. Reports changed in terms of thinking about the actual learning rather than saying they are good at something (L) School reports are written differently now, all those things, the timeframe, thinking about assessment checking to see if we were on the right track. (D)

THE NATURE OF THE PROGRAMME Several aspects related to the nature of the research and development process were considered important for enhancing teachers’ practices. These included viewing workshops as professional development, establishing a collaborative culture between researchers and teachers, the personal involvement of teachers and researcher acknowledgement of their commitment.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOPS Although the positive research outcomes in terms of student learning had a significant impact on the uptake of the ideas and the culture of the school expedited this, the teachers also commented that the nature of the programme had a significant impact. The researchers had worked with the teachers to develop strategies to enhance teaching, learning and assessment of technology. Workshops undertaken throughout the year facilitated this process, as the teachers perceived these as professional development sessions. It was in these sessions that the teachers and researchers explored ways of enhancing student learning. As one teacher commented: It was the best form of professional development I have seen. It was meeting needs, it was challenging their thinking, it was real problems that they were facing themselves, also experts helping guiding and facilitating their learning, The experts knew the questions not necessarily the answers – they were the thinkers in our school to have someone to challenge them. It was real problems with their students. (D) These sessions were very challenging for the teachers. For example, two commented: The professional development sessions were tough but it was debating in a professional manner. It was pulling apart and challenging the ideas and then thinking. It was putting to on the table and dissecting it apart. You would come away and be exhausted. (D) It was like teacher development – it was not a day course. It was hard, hard work. You were moving and growing and it was back up the next year so you kept going. (L) The teachers commented that professional development linked with the research outcomes was significant both in terms of working with the research teachers and in bringing about wider change in the school.

90

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

Having a research project in association with professional development was crucial. The depth of the professional development and interactions you had with the teachers. The teacher development was driven by the research project (L) What you did was very much in-depth; other staff wanted to know about it. (I)

COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIPS The teachers saw that an essential part of the research/professional development relationship was working together on a common problem. The joint nature of the problem and collaborative relationship between the different groups was seen as significant. You identified a problem then we went on a journey to solve that problem. Professional development we were working on a common problem and it was forward thinking. It was new ground. It was innovative. When you have been in teaching a long time most professional development becomes the same, whereas this was fresh. We were exploring something quite different. It wasn’t rehashing. It didn’t just tackle one problem like most professional development, but tackled wider issues as well. It’s the sort of thing that keeps teachers going. (D) It was crucial looking at the planning stage and learning outcomes and teasing those out – it was a very difficult process. You were devising a model to meet our needs too. So it was growth on both sides – it was reciprocal. (L)

PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The teachers commented that they felt part of the research process and felt that they received acknowledgement for the work and risks that they had taken. The research team attempted to acknowledge the teachers in a number of ways. Two of these were the presentation of certificates and morning teas. As teachers you are not very often affirmed for what you do. Important to acknowledge – the graduation and certificates were huge. It must have been important because we got a certificate. It was an acknowledgement that we were valued – I was surprised about that and very proud. It was that feeling ‘valued’ how important is that and you built up that sort of loyalty. (D) Making morning tea for the staff, giving the certificates and getting the Ministry to present them, they are proud of it. There was no qualification but there was credit for their teacher portfolio for appraisal. After you left they still had their journey, their certificates in their portfolio. (I) The length of time of the research project was also seen as important. As the principal stated: It takes time to come fluent in this . . . People had time to go through a number of phases they got a number of repeats. The length of time the three years was essential. (I)

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

91

RESEARCHERS’ WAYS OF WORKING The relationship between the researchers and the school positively impacted on the outcomes of the research. It was important that researchers had classroom credibility and that their role in classrooms was non-intrusive. The researchers were seen as having expertise as teachers, particularly the team members from primary backgrounds, and having expertise in the area of technology education. You had a track record in primary schools as teachers. It is the people we had in the research team that was important as well. There was professional respect and the understanding of the roles that we both had. The relationship developed. (D) Background experience as classroom teachers and ability to blend into the classroom environment were highlighted as significant. The non-use of intrusive research equipment such as videos was also considered positive. The role the researchers took was crucial, modeling in the classroom, blending in when observing, no equipment hanging around; having that experienced primary teacher who was also an excellent researcher really helped. (D) It was great experience when Judy came into the room and having been a teacher herself she sort of knew where the kids were going. She would sit in the room and you would not know that she was there. She would sit down alongside the kids and interact with them. Other researchers come with all this equipment that gets in the way, which really disrupts it. (L) It was not only the roles that the researchers took in the classroom that were highlighted. The way the research team guided teachers through the change process, the provision of resources, the acknowledgments of their time and work commitments, respecting them as teachers and the importance of being on a joint project and journey were viewed as enablers for change. As the principal commented: The opportunity to have someone in classroom and not threatening. But observing your practice, to analyse what has happened and reflecting that back. How you set up the conditions for that. You responded in a humane way. It was painful but you listened, you took them through. The staff was excited about the strawberry and cream. You were on a journey with them you were working on a problem. It was developed with practitioners. Reducing the distance between researchers and teachers showing you understand their job, pressures, and constraints. It is being problem solvers together. You have to take them somewhere. If you want to do research in schools you have to leave something tangible. It is reciprocal. To back the teacher when they find the going tough, finding money for relief time. It is an interpersonal relationship. (I) The teachers in the school commented that the research had strengthened the relationship between researchers and the school. It was now seen as an active and growing partnership to improve student learning. As a teacher commented: It is an active partnership, active participation in the classroom. The relationship between the Centre and the school is very strong now because of this research – we are always seeking advice in an informal way. It is a two-way thing. For us it has been the best professional development I have ever seen. (D)

92

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

CONCLUSION In 1998 an exploratory project was begun in a local primary school. Six years later significant changes are evident in the way the school approaches teaching, learning and assessment in science and technology education. This chapter has attempted to explore the factors that contributed to these changes. The introduction of this model of pedagogical content knowledge in association with effective teacher development has been shown to have a positive impact on teaching and student performance in technology. Also it has become apparent that introducing teachers to these components of pedagogical content knowledge generally is beginning to lead to enhanced teaching, learning and assessment in other curriculum areas. It was obvious that the school culture assisted teachers’ receptivity to being involved in the initial project. The culture was described as supportive and encouraging of risk taking, questioning and reflection. Teachers were also motivated to research their own practice. Within this culture the principal played a key role in supporting teachers, as did the management team. The participants in the initial research project represented all areas of the school and were reflective and professional in their practice. This appeared to allow for greater uptake and adoption of the outcomes across the school. The project was seen to be successful because it centred on enhancing student learning. Also notable was linking research with professional development. Teachers perceived that working with each other and with researchers on common problems were essential. They also felt acknowledged and valued and understood that their contributions were worthwhile. The long-term nature (3 years) of the project also contributed to success. The roles researchers played in the school were important. The researchers were seen as having credibility as classroom teachers, researchers and experts. In the classroom the researchers blended in but were able to offer support and guidance where necessary. They were also aware of teacher difficulties when making changes at the school level. The researchers have continued to play an informal role in the school in terms of being a focus point for exploring ideas. Mountview School provides evidence that involvement with research and professional development can have benefits that extend beyond the research project itself, if the research and professional development programme is structured in a particular way. There needs to be a joint problem, an enabling school culture and an empathic research relationship.

REFERENCES Anning, A. (1994) Dilemmas and opportunities of a new curriculum: Design and technology with young children. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4, 155177. Anning, A. (1997) Drawing out ideas: Graphicacy and young children. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 219-239. Appleton, K. (2003) Pathways in professional development in primary science: Extending science PCK. Paper presented at 34th ASERA Conference, Melbourne, June 8-12.

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

93

Askew, M., Brown, M.L., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D.C. & Wiliam, D. (1997) Effective teachers of numeracy: Final report. London, UK: King’s College London School of Education. Barnett, J. & Hodson, D. (2001) Pedagogical content knowledge: Towards a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know. Science Education. 85(4), 426-453. Bell, B. & Cowie, B. (1997) Formative assessment and science education. Research Report, Learning in Science Project (Assessment). Centre for Science Mathematics and Technology Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Bell, B. & Gilbert, J. (1996) Teacher development: A model from science education. London: The Falmer Press. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C. & Wiliam, D. (2001) Theory and practice of formative assessment. Paper presented at AERA Conference, New Orleans, April. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Carr, M., McGee, C., Jones, A., McKinley, E., Bell, B., Barr, H. & Simpson, T. (2000) The effects of curricula and assessment on pedagogical approaches and on education outcomes. Report prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Education. University of Waikato. Cochran, K., deRuiter, J. & King, R. (1993) Pedagogical content knowing: an integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263-272. Dalton, S. & Tharp, R. (2002) Standards for pedagogy: Research, theory and practice. In G. Wells and G. Claxton (Eds), Learning for life in the 21st Century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education. (181-194). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Duschl, R. A. & Gitomer, D. H. (1997) Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37-73. Fleer, M. (1999) The science of technology: Young children working technologically. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 269-291. Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (1992) Teacher development and educational change. London: The Falmer Press Gess-Newsome, J. (1999) Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome and N. Lederman, (Eds), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. (51-94). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gipps, C. (1999) Sociocultural aspects to assessment. Review of Educational Research, 24, 353-392. Gipps, C. & Brown, M. (1999) Primary teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning. The Curriculum Journal, 10(1), 123-134. Grossman, P. (1990) The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press. Harlen, W. (1999) Purposes and procedures for assessing science process skills. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 129-144. Harlen, W. & James, M. (1997) Assessment and learning: Differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment. Assessment in Education, 4(3), 365-379. Hennessy, S., McCormick. R. & Murphy, P. (1993) The myth of general problem solving capability: Design and technology as an example. The Curriculum Journal, 4(1), 73-89.

94

Alister Jones and Judy Moreland

Jones, A. (1997) An analysis of student existing technological capability: developing an initial framework. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7 (3) 241258 Jones, A. & Carr, M. (1993) Towards technology education. Volume 1: Working papers from the first phase of the Learning in Technology Education Project. Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Jones, A. & Compton, V. (1998) Towards a model of teacher development in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(1), 51-65. Jones, A, Mather V and Carr, M. (1994) Issues in the practice of technology education. Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, Hamilton, University of Waikato. Hamilton p125. Jones, A. & Moreland, J. (2001) Frameworks and cognitive tools for enhancing practicing teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. SAMEpapers 2001, 238-262. Jones, A. & Moreland, J. (2003) Developing classroom focused research in technology education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(1), 51-66. Jones, A., Moreland, J. & Chambers, M. (2001) Enhancing student learning in technology through enhancing teacher technological literacy, Paper presented to NARST Annual Meeting, St Louis, MO, USA, 25-28 March. Kimbell, R. A., Stables, K. & Green, R. (1996) Understanding practice in design and technology. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McCormick, R. (2000) Theoretical and empirical issues of technology education research. Address given to AAAS Technology Education Research Conference 2000.http://www.project2061.org/technology/McCormick/McCormick.htm Retrieved 22.03.01 McGee, C. (1997) Teachers and curriculum decision-making. Palmerston North: The Dunmore Printing Company. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999) Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching, In J. Gess-Newsome and N. Lederman (Eds), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. (95-132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer. Moreland, J. & Jones, A. (2000) Emerging Assessment Practices in an Emergent Curriculum: Implications for Technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 283-305. Moreland, J., Jones, A. & Northover, A. (2001) Enhancing teachers’ technological knowledge and assessment practices to enhance student learning in technology: a two-year classroom study. Research in Science Education, 31(1), 155-176. Porter, A. & Brophy, J. (1988) Synthesis in research on good teaching: Insights from the work of the Institute of Research on Teaching. Education Leadership, 48(8) 74-85. Rennie, L. (2001) Teacher collaboration in curriculum change: the implications of technology education in the primary school. Research in Science Education, 31(1), 49-69. Rogoff, B., Matusov, E. & White, C. (1996) Models of teaching and learning: participation in a community of learners. In D. Olson and N. Torrance (Eds.), Handbook of education

The Centrality of PCK in Professional Development for Primary Science….

95

and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling. (pp 388-414). London: Basil Blackwell. Sadler, D. R. (1998) Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory, Assessment in Education, 5(1), 77-84. Shulman, L. S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. Solomon, J. & Hall, S. (1996) An inquiry into progression in primary technology: A role for teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 6, 263-282. Stables, K. (1997) Critical issues to consider when introducing technology education into the curriculum of young learners. Journal of Technology Education, 8(2), 1-17. Stetsenko, A. & Arievitch, I. (2002) Teaching, learning, and development: A post-Vygotskian perspective. In G. Wells and G. Claxton (Eds), Learning for life in the 21st Century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education. (84-96). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Treagust, D.F. & Rennie, L.J. (1993) Implementing technology in the school curriculum: a case study involving six schools. Journal of Technology Education, 5(1), 1-11. Wragg, E., Wragg, C., Hayes, G. & Chamberlain, R. (1998) Improving literacy in the primary school. London: Routledge.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 97-114

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 4

TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS AND ATTITUDE TOWARDS SCIENCE Lily Cherian University of the North Republic of South Africa

ABSTRACT Many researchers have identified a number of variables that influence learner’s attitude towards Science as a school subject. Since the objective of any Science curriculum includes fostering of favourable feelings toward Science as well as imparting knowledge, it is imperative that researchers attempt to find out if these are achieved. If a positive attitude is a reasonable expectation for young South Africans, science educators have an obligation to conduct research on the attitudes and factors that promote positive attitudes of adolescents. The purpose of the study was to investigate the attitude of Grade 12 learners in South Africa towards Science and also to study the most important factors that affect their attitudes towards Science. Twenty-seven schools were selected randomly from Northern Province of South Africa. Questionnaires were administered to 793 learners. The sample included 422 female learners and 369 male learners. Their ages ranged from 17 to 24 years. The results showed that the following factors are highly correlated with learner’s attitude towards Science. They are: teacher characteristics [which included teacher attitude, teacher qualification, teacher’s knowledge of the subject, teacher’s personality), class size, laboratory facility, gender, peer influence, educational level and occupation of parents. Teacher characteristics are a key factor in the success of educational reform efforts in South Africa, which is still in its early years of democracy.

INTRODUCTION Each one of us can remember at least one of our favourite subjects and one of our favourite teachers. In many instances our best teachers taught us our most favourite subjects

98

Lily Cherian

and vice versa. Why is this so? In some other cases, we can remember why we ended up hating a subject? Was it because we didn’t have the ability to understand that subject or we didn’t develop a liking for the teacher who taught that subject? In many cases, students end up disliking a subject because they dislike the teacher who teaches the subject. As a student in the secondary school, I can still remember how I ended up hating certain subjects because I didn’t like the teachers concerned. All these go to manifest the role a teacher can play in developing positive attitudes in students towards the subject one teaches. South Africa, as a developing nation, should prepare itself to survive and cope successfully with the demands of developments in this technological world. Entry into the field of science and technology is based on success in science. A thorough knowledge and positive attitude toward Science will open career opportunities for learners in this technological and competitive society. Smith and Gessler [1989: 36] further highlighted the importance of Science as a subject when they stated that “our nation need at least four percent of its citizens to be design engineers and scientists”. Assuming that attitudes monitor the number of students who take Science seriously, it is cavalier to suggest that a positive student attitude toward science not only superintends scientific literacy but it could also have a bearing on our country’s global competitiveness. If a positive science attitude is a reasonable expectation for young South Africans, science educators must try to develop positive attitudes among adolescents. Science must be taught in such a way that positive attitudes are formed throughout the students’ science programme.

Attitude Theory Allport [1968:60] characterizes an attitude as a state of readiness for mental and physical activity. Triandis [1971] defines an attitude as "an idea charged with emotion which predisposes a class of actions to a particular class of social situations." An attitude model can be represented consisting of three components: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. According to this model, a person categorizes an attitude object, for which an emotional response is associated, resulting in a predisposition to action. A certain amount of agreement seems to exist among contemporary psychologists on the definition of attitude: a disposition to react favourably or unfavourably to a class of objects. This disposition may, of course, be inferred from a variety of observable responses made by the individual when he is confronted by a number of objects toward which he has an attitude: facial expressions, postures, locomotions, sounds of voice and vibrations [Sarnoff, 1962: 165]. Moreover, an individual need not be aware of his attitude nor of his behaviours on the basis of which his attitude is inferred by others. Thus, psychologists define attitudes as the relatively enduring orientations that individuals develop towards the various objects and issues they encounter during their lives, and which they express verbally as opinions. Obviously attitudes contain elements of value and belief, as well as varying degree of factual knowledge, including those which the holder takes to be factual knowledge. Attitudes include the disposition to assess consistently certain classes of objects or people as negative or positive and to behave towards them in accordance with this assessment [Meyer, Moore and Viljoen, 1989: 334]. Attitudes may also be so pervasive that it becomes difficult to distinguish them from personality traits. The difference lies in the fact that attitudes always include an element of “for” or “against”, which is not a characteristic of trait

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

99

[Allport, 1961: 347]. The presence of this positive and negative emotion contains the affective component of attitude. Attitudes are cultivated and learned. When a person experiences a rewarding state of affairs in association with an attitude object, his response toward the object will become more favourable. Conversely, if the experience is painful, the person will change his response in a negative direction. We learn our cognitive attitudes component either from direct experience or from other people. Direct experience is most relevant to the development of the cognitive and affective components. Mager [1968] outlined three reasons for promoting positive attitudes in students: (i) there is a relationship between positive attitudes and enhanced academic achievement, (ii) a positive attitude is more likely to sustain interest, (iii) peers are influenced by the attitudes of others. In the Sunday Times [29/6/1997], it was indicated that Science is one of the least popular subjects in South Africa. Northern Province is regarded as the poorest in this respect in South Africa and recently considered a disaster area as far as educational provisions are considered. The numbers of students who take Science as a subject and the pass rate in Science in the schools are alarmingly small. This is evident in the Table shown below. Based on the above data, it is clear that quite a small number of secondary school learners choose Science as a subject and the results are dismal. Table 1 Summary of results from 1988 to 2003 for Science in Grade 12 Examination [Limpopo Province] Year

No of students who wrote grade 12 exam

No of students who wrote science exam

No of students who obtained above 80% marks

No of students who obtained above 70% marks

No of students who passed

Pass %

No of students who failed

Fail %

1998

Not available

17182

48

89

1940

11.29

15242

88.71

1999

Not available

14359

109

156

2838

19.77

11521

80.23

2000

106038

13583

44

79

2040

15.01

11543

84.99

2001

83318

11380

86

88

2025

17.80

9355

82.20

2002

74446

11570

107

106

2477

21.40

9093

78.60

2003

70056

11363

115

152

2521

22.18

8842

77.82

100

Lily Cherian

If Science is to continue to thrive in our society, it is important that it be viewed positively not only by its “producers” but also by its “users” and “consumers”. Teacher4 characteristics could be linked with teacher effectiveness and attitude development of learners. The promotion of positive attitudes toward science is seen as a major aim of science education. Teachers contribute enormously to a positive social climate in science classes, particularly through their communication with students. Positive social climate will inevitably contribute towards the development of positive attitude towards science. Teachers should make a major contribution toward creating a positive attitude towards science, particularly through their interaction or communication with their students. Research has indicated that positive relationships between teachers and students promote student attitude and outcomes in science. In South Africa, “chalk and talk” and textbook science approach has changed little over the past 10 years. Teacher-centred classrooms appear to be the norm although it is possible to see a range of teaching strategies within this approach. A number of research studies on attitude towards Science have been carried out in many countries including South Africa [Talton & Simpson, 1987; Cherian, 1985 & 1996]. These studies investigated systematically learner’s attitude towards Science. Some studies investigated how these attitudes affect learning [Pell, 1985:123]. The teacher plays a key role in the development of positive attitudes among learners. This was revealed to the investigator when she was a Biology and Chemistry teacher at secondary schools under the Ministry of Education of the Government of the Republic of Zambia. This came into prominence again in “Republic of Transkei” when the investigator was teaching Physical Science and Biology in the secondary school. It was observed that some teachers taught these subjects in such a way that the student, whether successful or not, ended up disliking and avoiding these subjects. This was obviously a most undesirable outcome among teachers and pupils in the schools under the then Department of Education. The investigator continued her career as a Biology teacher for more than a decade after a successful decade of teaching in Zambia. A teacher can influence a student’s feelings towards a subject, either positively or negatively. If the influence is positive, it will reflect positively in their performance in that particular subject. Students’ systematic study of Science usually begins in the secondary school. It is at this stage that science teachers may be in a position to nurture and sustain a keen interest in Science because it is during this phase that an understanding of the relevance of science to our daily lives may occur. Accordingly, it was the investigator’s observation that the General Science course commonly taught to adolescent students in schools in Zambia and Transkei did not produce in students a positive attitude towards Science during the junior secondary school stage, when pupils should in fact develop a favourable impression of Science, and develop a love for the subject. Twenty-seven schools were selected randomly from Northern Province of South Africa. Questionnaires were administered to 793 learners. The sample included 422 female learners and 369 male learners [one leaner did not indicate his/her sex]. The purpose of the study was to investigate the attitude of Grade 12 learners in South Africa towards Science and also to study the most important factors that affect their attitudes towards Science. The items on teacher variables included teacher’s sex, experience, knowledge, attitude towards science, 4

[Transkei is now part of one of the nine provinces in South Africa called Eastern Cape]

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

101

teaching methods, qualifications and teacher’s personality. The discussions that are presented below are from the findings of the above study.

Teacher Characteristics and Attitudes Towards Science Personality characteristics of teachers were found to influence students' attitudes to a very large extent. Several studies have shown the influence teachers can play in the formulation of student attitudes. Since it is the teacher alone in the classroom who ultimately determines the quality, and quantity of science instruction to which students are exposed, it seems critically important to study the variables influencing teacher behaviour. Teacher characteristics were highly and positively correlated [61] with student attitude. There are many teacher characteristics that might contribute to improvement in science attitude. Characteristics most likely to be related to the student attitudes are: knowledge of the subject matter, teaching methods, attitude towards Science, qualification [professional selfimprovement], management, leadership abilities, personality, and type of learning environment created. The ultimate test of teacher effectiveness should be its consequences for students. Being a successful and respected teacher also involves a empathetic attitude in class. How about a cheery greeting upon entering class, delivered in a fashion that the students know you mean it? The students are all aware of the fact that you are the expert so you don't have to show off your mastery. Humour and interest in class can dispel the weary, enliven the teaching atmosphere and make difficult concepts easy [Hartmann-Petersen, 2004]. According to Methen and Wilkinson [1986:171] "good" Science teachers provide a stimulating environment, create an acceptable atmosphere, expect different students to achieve differently, use societal issues as a focus, give considerable student self-assessment, ask questions leading to a synthesis of ideas, and seek excellence. Students' perceptions of the ideal teacher can be an important part of the classroom experience. Perceptions may contribute to or detract from learning [Peterson and Mayes, 1981: 315]. The accumulation of scientific, and technological knowledge is a great force that is shaping the future. A Science teacher has a special role to play as young peoples' guide to the future. Teacher's involvement with the individual students has the most powerful impact on children's attitude towards the teacher and towards the subject [Skinner and Belmont, 1993: 577]. Certainly many young people will look to their Science teachers for some hints about the mysterious future, because most of them know fully well that tomorrow's world is being shaped by today's Science. The world of tomorrow can be made better through education, and Science. Science should be taught in such a way that it helps this to come about. The following teacher characteristics and how these relate to attitude towards Science will be discussed below: * * * * *

teacher's knowledge teacher's attitude teaching methods of the teacher teacher's qualifications and teacher's personality

102

Lily Cherian

Teacher's Science Knowledge and Attitude Towards Science In this study, teacher’s knowledge was highly and positively correlated [.91] with student attitude. Some secondary school science teachers have a distorted understanding of the nature of science because their scientific education has focused on the body of knowledge of science, and this has given very little emphasis on the processes by which scientific knowledge is developed, and validated. As a consequence, students do not understand how scientific knowledge is formulated and validated, nor can they articulate attitudes that are part of the ethos of science [Gallagher, 1991: 132]. Scientific knowledge is simply imparted to students without relating it to their day-to-day activities. As a result students are not aware of the relevance of Science to their daily lives. A secondary school science teacher is defined as one who is assigned to teach any of the sciences in any of the Grades 8 to 12 for the full school day. Good teaching in science has always prompted understanding of basic concepts. Teachers' knowledge of science is limited to the body of knowledge of science. One side effect of this is teachers' lack of knowledge about scientific attitudes. These teachers also have very limited understanding of the applications of science [Gallagher, 1991: 125]. Smith, and Bramblett [1981: 358] found in their study that teacher vagueness significantly affect student achievement and students' attitude and perception. Science cannot afford to overlook student attitudes. If the teaching of Science is to reflect the nature of Science, then it becomes obvious that the teachers of Science must possess an understanding of the nature of Science. There is no doubt that the Science teacher is the backbone, and chief intermediary of any science programme [Billeh and Hasan, 1975: 209]. His/her classroom activities, understandings, attitudes and interests, among other things, determine the attitude of students. According to Lee [1993: 625] it is essential to acquire and display reasoning ability, science knowledge, science process skills, and favourable attitudes toward both science, and science teaching to be a good teacher. Science teacher's knowledge about the nature of Science is important because they play a key role in forming the image of Science that is held by the general public and by pupils [Gallager, 1991: 121]. Science teachers should achieve, and maintain a high level of mastery in the subject matter, and the passion to make science come alive in the classroom. Early research done by Schwerian [1969: 203-204] found a positive association between the amount of college science experience, and science understanding. If teachers lack experience and understanding they feel less certain of their knowledge, and rely more and more on the text book to provide knowledge they think they ought to disperse. Shrigley [1974: 148], on the other hand, found a correlation between science knowledge, and teacher’s attitudes towards science. The classes of those teachers armed with strong Science background will be more interesting, and motivating to their pupils. Such teachers are ambitious and dedicated. This in turn will lead to the development of positive attitudes towards Science. Teachers' knowledge of Science was positively related to student achievement and attitude [Lawrenz, 1975: 436]. If an enthusiastic Science teacher perceives constraints that limit his\her science teaching, one could suppose that a non-enthusiast perceiving similar constraints would more readily comply with the existing school culture. Furthermore, if an enthusiastic science teacher is constrained

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

103

by lack of content, and knowledge, it is reasonable to assume that non-enthusiasts would face this problem to an even greater extent. More enjoyment in physics was found to be associated significantly with students' perceptions of the science teacher as well organised, intellectual, ambitious, and stimulating [Lawrenz, 1975: 433, 436; McMillan and May: 1979: 217]. A significant relationship was found by them between students' attitudes, and some teachers' characteristics [that is, desire for self improvement, and knowledge of science processes]. According to Bybee [1975: 229], a Science teacher should have knowledge, and organization of subject matter, enthusiasm in working with Science students, and good relations with students in Science class. Although this study was conducted in 1975, it may still be true and valid today. A great deal of Science that is done in the schools, even at the elementary level demands that the teacher have at his\her command the language of Science [Duschl, 1983: 746]. If teachers are armed with this background, student interest in Science may follow. It is ironic that much elementary science is conducted with only the most rudimentary hardware [Mittlefehldt, 1985: 67]. In a society so rich in technology, it seems paradoxical if not tragic that so little of this hardware gets into the classroom. A teacher who has a good knowledge of Science will try all means necessary to teach Science by conducting a maximum number of practical lessons even if he\she has to teach with the most rudimentary hardware. Moreover, Cherian (1985) found that 94% of all elementary teachers were women. Their lack of confidence in teaching Science may be perceived by female students, and project a negative image for prospective female scientists. This lack of confidence could be because of poor Science background and knowledge. Yager and Yager [1985: 351] found in their study that elementary teachers admit to not knowing the answers to science questions nearly half the time whereas high school science teachers rarely admit to not knowing answers to science questions. Teacher's knowledge of Science may influence the clarity or vagueness with which they teach. Teacher vagueness in communication affects the effectiveness of the lesson [Smith and Bramblett, 1981: 358]. Strunk and White [1972: 65] referred to vagueness as "the leeches that infect the pond of prose, sucking the blood of words". Hiller, Fisher, and Kaess [1969: 670] described vagueness to be "a psychological construct which refers to the state of mind of a performer who does not sufficiently command the facts or the understanding required for maximally effective communication". Duschl [1983: 746] reports that science instructions at the elementary level, if occurring at all, is low in quality and too infrequent to be effective. Tilgner [1990: 421] provides in this regard the obstacles to teaching science frequently cited by elementary teachers as inadequate teacher background and hence knowledge in science. Mittlefehldt [1985: 67-68] blames amongst others inadequate teacher training as a cause for the lack of knowledge of Science. Part of the dissatisfaction with science can be traced directly to teachers' attitudes towards science, and science teaching. Experienced elementary school teachers feel constrained in teaching science by the limiting factors of time, facilities, equipment, and background knowledge [Abell, 1990: 292; Abell and Roth, 1992: 591]. Other researchers have also documented the inadequate understanding of science, and technology by both students and teachers. Cannon and Simpson [1985: 121] report Weiss [1978] having found that in elementary schools science was less important than other subjects and that teachers felt that they were provided with inadequate

104

Lily Cherian

facilities, and time, insufficient funds, and inadequate, and out-of-date materials to teach science. Because of a lack of insight and understanding of Science elementary teachers see Science as an unrelated body of assorted facts. They have no idea how these ideas were discovered nor do they have any inkling of the impact Science has on the society. Thus several elementary school science students were reported making comments on the relative unimportance of science compared with other school subjects [Young and Kellog, 1993: 286]. These students were strongly influenced by their teachers in the elementary, and secondary schools. Many students described to the above-mentioned researchers about their early negative science experiences as those that caused them to define themselves as non-science types.

Teacher's Attitude and Students' Attitude Toward Science Teacher’s attitude towards Science was highly and positively correlated [.81] with student attitude. This confirms the findings of earlier studies. There is a reciprocal relationship between teacher's behaviour and the student's attitude in the classroom. A lot of the research in Science education has been advocated relative to the attitudes of pupils in various learning situations. Personal characteristics of Science teachers have also been studied with great interest. Evidence suggests that attitudes, and feelings of teachers toward Science have significant implications for development of student attitudes. Teachers communicate their feelings in various subtle ways, and apparently the responses of students are greatly influenced by these feelings [Simpson and Brown, 1970: 207]. Teacher characteristics seem more significant in deciding outcomes than any imposed external arrangement. The Science teacher who teaches the subject without making an effort to develop positive attitudes in students is doing a disservice to students by making instruction less effective than it could be. Several studies have shown that teachers possess negative attitude towards Science [Mittlefehldt 1985: 67; Yager and Yager, 1985: 351; Piper and Hough, 1979: 196; Westerback, 1984: 937]. If, however, a teacher has a genuine interest in the subject matter, the students will most likely benefit. In a sense, the interest, and attitude of the teacher is caught by the students, and helps to develop high interest and attitude in the subject being taught. One of the barriers to effective teaching, as revealed by Blackwood [1964: 13] in his survey of elementary school teachers, was a lack of teacher interest in science. Shrigley [1974: 148] also found that if teachers did not like science, their students tended not to like science. In a sense, the interest, and attitude of the teacher is caught by the students like a contagion of enthusiasm, and high interest, and attitude in the subject being taught. Researchers have shown that over half of elementary teachers rank science fourth or fifth out of five subjects and furthermore, teachers feel unprepared to teach Science [Westerback, 1984: 937; Tilgner, 1990: 422]. One of the commonly held beliefs is that elementary teachers do not hold positive attitudes toward science or the teaching of science. It is not surprising, therefore, that attitude change was a focus for a number of studies. Most of these teachers see themselves primarily as dispensers of scientific facts [Tilgner, 1990: 429]. According to Piper and Hough [1979: 196], part of the problem of negative attitudes toward teaching Science among elementary science teachers can be attributed to the method of instruction they receive in preparation to teach Science.

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

105

The effectiveness of teaching elementary school science is to some extent a function of the teacher's attitude towards Science, which is in itself a consequence of significant personal and professional experiences the teacher had. As he/she teaches Science each year, he/she broadens his/her own understanding, and attitudes as well as those of the children. Washton's [1971] study indicated that pupils imitate the attitude of their elementary teachers toward science. He concluded by saying "they felt that their elementary school teachers disliked science and so it was contagious to dislike science" [Washton, 1971: 378]. As a result, teachers were afraid to teach science to their pupils. It is important for educators to realise that while a teacher may have an influence in developing positive student attitudes within the science classroom, other factors need to be considered. Behind every successful Science student is a dedicated teacher or a supportive parent, or both [Glass, 1993: 40]. The personal attention, approval, and encouragement provided by the teacher lays the foundation upon which the student can develop lasting impressions about Science. Favourable attitudes toward Science are an important characteristic of a scientifically literate individual or teacher. Teachers who have positive attitudes toward Science like to teach Science and students taught by them will have positive attitudes towards Science [Sherwood and Gabel, 1980: 195]. Teacher attitude is one of the most important aspects of a school's effectiveness. Positive, and negative teacher attitudes contribute to the nature of a school's educational environment, determine how instructional resources are utilised in the classroom, and influence student attitudes and achievement [Martin, 1985: 229]. On the other hand negative attitudes toward teaching Science persist among elementary school Science teachers. Also, teachers with negative or neutral attitudes toward Science may transmit that attitude to their students [Shrigley, 1974: 143; Rakow and Bermudez, 1993: 670; Gabel and Rubba, 1979: 19]. Hone and Carswell [1969: 24] support the above-mentioned with the statement: "Children's built-in radar is fine-tuned to their teachers feelings about science". Thus the effectiveness of teaching science is to some extent a function of the teacher's attitude towards science. Elementary school teachers' attitudes towards Science is very important, and it was found to have a critical influence on their instruction in the subject [McDevitt, Heikkinen, Alcorn, Ambrosio & Gardner, 1993: 594]. Secondary school Science teachers have also to give instruction in such a way as to help the students to continue developing positive attitudes towards Science. Thus, the Science teacher must assume a large part of both the responsibility, and the challenge of developing positive attitudes towards Science.

Teaching Methods and Students' Attitude Towards Science Teaching methods were highly and positively correlated [.81] with student attitude. The values, attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge held by teachers undoubtedly influence their teaching methods to a significant degree [Olstad and Haury, 1984: 243]. There is a need for the teacher to develop positive relations with the students, to stress classroom activities which involve active learning and student participation, and to engage the students in the subject, so that meaningful effort and investment is assured. The Science teacher should be able to plan well, and have access to and utilize various methods of instruction. Fouts and Myers [1992: 360] reveal in their study that Science teachers may be creating the negative attitudes that many students have towards Science by using inappropriate

106

Lily Cherian

teaching methods and classroom techniques. Carefully designed teaching strategies can bring about desirable attitudinal changes in students. Scotti [1989: 153] reports that "exemplary" Science teachers' methods of teaching are humanistic, and they make schoolwork palatable and suited to the needs, interests and perspectives of the students. The learning that they create requires a high degree of trust, time for thinking, action and independent points of view. With these elements in a classroom, exemplary teachers can carry on their work with self-motivation and a passion for learning. This in turn will create in students positive attitudes towards Science. Recent studies indicate that many pre-service teacher education students carry with them views of teaching which, like many in the community, revolve around the belief that teaching content is a matter of telling or showing, also that learning means remembering [Loughran, 1994: 366]. The methods used by the teacher include mainly lecture methods, and laboratory methods. Hence, the most common practice in the Science classroom is a discussion of material from a textbook [Pitburn and Baker, 1993: 394]. This practice does not give students an opportunity for direct experience with concrete physical objects. Students should be given plenty of opportunities for direct experience with phenomena; otherwise most teaching will be dull. Question-answer sessions, writing assignments, which are the most prevalent classroom activities, are not very popular with students. At the elementary level, written activities contribute to negative attitudes, while hands-on inquiry contributes to positive attitudes [Pitburn and Baker, 1993: 394]. Teaching strategies are likely to reflect the teacher's beliefs and knowledge other than what is intended by the curriculum designers [Tobin and Fraser, 1989: 330]. A teacher's classroom management orientation may be related to how a teacher perceives science being taught. A teacher expressing a high preference for "enquiry" instructional approaches might also reflect a strong tendency for "humanistic" classroom management strategies or vice versa; a strong preference for traditional teaching methods might relate to a high orientation toward "custodial" classroom management. Humanistic approaches make the schoolwork palatable, and suited to the needs, interest, and attitudes of the students. According to Morrison and McIntyre [1969: 167] "superior, orderly" teachers' teaching methods were favoured by "docile conformers" and "strivers". They classified teachers as "superior" or "inferior" according to their warmth and responsiveness to students, and classified pupils as "strivers" and "docile conformers". When pupil differences were taken into account, then "strivers" did well more or less regardless of the characteristics of the teacher; "docile conformers" did very well with "superior, spontaneous" teachers. "Superior spontaneous" teachers were warm, exuberant, highly independent, with a strong liking for the expression of ideas by students. The following methods used by teachers and which may influence attitudes towards Science, will be discussed:

Over-Reliance on the Text Book Over-reliance on the textbook by some teachers suggests to the students that only the authorities know the right answers, and worse, that all the answers are known. In this way Science becomes not only intimidating but also rigid and unproductive [Mittlefehldt, 1985: 68]. This may lead to negative attitudes towards Science.

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

107

Hands-On Activities Engaging in hands-on activities leads to a better understanding of Science concepts by providing students with meaningful, concrete experiences. Scientific processes such as observing, hypothesizing, measuring, collecting, and analysing data, and drawing conclusions which are practised throughout promote problem-solving and critical thinking skills to be applied within other learning, personal, and everyday life situations as well. Positive attitudes towards science are fostered as students make their own discoveries and become personally involved in what they are doing [Meichtry, 1992: 437]. Interactive Methods In a study conducted by Swank, Taylor, Brady and Freiberg [1989: 179], effective teachers were found to be those who used "interactive instruction". These teachers spent less time in organising and managing, more time on task, and had students who were more involved in interactive instruction. These students had more positive attitudes towards Science. Laboratory Methods In the teaching of Science, prominent science educators have considered the science teaching laboratory to be an important instructional component. This study found lecturelaboratory method of Science instruction have greater efficacy than the lecture-only method. They also accounted for an increase in positive attitudes of students towards Science of lecture-laboratory methods, when compared to a lecture-only method. Laboratory teaching is one of the most effective features of Science education. The Science laboratory may be used as a primary vehicle for promoting formal reasoning skills. Teaching strategies unique to Science laboratories may serve to develop student-reasoning skills. Students actively explore, and manipulate concrete materials in small groups using Science process skills prior to concept introduction and application. This inquiry-based, hands-on approach in which students plan, discuss, and carry out experiments can foster positive attitudes towards Science. These methods also provide for social interaction and sequenced concrete experiences, each of which is necessary to enhance cognitive and affective development of students. Moreover, students value activities over other forms of instruction and prefer divergent to convergent learning experiences. From the preceding averments, it follows that an important aspect of science instruction, whether at the high school level or at university level, is its emphasis on laboratory procedures and skills. The laboratory teaching experience can constitute a range of activities from true experimental investigations to confirmatory exercises, and skill learning. Thus, the laboratory is the place where one learns most readily what questions can be asked fruitfully and how they must be put. It is where one learns why science insists on precise measurement, accurate observations, conciseness, and clarity of communications. Laboratory activities can be effective in promoting intellectual development, inquiry, and problem-solving skills. Further, laboratory activities could assist in the development of the observational and manipulative skills in understanding Science concepts [Tobin, 1990: 403]. Teachers trained to ask probing questions throughout a laboratory activity may help students focus on the more relevant aspects of the activity, and at the same time, permit the teacher to assess more accurately students' understanding of the procedures, and content. Students who have

108

Lily Cherian

developed the afore-mentioned skills may develop positive attitudes towards Science. Several studies have shown that students taught by the laboratory approach had positive attitudes toward science, and achieved better than students taught by a lecture-demonstration method only. It may be suggested that students with poor prior academic experiences in Science should be encouraged to use laboratory experience as a major instructional strategy. This suggests that every effort should be made by the teacher to ensure the highest possible quality laboratory instruction. This may lead to the development of positive attitudes towards Science. The Science laboratory has always been regarded as the place where students learn the process of doing Science. Laboratory activities promise so much in terms of students being able to solve problems, and construct relevant science knowledge. In other words, how students engage in laboratory activities influences how and what they learn. Eventually, it may lead to the development of positive attitudes towards Science. The manipulation of materials during laboratory experiences may reinforce and clarify scientific concepts for the low-achieving students and this may contribute to the development of more positive attitudes towards Science.

Lecture-Laboratory Method Okebukola and Adeniyi [1987: 225] found that the quality of the use of the laboratory resources is the most powerful correlate of students' attitude towards Science. In the lecturelaboratory method, the students are actively involved in the learning activities. In the lecturelaboratory mode of instruction students manipulate laboratory apparatus, perform experiments, and attend lectures. In contrast, however, the lecture-only method [where students do not manipulate apparatus or perform experiments] continues to find wide application in Science in schools. Teacher Qualifications Teacher’s qualifications were highly and positively correlated [.90] with student attitude towards Science. The challenge faced by the beginning Science teacher is complex and therefore teachers need to be well qualified. However, an inspection of the educational preparation of teachers offers a clue to the infrequent science teaching in the primary school science classroom. Several studies have revealed that teachers were inadequately prepared to teach science [Tilgner, 1990: 422]. A large percentage of those teachers have never taken a graduate level science education course and most had never participated in any science inservice programmes. Consequently, many elementary teachers do not like science. Many feel totally unprepared to do an adequate job of teaching science. To answer why elementary teachers feel unprepared and unqualified, the programmes that prepare teachers to teach science need a closer scrutiny. Part of the negative attitudes shown by teachers may be attributed to the method of instruction they themselves received in preparation to teach Science. Teachers' cognition level in science affects their attitude toward the subject. One of the important components of teacher preparation is the knowledge of science content. Selfconfidence is an effective weapon against a negative attitude or fears of teaching science. Teachers of secondary school must be prepared by design rather than by default. Mason and Kahle [1988: 36-37] report that students who were taught by adequately trained teachers, have more positive attitudes toward science.

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

109

A Science teacher needs academic and professional preparation so that he develops a sound and reasonable philosophy of science teaching [Zurub and Rubba, 1983: 867]. Inadequate teacher training contributes to lack of interest and negative attitudes among teachers [Mittlefehldt, 1985: 67]. In turn, this may adversely influence the attitudes of students.

Teacher's Personality In this it was found that teacher’s personality is highly and positively correlated [.81] with student attitude. Another factor that influences the attitudes of students has been found to be the personality of the teacher. Students' attitudes are influenced by their perceptions of their science teachers' personalities, and hence their relationship with students as perceived by the latter have a crucial influence on students' attitudes toward science. Personality characteristics of teachers were found to influence students’ attitudes to a very large extent. Several studies have shown the influence teachers play in the formation of student attitudes. Haladyna and Shaughnessy [1982: 551] indicated in their study that teacher personality and relationship with students is the most crucial variable in attitude formation and the use of motivation by teachers was found to be related to positive student attitudes. According to them the teacher is the primary change agent in affecting the learning environment. A teacher's supportive nature, relations and interactions with pupils, classroom activities, rewards of assignments, and reaction to pupil's work, all have an influence on attitude development. Many studies have found that Science teachers can change the negative attitudes shown by many students by focusing on specific strategies, such as diverse classroom routines, procedures, and active and co-operative student learning activities, and by developing positive inter personal relations with students. The personality of the teacher also influences the management strategies that are used and consequently probably students' attitudes. Tobin and Fraser [1989: 324] found in their study that exemplary teachers used management strategies that facilitate student enjoyment. The teachers, according to them, maintained control-at-a-distance over the entire class and actively monitored student behaviour by moving around the classroom and speaking with individuals from time to time. Students in such classes were able to work independently and co-operatively in groups. "Exemplary" Science teachers have "exemplary" expectations for their students. These teachers develop programmes for their students to take part actively in the learning process. This actually calls for a lot of dedication and hard work from these dedicated teachers. Their dedication and hard work will enhance positive attitudes amongst high achieving and low achieving Science students. The investigator further observed that many students enrolled for Science courses either due to parental influence or due to peer influence. Table 2 below shows the role of parents and peers in choosing science as subject in the secondary school. Unless we help teachers to identify their own behaviours in teaching, and make them aware of what happens in class, it is difficult to promote positive attitude towards science. In this study, student perceptions are taken as indicators of teacher characteristics because of the following reasons:

Lily Cherian

110

Table 2: Correlation between choice of science as a subject and influence of family and peers. Total number of students = 793

Factor Family influence Peers

• • • • • •

Correlation with choice of science as a subject .90 0.92

Probability P<0.01 P<0.01

Students are in a better position to observe teacher’s characteristics than does an outside observer. Students are in a better position to judge teacher’s clarity of expression than an outsider. Students are familiar with their teacher’s habits than an outsider. Students can observe aspects of teacher’s behaviour an outside observer cannot. The use of a trained observer could be very expensive. The presence of an observer can alter the general behaviour of a teacher.

CONCLUSION The ideal teaching situation is one in which a dedicated teacher works with an interested student. However, we know that all the students do not have the same motivation to do well, but it is a fact that when placed in a stimulating environment surrounded by enthusiastic people, most of them who don't want to learn often change their minds. Ongoing professional development for teachers is an important aspect of the teaching and learning relationship. Teachers are lifelong learners and they need to be supported by colleagues, the school administration and educational jurisdictions. As part of this approach, schools should develop strong links with business, scientific organisations and the community. A teacher who has a positive attitude towards the subject will ensure the following: •

• •

•

Students to be enthusiastic value each other in the learning partnership and have an ongoing commitment to learning and quality teaching and learning relationship. Students choosing to be actively engaged is a good sign of good teaching and learning. Kids bursting through the door to announce they’ve found, read, viewed or heard something you taught yesterday, last week, last month…all indicate that they are in the right classroom with the right teacher. Students should be given a variety of learning experiences from topic to topic, lesson to lesson, to cater to different learning needs and to expose students to new methods and different modes of presenting information.

Within this relationship there are characteristics that focus on the learner, the teacher, and the support mechanisms/structures. To be able to participate fully in the ownership of their

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

111

learning, students will often need to access support in literacy, numeracy and classroom skills. The curriculum should be relevant and focus on the development of scientific literacy for all students. The students who participated in the study believed that teachers must have a sound knowledge in science and scientific methods, combined with the skills to pursue a range of teaching strategies that will suit the needs of their individual students. Many teachers think that their role is to provide students with the opportunity and skills to access knowledge, and use it, when appropriate. This comment is typical: “Give students the skills and the methods to allow them to think independently and to be able to process data in ways which are lateral and linear.” To support the development of a quality-learning environment, classrooms need adequate material and financial resources. Financial and material resources are needed to create smaller classes to enable more meaningful discussion and the opportunity for enhanced practical work. The best way to guarantee high-quality learning is to have motivated, enthusiastic teachers, who use their imagination to plan and execute experiential learning for their students.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The contributions made by Prof Mathew C Ninan, Principal, Little Rock Indian School, Brahmavar, India, in this paper is greatly appreciated and acknowledged.

REFERENCES Abell, S.K. (1990). A case study for elementary science specialist. School Science and Mathematics, 90 (4), 291-301. Abell, S.K., & Roth, M. (1992). Constraints to teaching elementary science: a case study of a science enthusiast student teacher. Science Education, 76 (6), 581-595. Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Allport, G.W. (1968). The historical background of modern social psychology. In Lindzey and E. Aaronson [Eds.], Handbook of Social Psychology, Boston: Addison-Wesley. Billeh,V., & Hassan, O. (1975). Factors affecting teachers’ gain in understanding the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12 (3), 209-219. Blackwood, P. E. (1964). Science in the elementary school. School Life, XLVII: 13-15. Bybee, R. (1975). The ideal elementary science teacher perceptions of children, pre-service and in-service elementary science teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 229-235. Cannon, R.K., & Simpson, R.D. (1985). Relationships among attitude, motivation, and achievement of ability grouped, seventh grade, life science students. Science Education, 69 (2), 121-138. Cherian, L. (1986). Attitude of students towards Biology in Transkei, M.Ed dissertation, University of Wales, Cardiff.

112

Lily Cherian

Cherian, L. (1996). The attitude of Standard ten pupils towards Science in Erstwhile Lebowa, D.Ed thesis, University of the North, South Africa. Duschl, R. A. (1983). The elementary level science methods course: breeding ground of all apprehension toward science? A case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 745-754. Fouts, J. T., & Myers, R. E. (1992). Classroom environments and middle school students' views of science. Journal of Educational Research, 85 (6), 356-361. Gabel, D., & Rubba, P. (1979). Attitude changes of elementary teachers according to the curriculum studied during workshop participation and their role as model science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 19-24. Gallagher, J.J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75 (1), 121133. Glass, L. W. (1993). Striving for excellence. The Science Teacher, 60 (9), 38-43. Haladyna, T., & Shaughnessy, J. (1982). Attitudes toward science: A qualitative synthesis. Science Education, 66, 547-563. Hartmann-Petersen, P. (2004). Science in Africa, Africa-on-line Magazine. Hiller, J. H., Fisher, G. A., & Kaes, W. A. (1969). Computer investiation of verbal characteristics of effective classroom lecturing. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 661-675. Hone, E., & Carswell, E. M. (1969). Elements of successful inservice education. Science and children, 6, 24-26. Lawrenz, F. (1975). The relationship between science teacher characteristics and student achievement and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12 (4), 433-437. Lee, T.Y. (1993). Comparisons of cognitive development, science process skills, and attitude toward science among Republic of China pre-service teachers with different science backgrounds. Science Education, 77 (6), 625-636. Loughran, J. (1994). Bridging the gap: an analysis of the needs of second-year science teachers. Science Education, 78 (4), 365-386. Mager, R.F. (1968). Developing attitude toward learning. Belmont, CA: Fearon Publishers. Martin, R. E. (1985). Is the credibility principle a model for changing science attitudes? Science Education, 69 (2), 229-239. Mason, C. L., & Kahle, J. B. (1988). Student attitudes toward science and science-related careers: A program designed to promote a stimulating gender-free learning environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26 (1), 25-39. McDevitt, T. M., Heikkinen, H. W., Alcorn, J. K., Ambrosio, A. L., & Gardner, A. L. (1993). Evaluation of the preparation of the teachers in science and mathematics: Assessment of preservice teachers' attitudes and beliefs. Science Education, 77 (6), 593-610. McMillan, J. H., & May, M. J. (1979). A study of factors influencing attitudes toward science of junior high students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 217-222. Meichtry, Y. S. (1992). Using laboratory experiences to develop the scientific literacy of middle school students. School science and Mathematics, 8, 437-441. Methen, A., & Wilkinson, W.J. (1986). What students in Kuwait consider to be the characteristics of a “good” science teacher. Research in Science and Technological Education, 4 (2), 171-181.

Teacher Characteristics and Attitude Towards Science

113

Meyer, W.F., Moore, C., & Viljoen, H G. (1990). Personality theories- from Freud to Frankl. Johannesburg, Lexicon Publishers. Mittlefehldt, B. (1985). Changing priorities in elementary science. Curriculum Review, 24, 6769. Morrison, A., & McIntyre, D. (1969). Teachers and Teaching. Penguin Books: New York. Okebukola, P. A., & Adeniyi, O. (1987). Resource utilization relative to students' achievement in and attitude toward science. Journal of Educational Research, 80 (4), 220-226. Olstad, R. G., & Haury, D. L. (1984). A summary of research in science education: Student characteristics. Science Education, 68 (3), 211-237. Pell, A.W. (1985). Enjoyment and attainment in secondary school Physics. British Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 123-132. Peterson, K., & Mayers, A. (1981). Ideal teacher behaviour perceptions of science students: success, gender, course. School Science and Mathematics, 81(4), 315-332. Piper, M., & Hough, L. (1979). Attitudes and open mindedness of undergraduate students enrolled in a science methods course and a freshman physics course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16 (3), 193-197. Pitburn, M. D., & Baker, D.L. (1993). If I were the teacher…….Qualitative study of attitude toward science. Science Education, 77 (4), 393-406. Rakow, S. J., & Bermudez, A. B. (1993). Science is " Ciencia": meeting the needs of Hispanic American students. Science Education, 77 (6), 669-683. Sarnoff, I. (1960a). Psychoanalytic theory and social attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24 (3), 251-279. Sarnoff, I. (1962). Personality dynamics and development. New York: John Wiley and sons, Inc. Schwerian, P. (1969). Characteristics related to of elementary science teachers attitudes toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6 (3), 203-213. Scotti, W. (1989). The science lab as an example of an effective humanistic and holistic approach to teaching and learning. Reading Improvement, 26 (2), 150-155. Sherwood, R. D., & Gabel, D. (1980). Basic science skills for prospective elementary teachers: Measuring and prediction success. Science Education, 64, 195-201. Shrigley, R. (1974). The correlation of science attitudes and science knowledge of pre-service elementary teachers. Science Education, 58 (2), 143-151. Simpson, R.D., & Brown, D,R. (1970). Attitudes toward selected concepts among junior high science teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 70 (3), 207-213. Skinner, E.A., & Belmont, M.J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85 (4), 571-581. Smith, B., & Bramblett, G.H. (1981). The effect of teacher vagueness terms on student performance in high school biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18 (4), 353-360. Smith, O.C., & Gessler, J. (1989). Advising and educating the engineers of tomorrow. Science Teacher, 56 (5), 33-36. Strunk, W., & White, E. B. (1972). The elements of style. New York: The MacMillan Company.

114

Lily Cherian

Swank, P. R., Taylor, R. D., Brady, M. P., & Freiberg, H. J. (1989). Sensitivity of classroom observation systems: measuring teacher effectiveness. The Journal of Experimental Education, 57 (2), 171-186. Sunday Times. (1997). Most pupils pass over Science and Mathematics. 29th June:7. Talton, E.L., & Simpson, R D. (1986). Relationships of attitudes towards self, family and school with attitudes towards Science among adolescents. Science Education, 63 (5), 649-654. Talton, E.L., & Simpson, R D. (1987). The relationship between attitude towards classroom environment with attitude to, and achievement in Science among tenth grade Biology students. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 24 (6), 507-525. Tilgner, P. J. (1990). Avoiding science in the elementary school. Science Education, 21-431. Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90 (5), 403-418. Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. J. (1989). Case studies of exemplary science and mathematics teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 89 (4), 320-334. Washton, N. S. (1971). Improving Elementary Teacher Education in science; reprinted by D. L. Williams and W. L. Herman Jr. in Current Research in Elementary School Science, New York: McMillan. Westerback, M. E. (1984). Studies on anxiety about teaching science in pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 937-950. Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (1985). Changes in perception of science for third, seventh, and eleventh grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 347-358. Young, B. J., & Kellog, T. (1993). Science attitudes and preparation of pre-service elementary teachers. Science Education, 77 (3), 279-291. Zurub, A. R., & Rubba, P. A. (1983). Development and validation of an inventory to assess science teacher needs in developing countries. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20 (9), 867-873.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 115-140

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 5

TEACHER COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOUR AND ENJOYMENT OF SCIENCE LESSONS Harkirat S. Dhindsa5 Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei

ABSTRACT Teacher communication behavior in a classroom is an important dimension of classroom learning environment that significantly contributes towards a unique learning environment. The aim of this research was to study secondary students’ perceptions of science teacher communication behaviour and its association with enjoyment of science lessons. Data were collected (a) by administering a teacher communication behaviour questionnaire and students’ enjoyment of science lesson questionnaire to 1098 students in 53 classes and (b) by direct observation of 20 science classes. Factor analysis, alpha reliability and discriminant validity coefficients for the five scales in the instruments using a student or a class or a school as a unit of analysis supported internal consistency and the distinct nature of the scales, thus the high quality of the data collected. The results of the study revealed that Bruneian science students perceived their teachers to some extent friendly and understanding who exercise dominance in the classrooms controlling the overall classroom interaction without so often challenging their students with higher order questions. The students seldom received praise, non-verbal support, and encouragement from their science teachers despite a large number of the teachers are expatriates with qualifications from and experience in developed countries. The female students perceived their teachers to be statistically significantly more challenging as well as understanding and friendly than the male students. A low level statistically significant difference in favour of Form 5 (Grade 10) students was observed on encouragement when compared to Form 4 students. Low to moderate level statistically significant differences between class means as well as school means revealed that teacher communication behavior varied marginally between the classes and schools. Statistically significant positive simple correlation values between students’ perceptions of enjoyment of and factors of teacher communication behaviour in science lessons suggest that teacher communication behaviour directly influence enjoyment of science lesson. The implication of this research is (a) for 5

[email protected]

116

Harkirat S. Dhindsa classroom teachers to optimse their classroom communication behaviour and (b) for teacher educators to redesign their training programs to optimize pre-service teachers’ communication behaviour to make science lessons more enjoyable.

INTRODUCTION Teacher and student communication plays a central role in establishing a quality classroom learning environment (Wubbels and Levey, 1993). Teacher communication behavior in a classroom, therefore, is an important dimension of the classroom learning environment that significantly contributes towards a unique classroom learning environment which is a result of interactions of students with peers, curriculum and teachers. These interactions last for approximately 15,000 hours per year (Fraser, 1989) the time secondary students spend in their classes to pursue their social and academic goals (Ryan and Patrick, 2001). According to Good and Brophy (1991) on an average teachers in secondary school have interactions with 150 students per day. The teachers are not aware of these interactions. Based on the interview results Good and Brophy (1991) concluded that the teachers were not aware of the number and types of questions they asked in their classes and the feed back they provided to their students. The influences of teacher-student interactions on classroom discipline (Rosenholtz, Bassler, and Hoover-Dempsey, 1986), constructivist learning (Watts and Bentley, 1987), and, attitudes and achievement (Wubbels and Levey, 1993) have been demonstrated. There is a large number of dimensions of teacher communication behaviour. Some of these dimensions include questioning (Carlsen, 1991), wait time (Jegede and Olajide, 1995; Rowe, 1974), communication rate (Dhindsa and Anderson, 1992), helping, friendly and understanding teacher behaviour (Fisher, Henderson and Fraser, 1996; Wubbels and Levey, 1993), controlling behaviour (Fisher and Rickards, 1997; Wubbels and Levey, 1993), verbal reinforcement (She, 2000), non-verbal reinforcement (She, and Fisher 2000, van Tartwijk, 1993). These dimensions of teacher communication behaviour directly influence students’ attitudes and learning outcomes (Fisher and Rickards, 1997; Wubbels and Levey, 1993). Wait time and communication rate dimensions have been extensively studied, whereas other dimensions listed above need attention. This study will concentrate on five dimensions of teacher communication behaviour namely challenging, encouragement and praise, non-verbal support, understanding and friendly, and, controlling. The importance of studying these dimensions has been highlighted in the literature. For example van Tartwijk (1993) reported that 63% of the measured variance of perceived influence of teachers on what happens in the class was explained by non-verbal behaviour of the teacher. She and Fisher (2002) reported statistically significant correlation (association) between teachers’ encouraging and praise behaviour to students’ affective and academic outcomes. In 1997, Fisher and Rickards reported an association between friendly and understanding behaviour of teachers, and, students’ learning outcome and positive attitude to learning the subject. They also reported that controlling or strict behaviour is associated with students’ cognitive gains not with attitudes. Challenging scales in this instrument covered questioning. Effective classroom questions promote relevance, encourage ownership, help students to interpret their observations and link new learning to extant knowledge (Deal and Sterling, 1997). Most of

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

117

the research in the area has been conducted in developed countries, and very little attention has been paid in developing countries especially in Asia. Communication is also a dimension of culture, hence it is not context free. The communication behaviours of teachers and students in a classroom are therefore, influenced by their cultural backgrounds. Chan (2004) observed that Asian students generally tend to be quieter than North American students, because they have been taught not to speak unless they are asked to as a respect to their teachers. According to Delpit (1988), white teachers used indirect statements or veiled commands instead of direct commands when speaking to black children. Moreover, the managerial strategies developed by lower secondary white American teachers did not meet the needs of children from other cultures. The communication behaviours of teachers and students are further influenced by subcultures identifiable by nation, tribe, language, location, religion, gender, occupation, race, ethnicity, and social class (Aikenhead, 1997). Communication occurring in physical and social contexts especially verbal communication reflects the thought patterns of a culture or sub-culture. Many cultures or subcultures express emotional overtone of messages with different nonverbal behaviour (Atwater, 1996). For example in Brunei, pointing at something with the thumb is acceptable, but not with the first finger. According to Rasool and Curtis (2000) cultures develop a variety of acceptable modes of verbal and nonverbal communication that can confuse and misinform outsiders. It can happen very often in classroom situations, because in many such situations teachers from a culture or subculture are involved teaching students from other cultures or subcultures. Often there are cultural overlaps between neighboring societies and even between neighboring countries. Bruneians share cultural values to some extent with neighboring countries. Therefore the research done in these countries could be useful in reflecting the situation in Brunei without doing actual research in local context. There are studies on the classroom learning environment reported from Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia (Wahyudi and Treagust, 2003; Goh and Fraser, 1998 ; Liau and Arellano, 2003 ). But no research has been reported using the instrument (TCBQ) used in this study. Moreover, minor variations in cultural context may be highly important in a classroom context. She and Fisher (2002) conducted a study in Taiwan and Australia using this instrument. Both Taiwan and Australian cultures are significantly different from Bruneian culture indicating a need for this study. In Brunei itself, a reasonable amount of work on the classroom learning environment has been conducted. For example, Dhindsa (2005) and Dhindsa and Fraser (2004) studied the cultural learning environment in secondary and tertiary institutions respectively, Riah (2001) studied learning environment in secondary chemistry classes and Poh (1995) investigated the learning environment in upper secondary biology laboratory classes. Riah (2001) has used QTI to study teacher interactions in chemistry classrooms in Brunei, but the dimensions of QTI are different to than of TCBQ. The author has not come across any research conducted on teacher communication behaviour in secondary science classes in Brunei. Under these conditions, it is important to study teacher classroom communication behaviour in a specific cultural context that is Bruneian, rather than importing research done in another non-compatible culture to solve local problems. This study was therefore planned and conducted to evaluate teacher communication behaviour in science classes and the association between teacher communication behaviour and the students’ enjoyment of science lessons. The dimensions of teacher communication behaviour in a classroom setting can be studied by using systematic observations of classroom interactions as well as of video

118

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

recorded files, descriptive base studies and using students’ and teachers’ perceptions (She, 2000). The major limitation of using observation and descriptive approaches is their ability to deal with small samples of data. Since generalization requires large volumes of data and a computer can process large quantities of data, a trend over the years has been to use the students’ and teachers’ perceptions approach. The advantage of using students’ perceptions as indicators of the quality of the classroom environment has been highlighted in many studies (Walberg and Haertel, 1980; Fraser 1998). These studies suggest that students are directly involved in classroom activities and observe more of their teacher’s behaviour than does an external observer. A number of instruments have been developed to study teacher interactions in a classroom: questionnaire on teacher interactions (QTI) by Wubbels and Levey (1993) and teacher communication behaviour questionnaire (TCBQ) by She and Fisher (2000). In this study the instrument developed by She and Fisher (2000) is considered for studying secondary students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour, because it is based on the theory of communication behaviours (Waltzlawick, Beavin and Jackson, 1967), also it has accounted for research based on the use of QTI. However, these dimensions are not directly covered in QTI. The TCBQ instrument consists of 40 items covering five dimensions namely challenging, encouragement and praise, non-verbal support, understanding and friendly, and, controlling. The instrument has been reported as valid and reliable for data collection (She and Fisher, 2000). They reported that the Chonbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the scales in the instrument ranged from 0.86 to 0.93 for Taiwan as well as for the Australian data. The discriminant validity (mean partial correlation of a scale with other scales) data for the scales varied from 0.16 to 0.50 for the Taiwan data and from 0.06 to 0.45 for the Australian data. These data suggest internal consistency and independence of the scales used in the instrument. Moreover, eta2 values ranged from 0.17 to 0.22 for Taiwan and from 0.05 to 0.15 for the Australian data. Eta2 values indicate the variance in teacher communication behaviour (dependent variable) that is accounted for by class memberships (independent variable). The research data have been analysed in numerous ways to study the effects of different variables. For example, researchers have evaluated the relationship between affective domain and academic outcomes and have reported a significant relationship between these variables (Fraser, 1994; Gardner and Gauld, 1990; Weinburgh, 1995). She and Fisher (2000) using 7item “Attitude to This Class” scale has reported significant correlation between affective domain and the students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour in classes. In the present study a 5-item enjoyment scale was used to investigate if the teacher communication behaviour scales significantly correlate with enjoyment of science in the classes of the respondents involved in this study. The enjoyment scale used in this study was previously used by Riah (2000) to study students’ enjoyment. He reported the reliability coefficients for the scale as 0.84 for chemistry theory classes data and 0.89 for practical classes data. The researchers have also analysed the data using individual students and a class as units of analysis (Fisher and Waldrip, 1997; She and Fisher, 2002). The trend in this direction is growing. Using the class as a unit of analysis, researchers have computed eta2 values to validate their instruments (Fisher and Waldrip, 1999; Riah, 2000). On similar grounds, one can argue that schools have their own culture that influences the communication behaviour of teachers. It is therefore important to analyse the data using the school as the unit of analysis. However, the limitation of analyzing data using a school as a unit of analysis is the number of

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

119

data points (degrees of freedom) becomes small. Furthermore, the social roles of males and females in a culture are usually different (Thomas, 2000). The communication styles or behaviours of males and females in a culture are therefore expected to be different. The students from different cultures or sub-cultures observe these practices at home and they exercise these practices in classroom situations. Therefore, it is also important to compare the perceptions of male and female students on teacher communication behaviour. Researchers also believe that students are directly involved in observing their teachers in a classroom setting (Walberg and Haertel, 1980; Fraser 1998). It implies from these studies that the students’ observation experience should make a difference. In other words the observations of students in lower grades should be different from that of students in higher grade. It is therefore worth comparing Form 4 and Form 5 students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour. The overall analysis of the above literature suggests that it is worth studying students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour in Bruneian schools by analyzing the data in the various modes of grouping discussed above, firstly because of the cultural distinctiveness of the local population and secondly because of the lack of research in the area not only in the country but also in the neighbouring countries.

AIMS The aims of the research reported here were (a) to determine reliability and validity of the Teacher Communication Behaviour Questionnaire (TCBQ) for collecting data on upper secondary students’ perceptions of science teachers’ communication behaviour (TCB), and (b) to evaluate the magnitude of dimensions of teacher communication behaviour in science classes of the upper secondary science at government schools. More specifically, the following research questions were answered in this study. 1. Was the TCBQ suitable for collecting data on upper secondary students’ perceptions of science teachers’ communication behaviour in their classes? 2. What were the students’ mean perceptions on the five dimensions of TCB? 3. Were there gender differences in students’ perceptions on the five dimensions of TCB? 4. Were there differences in Form 4 and 5 students’ perceptions on the five dimensions of TCB? 5. Were there any associations between students’ perceptions on dimensions of teacher communication behaviour and their enjoyment of science lessons?

METHODOLOGY This section reports the descriptions of respondents, instrument, procedure, and contexts: cultural and classroom.

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

120

Table 1. Description of Dimensions of Teacher Communication Behaviour and Example Items Scale Challenging

Encouragement and Praise Non-verbal Support

Understanding and Friendly Controlling

Enjoyment

Description Extent to which the teacher uses higher-order questions to challenge students in their learning. Extent to which the teacher praises and encourages students. The extent to The teacher uses non-verbal communication to interact positively with students. Extent to which the teacher is understanding and friendly towards students. Extent to which the teacher controls and manages student behaviour in the class. Extent to which respondents enjoy their science lesson.

Sample Item This teacher asks me questions that require me to apply what I have learned in class in order to answer This teacher praises me for asking a good question. This teacher smiles at me to show support while I am trying to solve a problem. This teacher understands when I doubt something. This teacher requires us to be quiet in his/her class. Science is fun.

This table containing 5 scales of TCB and an enjoyment scale is partly adapted from She and Fisher (2000).

Respondents The population for this study comparised Form 4 and 5 secondary science students at Government schools in Brunei Darussalam. The subjects of the study were 1098 upper secondary science students from 15 schools. These students were attending 53 classes in these schools. The sample consisted of 33 % males and 67% females with an overall mean age of 16.6 + 0.9 years. The data on national enrolment in schools, including science subjects, show that the number of female students is higher than that of male students (BDSY, 1996-97). Moreover, the mean achievement score in science for female students is higher than that of male students (unpublished data). The male and female students occupy separate rows and seats.

Instruments and Procedure The instrument (TCBQ) developed empirically by She and Fisher (2000) was used in this study. It contained 40 items representing five scales. The test items in each scale are written in English language. The instrument was given to three university lecturers of science education who evaluated its language, content and constructs. They reported that the content and constructs were valid for the use of the instrument in Brunei. However, the items are wordy and are somewhat difficult to understand especially for those students who lack

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

121

English language proficiency, especially student at lower secondary schools. They believed that the use of instrument should be satisfactory for upper secondary students. During a pilot study, the students in lower secondary science classes found the items wordy and difficult. A group of 20 upper secondary students who were not part of this study found the questions in the instrument easy to understand. The 40-item instrument consisted of five scales: Challenging, Encouragement and Praise, Non-verbal Support, Understanding and Friendly, and, Controlling. The enjoyment scale consisted of five items. The enjoyment scale has been previously used by Riah (2000) The descriptions of the TCB scales and enjoyment scale are reported in Table 1. Each TCB scale contained eight items and the enjoyment 5 items. Each TCB item was responded to on a five-point scale response format with the extreme alternatives from “Almost never” to “Almost always” (Strongly agree to Strongly disagree for enjoyment scale). The instrument covering TCB scales and enjoyment scale was administered to the students in their classes and the students were asked to indicate to what extent they agreed to that each item described their classroom. The higher the score for a given scale the more prominent is the behaviour. The scores for negative items were reversed before the analysis. The data were analysed using ANOVA and the significance of the results was further evaluated using effect size data. The effect size classification reported by Cohen (1969) was used to evaluate the effects of treatment. The observation of teacher communication behaviour in 20 classes followed nonparticipant field note taking. Every effort was made to thoroughly record the five dimensions of teacher communication behaviour and enjoyment activities in the classes. The field notes were then summarised for the observations to make overall comments.

Contexts There are two types of contexts discussed under this heading: Cultural and Classroom. The cultural context explains the actual cultural diversity in local population that affects the classroom composition. The classroom context describes the classroom situation and public perception of classroom. Cultural Context. The Brunei although small in size, is rich in cultural diversity. The major sources of cultural diversity in the Brunei are the cultural variations within the population as well as in temporary (migrant) population. In 2001, there were about 80,000 (about 23% of the total population) temporary workers from many countries working in Brunei Darussalam. A considerable fraction of temporary workers is involved in teaching at primary, secondary and tertiary institutions. Children of the temporary workers attend primary, secondary and tertiary educational institutions. The Bruneian population mainly consists of Malay, Kedayan, Tutong, Belait, Bisaya, Dusan, Murut, Iban, Kelabit and Chinese communities. The population (344500; estimated for 2001) of Brunei Darussalam consists of 53% male and 47% female. On the basis of race, there are 73.8% Malays, 6% indigenous people, 14.8% Chinese and 11.4 % Others (see Borneo Bulletin Brunei Year Book, 2002 for details). The literacy rate, that is ability to sign one’s name in a local language, is 90%. There are also sub-cultures co-existing within a culture such as rural, urban, water-village culture, rich, well to do and poor. The language as well as style of communication in these cultures and sub-cultures are so diverse. For example, the students from rural and water village sub-

122

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

cultures often speak louder than other students The data reported in this paragraph show cultural diversity in Brunei Darussalam that students from various cultures and sub-cultures bring to their classes that influence the teaching and learning processes in the schools. . Classroom context. In general, classrooms are coeducational. The government however, has also provided the facility of single sex schools for parents to make a choice of educational institution type for their children. The classrooms have single students desks arranged in rows. Almost all classrooms have electricity and fans fitted. The climate is hot and humid. The boys and girls usually occupy different rows. However, gender equity is quite high in the classes. Local culture is highly hierarchical, that provides teachers a higher level on the priori scale of hierarchy. Therefore teachers are usually authoritarian. Their teaching style is more traditional that further adds to the teacher authority in the classroom. The students often are quiet in their classes and do not argue with the teacher. This may be the cultural effect as stated by Chan (2004). According to her, Asian students are much quieter than their American counterparts. However, in the absence of teacher or in after hour social context, they may be very expressive. A compression of two situations is very aptly captured in the following cartoon (Cuboi, 2001).

RESULTS The results of this study are described under three major heading: (a) Validation of instruments, (b) Teacher communication behvaiour and (c) Associations between teacher communication behaviour scales and enjoyment of science lessons.

Validation of Instruments This section deals with validations of TCBQ and the enjoyment scale. Validation of TCBQ. Under this heading, Chi-square, factors analysis, reliability, discriminant validity and the eta2 coefficients for the scales in the TCBQ are discussed.

Figure1. Brunei classrooms: A cartoonists’ viewpoint

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

123

Chi-square analysis values for all the items in the instrument using the data collected from all the subjects were calculated to examine if the distribution of the responses was different from the randomly distributed (equal for all possible choice). The Chi-square values obtained were over 157 for all items and were highly significant at P<.001. These results demonstrated that the respondents' responses to the test items were not randomly selected. Table 2. Factor Loading for Items in the 30-item Version of the Personal Form of the CLEQ for the Individual Students as the Unit of Analysis Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 % Variance Eigen Value

CHA 0.60 0.56 0.66 0.41 0.65 0.57 0.62 0.43 0.36

EAP

NVS

UAF

CON

0.33

0.64 0.51 0.45 0.67 0.66 0.62 0.75 0.70 0.56 0.62 0.74 0.74 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.67 0.61 0.68 0.67 0.58 0.70 0.76 0.70 0.64

4.47 1.79

6.44 2.58

22.76 9.10

9.86 3.95

0.42 0.63 0.75 0.76 0.75 0.67 0.53 0.62 5.44 2.18

h2 0.41 0.39 0.48 0.34 0.47 0.40 0.48 0.30 0.48 0.44 0.33 0.53 0.48 0.45 0.63 0.55 0.39 0.46 0.63 0.62 0.62 0.63 0.62 0.51 0.43 0.54 0.49 0.43 0.53 0.62 0.56 0.52 0.32 0.51 0.58 0.60 0.57 0.47 0.34 0.44

CHA = Challenging; EAP = Encouragement and Praise; NVS = Non-verbal Support; UAF = Understanding and Friendly; CON = Controlling; Cut-off point for factor loadings = 0.3. h2 is the commonality.

124

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

Factor analysis was performed to refine and validate TCBQ. It involved a series of factor analyses whose purpose was to examine the internal structure of the set of 40 items. Using SPSS, principal components analysis with varimax rotation was used to generate orthogonal factors. Because the instrument was designed with five scales, a five-factor solution was first tried. All the 40 items grouped into the five factors reported in Table 2 in the same fashion as reported by She and Fisher (2000). The table also shows the factor loadings for the five factors obtained from this analysis using the individual student as the unit of analysis. All factor loadings less than 0.3 have been omitted. Table 2 shows that, for each of the 40 items, the factor loading is larger than 0.4 on the a priori scale. The percentage variance extracted and eigenvalue (rotation sum of squared loading) associated with each factor are also recorded at the bottom of each scale. The five factors reported in this study accounted for a total of 49% of the variance. Similar values for the total variance explained have been reported (see Dhindsa, 2005; Salta and Tzougraki, 2004). The amount of variance for each factor explained varied from 4.5% to 22.8 %. The communality values (h2) reported in Table 2 represent the fraction of variance explained by an item when grouped into a factor. The communality data were within an acceptable range and vary from 0.32 to 0.63. Reliability is a measure of the internal consistency of each scale and it was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Table 3 shows that, for this sample of students, the alpha reliability coefficient ranged from 0.77 to 0.86 and from 0.87 to 0.94 when individual student and class as units of analysis respectively were considered. The overall reliability coefficients for the 40 items instrument were 0.91 and 0.93 when individual student and class as a units of analysis respectively were used. These data suggest that each scale as well as the instrument have acceptable reliability. Discriminant validity is a measure of overlap between the scales. The mean partial correlation of a scale with the other scales was used as a convenient measure of the discriminant validity or independence of the instrument scales. The mean correlations of each scale with the other scales, reported in Table 3, ranged from 0.17 to 0.21, 0.14 to 0.31 and 0.17 to 0.42 when data were analysed using an individual student, a class and a school as units of analysis respectively. These values suggest that the instrument scales measure relatively distinct aspects of the learning environment. Moreover, the factor analysis results (individual student data) attest to the independence of factor scores on CLEQ scales. Table 3. Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficients and Discriminant Validity for each Scale Using a Student, a Class and a School means as unist of analyses Scale

N

Challenging Encouragement and Praise Non-verbal Support Understanding and Friendly Controlling Instrument

8 8 8 8 8 40

Alpha Reliability Ind. Class 0.77 0.87 0.83 0.92 0.88 0.94 0.86 0.90 0.82 0.87 0.91 0.93

N = Number of items in a scale. Ind. = individual

Discriminant Validity Ind. Class School 0.21 0.31 0.41 0.21 0.31 0.42 0.19 0.24 0.21 0.19 0.14 0.29 0.17 0.29 0.17 -

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

125

Table 4. Eta 2 Data for Each Scale Using Class and School as a Unit of Analysis Scale

N

Challenging Encouragement and Praise Non-verbal Support Understanding and Friendly Controlling

8 8 8 8 8

Eta2 Class 0.22 0.25 0.19 0.16 0.17

School 0.10 0.16 0.11 0.07 0.05

N = Number of items in a scale.

The eta2 values reported in Table 4 were computed to evaluate the variance explained when a class or a school as a unit of analysis was used. This measure was adopted because of some limitations of SPSS-ANOVA analysis of large data (also details discussed later in this paragraph). Table 4 shows that eta2 values ranged from 0.16 to 0.25 and from 0.05 to 0.16 for class and school memberships respectively. These data suggest that 16% – 25% of the variance in teacher communication behaviour data on the five scales was explained by class membership and 5% - 16% by school membership. These eta2 values lend further support to the validity of TCBQ in the local context. The ANOVA analysis of data using a class or a school as units of analysis produced Fvalues highly significant at p< .001 for all the five scales. These results indicated that at least one of the compared pairs was statistically significantly different. The post-hoc analysis was difficult to summarise due to (a) large numbers of pairs of schools and (b) inability of the SPSS program to handle large number of class pairs for comparison. Therefore, the scale item mean values averaged over classes or schools are reported in Table 5 for reference and are not discussed further in this manuscript. Validation of Enjoyment scale. The enjoyment scale contained five items. The scale is described in Table 1 along with TCBQ scales. This is a uni-dimensional scale with a Chrobach alpha value of 0.82 and mean inter item correlation of 0.47. The factor analysis revealed that the five items converge into a factor with factor loading values ranging between 0.68 and 0.80 on a priori scale. The communality data were within an acceptable range and vary from 0.46 to 0.65. The communality values (h2) reported represent the fraction of variance explained by an item when grouped into a factor. This scale explained 57.8% of the total variance. When the data on these items was grouped with TCBQ data, these items got grouped together as a factor without any interference to or from the TCBQ scales. For this scale, the values of eta2 for class and school as units of analysis were 0.14 and 0.05 respectively. Eta2 represents the proportion of variation accounted for class or school membership. These results indicate that 14% and 5% of the variation in enjoyment data is accounted for by class and school variables.

Teacher Communication Behaviour The results of this study dealing with scales of teacher communication behaviour are described quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative results deal with students’

126

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

perception of teacher communication behaviour data collected using survey instruments and the qualitative with classroom observation data. Quantitative data. The results in this section are discussed under three sub-headings representing: (a) The students’ perception of TCB in general, (b) the gender differences in students’ perceptions, and (c) the difference in perception of Form 4 and Form 5 students. The students’ perceptions of TCB in general are reported as the scale item mean values averaged over individual student, a class and a school on the five teacher communication behaviour factors assessed by the instrument. These data hereafter are referred to as average scale item mean value(s), average scale item mean-C value(s), average scale item mean-S value(s) respectively. The students’ perceptions of TCB in general are reported in Table 5. The data in the table show average scale item mean, average scale item mean-C, average scale item mean-S, standard deviation and 95% confidence interval data for five factors of teacher communication behaviour. The mean data for individual student, class and school reported in the table ranged 2.60 - 3.70, 2.62 - 3.70 and 2.59 - 3.71 respectively for TCB scales. The average scale item mean values for these three types of data are almost the same with differences in standard deviation data therefore the scale item mean values averaged over a student will be further discussed in detail. Table 5. Average Scale Item Mean, Standard Deviation, N and 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Data Average Item Mean, Standard Deviation, N and 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Data Scales Challenging

Encouragement and Praise

Non-verbal Support

Understanding and Friendly

Controlling

Analysis Unit Indiv. Class School Indiv. Class School Indiv. Class School Indiv. Class School Indiv. Class School

N 1098 53 15 1108 53 15 1104 53 15 1109 53 15 1108 53 15

Mean 3.49 3.50 3.44 2.60 2.62 2.59 2.74 2.73 2.71 3.70 3.70 3.71 3.68 3.67 3.62

SD 0.61 0.30 0.21 0.71 0.38 0.32 0.80 0.36 0.31 0.72 0.31 0.18 0.69 0.29 0.20

95% Confidence Interval (Mean) 3.45 – 3.52 3.42 – 3.58 3.32 – 3.55 2.55 – 2.63 2.52 – 2.73 2.53 – 2.77 2.70 – 2.79 2.64 – 2.83 2.53 – 2.88 3.66 – 3.74 3.61 – 3.78 3.61 – 3.81 3.64 – 3.72 3.58 – 3.75 3.51 – 3.73

Indivi. = Individual, N = Number of data points

The average scale item mean values reported in the Table 5 can be divided into two categories: (i) greater than 3 and (ii) less than 3. A value of 3.00 represented sometimes on the five point scales indicating that teachers exhibited the behaviour sometimes only. The average scale item mean values for Understanding and Friendly, controlling and challenging

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

127

were greater than three indicating that students perceived their teachers exhibiting these behaviours in their classes to some extent, that is between “sometimes” and “often” may be more close to often. However, the average scale item mean values for the non-verbal support, and, the encouragement and praise scales were less than three. These data indicated that teachers exhibited these behaviours “seldom” to “sometimes”. The highest average scale item mean value was 3.70 for understanding and friendly and the lowest 2.60 for encouragement and praise. These data suggest that teachers teaching upper secondary science classes are often understanding and friendly, but they seldom encourage and praise their students. The data in the table also suggest that the teachers were in control of their classes and challenged their students with questions. However, they seldom provided non-verbal support. In the table, standard deviation values for the data ranged from 0.61 to 0.80. The highest value of 0.80 was obtained for non-verbal support scale, with the average scale item value just above the minimum mean value (4th out of five). The standard deviation values indicate that the teachers varied in providing non-verbal support more than exhibiting challenging behaviour where the standard deviation value was 0.61. The variations in the students’ perceptions of TCB for other three scales were in between the above stated two extremes as reflected by the standard deviation values for non-verbal ands challenging scales. Table 6. Average Scale Item Mean, Average Item Standard Deviation, and ANOVA Results for Difference in TCBQ Mean Scale Data for Male and Female Respondents Scales Challenging Encouragement and Praise Non-verbal Support Understanding and Friendly Controlling

Male N 351

Mean 3.36

SD 0.59

Female N Mean 747 3.55

SD 0.61

357

2.65

0.70

740

2.57

0.71

352

2.67

0.78

745

2.78

0.81

355

3.52

0.72

743

3.78

0.70

354

2.58

0.68

744

3.72

0.69

Significance of Difference F /(p) Effect size 23.31 0.31 (.000) 2.05 0.11 (.086) 4.77 0.14 (.029) 34.04 0.37 (.000) 10.65 0.20 (.001)

N = number of respondents.

The gender differences in students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour are reported in Table 6. The data in the table show no statistically significant differences in average scale item mean values on encouragement and praise scale for male and female subjects. These results suggest that both male and female students perceived encouragement and praise in their classes to the same extent. For the remaining four TCB factors, statistically significant gender differences (p< .03) were observed. However, the effect size values for non-verbal support, and, controlling scales were 0.14 and 0.20 respectively. Therefore, these low (see Cohen 1969 for classification) level significant differences are of little educational importance and might have been contributed by some other factors such as the large sample size. It was therefore concluded that there were no gender differences in non-verbal support, and, controlling dimensions of teacher communication behaviour. The table also shows

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

128

statistically significant low to medium level gender differences on Challenging, and, Understanding and Friendly scales with effect size values of 0.31 and 0.37 respectively. These results show that the female as compared to male students perceived their teachers to be more challenging as well as understanding and friendly. Table 7. Average Scale Item Mean, Average Item Standard Deviation, ANOVA and Effect Size Results for Difference in TCBQ Mean Scale Data for Form 4 and Form 5 Scales

Form 4

Form 5

Significance of Diff.

Challenging

N 658

Mean 3.46

SD 0.62

N 440

Mean 3.52

SD 0.63

Encouragement and Praise

651

2.50

0.72

446

2.73

0.70

Non-verbal Support

650

2.68

0.81

445

2.84

0.81

Understanding and Friendly

651

3.66

0.72

446

3.76

0.74

Controlling

655

3.67

0.70

442

3.67

0.70

F/ (p) 1.92 (.166) 27.11 (.000) 10.74 (.001) 5.11 (.024) 0.00 (.956)

ES 0.10 0.32 0.20 0.14 0.00

N = number of respondents; ES = effect size; Diff. = Difference

The overall results show that the gender differences on three out of five factors were statistically significantly different with effect size >= 0.20. Based on the quantitative data, it was therefore concluded that there were gender differences in students’ perceptions of teacher communication behaviour in science classes. However, readers should consider these results with caution because in a complex situation like this where TCB dimensions interact with a large number of variables associated with the school, content, teacher and students during teaching and learning, the low effect size and small differences such as for non-verbal support and controlling may be of some importance especially if they are observed in repeat studies (see Rennie, 1998). The difference in perceptions of Form 4 and Form 5 students on the TCB scales are reported in Table 7. The ANOVA analysis of Form 4 and 5 students' data revealed that the average scale item mean score representing Form 4 and 5 students' perceptions of TCB in their classrooms were comparable (not statistically significantly different) for the factors except for Non-verbal Support, and, Encouragement and Praise scales (see table 7). These results suggest that Form 5 students perceived statistically significantly higher level (p = 0.001; ES = 0.20) of non-verbal support as compared to Form 4 students. The low effect size suggests that the perceptions of both the groups were only marginally different on this scale. The results in the table also suggest that Form 5 students perceived that they received statistically significantly more encouragement and praise (p = 0.000; ES = 0.32) from their teachers when compared to Form 4 students. The effect size values suggest that the difference between the two groups’ perceptions was low to moderate. Form 5 students were to sit for the GCE – O level examination at the end of the year, therefore teachers and students appeared to have become more serious about optimizing learning in their classes. The overall results demonstrate that Form 4 and Form 5 students’ perceptions’ were statistically significantly

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

129

different for two out of five factors. Out of these two factors, the difference on one factor was of low level (Effect size = 0.20), which is of little educational importance and on the second factor low to medium level. Therefore based on the survey data, it was concluded that the perceptions of both groups of students on TCB were comparable. The qualitative classroom observation data. The observation data is summarised under five sub-heading representing five dimensions of TCB and an enjoyment of science lessons scale. The challenging nature of TCB is summarised as follows. In general the teachers asked chorus questions to whole class where any student who knew the answer initiated the response and others mumbled with him or her. It was therefore difficult to know if the teachers asked more question to male or female students. Most of the questions were recall type and very few questions were of the thinking type or higher order. Often the higher order questions were linked to what is expected from them in final examination. The response from the students was minimal. When the teachers were faced with stunned silence after they ask a question, they will answer the questions themselves. Many times teachers did not give enough wait-time. However, there were only a few teachers who asked higher level questions. The following field note indicates a summary of classroom observation of a teacher. “The nature of questions often posed in the class were more geared towards finding out students’ recall of certain facts. These questions did little to determine the depth of students’ understanding of particular concepts. Very few of the questions challenged the students to think creatively or to analyse and organise information. It was observed that some times there was a certain tendency for the teacher to answer his/her own question, particularly if the questions required a certain amount of application.”

Encouragement and Praise classroom observation data revealed that the teachers often praised the students when their responses to the questions were correct. However, the praise was very much limited because teachers did not ask many questions to individual students. Teachers tended to overlook the value of praising students for their efforts when they did not give correct responses. There are teachers who even did not praise the students after they responded the questions correctly and simply used the word OK. The praise was mostly linked to the responses to the questions only, however, the classroom has much more where teachers should praise their students. The home-work and class-work marked by teachers had practically no praise or encouraging comments. Both male and female students are often not praised for their good behaviour in the class. The students were not encouraged to discuss answers among themselves. In the majority of times, students’ ideas were not used in the development of the concepts. The following field note indicates a summary of classroom observation of a teacher: “This teacher does tend to praise students for giving correct responses. Apart from that, teachers tend to overlook the part where they should praise students for their efforts as well. Also while observing the classes of the teacher, it seems to be a general lack of teacher encouraging his/her students to ask questions and express their opinions.”

Nonverbal support provided to the students by their teachers during the lessons was limited. The teachers displayed hand movements while explaining the concepts to the students. More common non-verbal support observed was nodding straight-faced head. Facial

130

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

expressions were more used to show anger rather than happiness. Eye and shoulder movements were rarely used during the lesson. The overall impression of the classroom observations was that there is a need for improvement of non-verbal support for both males and female students in science lessons. The following field note indicates a summary of nonverbal support in a typical classroom: “The teacher nodded her head to approve students’ actions but did not display lot of facial expression. Very little eye contact occurred in this class and the teacher did not use the shoulder movements at all to express non-verbal support.”

Friendly and Understanding nature of a teacher as observed in the classes showed that in general teachers are fairly friendly to students but they still keep some distance. They may think that this distance is required to maintain discipline in their classes. Teachers often were willing to repeat the points over and again for all students without any preference for a gender. They trusted their students and were patient with their students. In general, the students were not afraid of their teachers, but some authoritarian teachers were also observed. Most of the times students trusted their teachers, but the degree of trust showed a wide range from low to high. The students seemed to accept everything their teacher say in the class. A specific example is described in the following field note. “Despite the teacher being friendly and willing to respond to students question over and again, does not seem to trust her students. This is obvious because the teacher thinks that the students know nothing and don’t even wait for students’ response to the questions before giving response to the question. Some intelligent students got angry and argued with her about the explanations.”

Controlling scale data collected during observation revealed that the teachers were often in control of classes. They expected their students to obey set rules, did not allow them to do things differently, demanded students to listen to them and do things as told. For example, don’t talk to anyone irrespective of the nature of subject to be discussed, don’t leave the desk and walk to student in the next row etc. Teachers often exhibited authoritarian attitude in the class and exercise teacher centred teaching to keep class in control. However, there is concern in the country about the increased problems with student discipline. The following field note highlights an incidence. “The most disappointing situation was when male students started talking while the teacher was explaining and the class began to make noise. They threw crumbled papers on the floor.”

Enjoyment of science lessons was often difficult to assess. One of the problems was the authoritarian nature of the teachers. Classes were silent and doing what they were told to do. In most of the classes students appeared to be comfortable. They did not show any expression of enjoyment during experimental activities. Was it enjoyment of real teaching or playing with the apparatus? Both male and female students were doing the class work in the class, but not very enthusiastically. Were they looking forward to their next science class? Following field note gives some hint.

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

131

“Students didn’t show that they were looking forward to next science class, may be the relief that the class for the day finally ends.”

Observation notes in Form 4 and Form 5 revealed that the perceptions of these two groups of students were not different. They were behaving very similarly on all the aspects evaluated in this study, may be because most of the teachers involved in this study were teaching classes of both the Forms. Table 8. Association between TCBQ Scales and Students Enjoyment of Science Lesson in Terms of Simple (R) and Multiple (β) Correlations Scale Individual student r β Challenging 0.30** 0.13** Encouragement and 0.24** 0.08* Praise Non-verbal Support 0.20** -0.05 Understanding 0.42** 0.37** and Friendly Controlling 0.20** 0.05 Multiple 0.47** correlation, R 0.22 R2

Enjoyment Class r β 0.50** 0.40* 0.19 0.04

r 0.65** 0.13

β 0.40 0.14

0.21 0.54**

-0.07 0.38*

0.33 0.63**

-0.12 0.63

0.13

-0.17

0.01

-0.31

School

0.61**

0.80

0.37

0.64

**p = .000; *p = .01

Associations between Teacher Communication Behaviour Scales and Enjoyment of Science Lessons The association between the teacher communication behaviour scales and the enjoyment of science lessons was computed using individual student, class and the school as units of analysis. The results are reported in Table 8. The multiple correlation data in the table show that students’ perception of their teacher communication behaviour contributed 22% of the measured variance in the students’ enjoyment of science lessons. The simple correlation values ranged from 0.20 to 0.42 and all these values were significant at p = .000. These values for the association between TCB scales and enjoyment scale suggest that there were significant relationships between students’ perceptions of their teachers’ communication behaviour for all the five scales of the TCB with their enjoyment of science lessons. That is, students’ enjoyment of their science lesson was higher when they perceived that their teachers provided them encouragement, praise and non-verbal support. The enjoyment of science lessons was also higher when they perceived their teachers’ nature is understanding, friendly, controlling and challenging. The highest correlation value of 0.42 for understanding and friendly scale and enjoyment scale suggests that Bruneian students enjoy learning science from teachers who trust, are willing to explain things over and again to, listen to, care,

132

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

friendly with and are patient with, their students. The simple correlation values of 0.20 for non-verbal support (or controlling) and enjoyment scales indicated the close associations of these scales with students’ enjoyment of science lessons. β is a more conservative standardised regression coefficient that measured the association between enjoyment and a scale of TCBQ while keeping the effect of other TCBQ scales constant. The data in Table 8 show that values of the β coefficient for associations between enjoyment and understanding and friendly (p = .000) or challenging (p = .000) or encouragement scales (p = .01) were statistically significant. This data further support that students enjoy more the science lessons of those teachers who are understanding and friendly. The β values for controlling and nonverbal support scales were 0.05 and -0.05 respectively. The analysis of associations between teacher communication behaviour and the enjoyment of science lessons using class and school as units of analysis revealed a strong association between enjoyment of the science lesson and the challenging as well as friendly and understanding behaviours of teacher (see r values in Table 7). As expected with a decrease in degrees of freedom from individual students through classes to schools, the number of significant associations between TCB scales and enjoyment decreased. However for the understanding and friendly behaviour scale the beta coefficient for class-data was statistically significant.

ANSWERS TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS The research questions in this section are answered by triangulating conclusions drawn based on quantitative data, qualitative data and research data in the literature. 1. Were the TCBQ and Enjoyment questionnaires suitable for collecting data of upper secondary science students’ perceptions of (i) teachers’ communication behaviour and (ii) enjoyment of their lessons? Teachers’ Communication Behaviour Questionnaire. The results on instrumental variables obtained by analysing the data using individual student, class and school as units of analysis revealed that 40 items in the instrument factorised into five factors clearly as reported by She and Fisher (2000). The percentage variance extracted associated with the factors varied from 4.5 % to 22.8%. The five factors reported in this study accounted for 49.0% of the variance. These data are comparable to the values reported in Bruneian studies in the field of learning environment (see Dhindsa, in press; Dhindsa and Fraser, 2004). These studies reported the variance explained by a cultural learning environment questionnaire (CLEQ) as 51.1% (Dhindsa, 2005) and 52.7% (Dhindsa and Fraser, 2004). She and Fisher (2002) used this instrument to study teacher communication behavior, however they did not report these data. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient for five factors ranged from 0.77 to 0.88 (0.87 – 0.93 for Taiwan; 0.86 – 0.93 for Australia) and from 0.87 to 0.94 when data were analysed using individual and class as units of analyses respectively. The reliabilities of the 40-item instrument were 0.91 and 0.93 when data were analysed using individual and class as units of analyses. These data suggest that the instrument was reliable.

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

133

The discriminant validity values for the scales ranged 0.17 - 0.21, 0.14 - 0.31and 0.17 to 0.42 when data were analysed using individual student, class and school as units of analysis respectively. The upper limits for individual and class data were lower than the values from 0.14 to 0.50 and from 0.05 to 0.44 reported for Taiwan and Australia respectively (She and Fisher, 2002). These data suggest that the TCBQ scales measure distinct, although somewhat overlapping aspects of the teacher communication behaviour. The conceptual distinctions among the scales are therefore justified by both the factor analysis and the discriminant validity. Eta2 is a measure of the amount of variance explained by class and school memberships. In this study the Eta2 values ranged from 0.16 to 0.25. These values are comparable to the data (0.17 – 0.22) reported from Taiwan, but higher than the data (0.05 – 0.15) reported from Australia. Based on the Chi-square analysis, factor analysis, discriminant validity, alpha reliability coefficient and eta2 values in this study and their comparison to published data, it was concluded that the TCB instrument was valid and reliable for the data collection in this study. Enjoyment Scale. The enjoyment scale is a uni-dimensional scale with a Chrobach alpha value of 0.82 and mean inter item correlation of 0.47. The factor analysis revealed that the five items converge into a factor and explained 57.8% of the total variance. The mean values of eta2 for a class and a school as units of analysis were 0.14 and 0.05 respectively. Eta2 represents the proportion of variance accounted for by class or school membership. These values are comparable to data reported using this scale in Brunei (see Riah, 2000). Based on these instrumental variable data it was concluded that the enjoyment scale was also valid and reliable to collect data for this study. 2. What were the students’ mean perceptions on the five dimensions of TCBQ? The scale item mean values of 2.60 and 2.74 for encouragement and praise, and nonverbal support respectively, fall below the sometimes level of 3.0. These results suggest that students perceived that their teachers only sometimes praised, and encouraged them. The teachers also sometimes use body language to express their praise, encouragement and concerns. She and Fisher (2002) reported 2.96 and 2.85 as the average scale item mean values for encouragement and praise, and non-verbal support scales respectively, as perceived by lower secondary students from Taiwan. Their data though are higher than that for the Bruneian sample, but still fall just below sometimes level. These results are further supported by the observation data. During classroom observation, it was found that the teachers often did not use body language to express their feeling and concerns. They also provided low-level encouragement and praise to their students. Based on the qualitative and quantitative data it is concluded that science students in their classes in Bruneian schools do not receive enough encouragement, praise and non-verbal support. These aspects therefore need special attention. The average scale-item mean values for understanding and friendly, challenging, and controlling scales were 3.7, 3.5, and 3.7 (Taiwan data 3.6, 3.3, 3.4) respectively. These values fall between “seldom” and “often”. Since these values are close to often, therefore, the students perceived a reasonable amount of activities associated with these factors occurring in their classes. The values are comparable to what students from Taiwan perceived. However, when we look at qualitative data, it was observed that teachers often ask recall type of questions. Very few questions of higher-level thinking are asked in this class. It looks that the

134

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

students perceived low-level questions as challenging. Moreover, a reasonable understanding and friendly behaviour was observed in these classes. Teachers like to be in control of their class, may be due to traditional teaching style they use in the classes. Most of these teachers were taught using traditional teaching style that could have influenced their teaching practices. The overall impression is although teachers exhibit these factors in their classes to a reasonable extent, but there is huge scope for improvement in teacher communication behaviours. In conclusion, teacher communication behaviour in science classes in local educational system need attention and actions towards improvement are desirable. 3. Were there gender differences in students’ perceptions on the five dimensions of TCBQ? A comparison of male and female respondents data revealed statistically significant differences (p<.03) in favour of girls in the students’ perceptions of TCB scales except for encouragement and praise scale. These results are different from what She and Fisher (2002) reported. In their study they found statistically significant sex differences in favour of girls on two scales (Understanding and friendly, and, controlling) only. However when the significance levels for differences in this study were evaluated using effect size analysis scale by Cohen, (1969) the gender differences on understanding and friendly scales only were of low to moderate level. She and Fisher (2002) did not report the effect size data, but the magnitude of the difference in mean data and the standard deviation data reported suggest that statistically significant sex differences in their study for two understanding and friendly, and, controlling scales were also of very low level. In Brunei, during the class room observations, no serious gender bias in classroom communication was observed. Other studies also have reflected a higher level of gender equity in Bruneian classes (Dhindsa, 2005; Dhindsa and Fraser, 2004). Based on the quantitative (one out of five comparisons being significant at effect size of 0.3) and qualitative results it was concluded that there were no sex differences in the male and female students’ perceptions of teacher communication behavior. 4. Were there differences in Form 4 and 5 students’ perceptions on the five dimensions of TCBQ? The results of this study suggested that Forms 4 and 5 students’ perceptions were statistically significantly different on non-verbal support (p = 0.001; ES = 0.20), and encouragement and praise (p = 0.000; ES = 0.32) scales, whereas non-significantly different on the challenging and controlling scales. The effect size values suggest that the statistically significant differences in perceptions of two groups, in favour of Form 5 students, were at low to moderate level. The qualitative results based on the observations also supported these results. Based on the qualitative and quantitative data, it was concluded that the perceptions of Forms 4 and 5 students on TCB in their classes were comparable. 5. Were there any associations between students’ perceptions of communication behaviour scales and their enjoyment of science lessons?

teacher

The results of this study revealed that students’ perception of their teacher communication behaviour contributed 22% (Multiple correlation, R = 0.47; p < .0001) of

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

135

measured variance in students’ enjoyment of science lessons. This value is higher than the one (17%; R = 0.41; p < .0001) reported by She and Fisher (2002). The statistically significant (p < .000) values of the simple correlation coefficient in the range from 0.20 to 0.42 suggest that there were significant relationships between students’ perceptions of their teachers’ communication behaviour for all the five scales of the TCBQ and their enjoyment of science lessons. These results are different from those of She and Fisher (2002). They reported a statistically non-significant relationship between controlling and enjoyment scales data. The results of this study are also supported by qualitative data. During the classroom observations it was observed that students seemed to be enjoying the lessons of those teachers who received more positive comments about their classroom communication behaviour. Based on quantitative data on simple correlation and standardised regression coefficients, and qualitative data it was concluded that teacher communication behaviour and enjoyment of science lessons in Bruneian schools correlated significantly.

DISCUSSION The instrument used in this study has been shown to be valid and reliable. Despite experts’ initial thinking that items are very wordy, the instrument seems suitable for upper secondary and tertiary students and it may be suitable to assess TCB in upper secondary classes in other subjects. Although, the instrument has been reported to be reliable and valid for data collection in Taiwanese and Australian lower secondary students (She and Fisher, 2002), it may not be suitable for lower secondary and primary students in Bruenian schools as stated by the experts. The author has observed a decrease in reliability coefficients from upper to lower secondary even when a simple instrument was used. The instrument, therefore, should either be translated into Malay (as it is translated in Taiwan to Chinese) or the items should be made simple. The author believes it is possible to translate as well as to simplify the items without losing the context. Teacher communication behaviour is a very complex concept with numerous dimensions. Defining this concept in terms of five scales and each scale in terms of 8 items is rather like putting an elephant in a teapot. Therefore, the study is limited to the definitions of the scales used in the TCBQ. Addition or deletion of items might add variability to the results. Moreover, as only science students were involved in this study, the results are limited to science students’ perceptions. In Brunei, so far there is no other research work done using this instrument. In general, there was a good agreement between the qualitative and quantitative data. This agreement supports the reliability and validity of research conducted using this instrument. However, some differences have been observed. For example, students’ data reflected that teachers often asked challenging questions to students, but in classroom observation this was seldom observed. It appears that even simple questions are perceived to be challenging by the students. More research is required to see the causes of this gap and possibilities of minimizing it. The analysis of data using class (or school) as a unit of analysis has been reported in this paper which is in line with that previously reported in the literature (see Fisher and Waldrip, 1997, 1999). But a class is a non-randomized small sub-set of students from the sample, e.g.

136

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

20 out of 3785 in an Australian study (Fisher and Waldrip, 1999). Therefore, these classes are not equivalent for comparison. Even random assignment does not ensure the groups are equivalent (Rennie, 1998). Therefore, data on the comparison of classes may be misleading. For example, in a situation where two classes with the same mean values will be treated as comparable on statistical grounds, the differences in their standard deviation values will reflect the differences in the students' perception of the targeted factor. Fisher and Waldrip (1997) also felt (without giving reasons) that a detailed examination of the class as a unit of analysis was generally not meaningful. Therefore, readers are urged to consider these results with caution. The data in this study indicate that students perceived that teachers often asked challenging questions in their classes. However, the classroom observations revealed that teachers often asked simple questions. Most of the time teachers addressed their questions to the whole class. The teachers rarely asked challenging questions in the class. This finding was also supported by data collected for another study (unpublished data). It appears that simple questions asked by the teachers appeared to be challenging to the students. These differences may be associated with traditional teaching and learning styles used in the classes. Teachers often give notes and students cram these notes without understanding. Therefore, the students are unable to integrate the rote learned knowledge to answer any questions that require something more than free recall of crammed knowledge. There are studies that report a decline in students’ interest in science learning (DeBoer, 1984; Erb, 1983; Utmost, 1998) and it has been linked to teacher related factors (She, 1995). Brunei is not different from the rest of the world. There was a decline of about 7% in the number of secondary science students from 1990 to 1996, thereafter it gradually improved due to intervention by the ministry of education (Monaliza, 2001). The ministry of education (MOE) asked schools to encourage more students in science subjects. Despite that, the concern about students not opting for science subjects is still serious in the country. The deputy minister of education, Brunei, while reporting a forecast for a demand of science related personals in Brunei, stated at the present rate, it would rather be impossible to meet the national demand of professionals in the science related fields. One way to achieve this goal is by increasing the number of science students at school level. The government tried introducing an N-level program to increase the number of science students (N-level students are of lower standard than normal students). This system was not successful and it was abolished in 2005. However, the author feels that improvements in teacher communication behaviour could help to make science lessons more enjoyable and attract more students to science. In this study, statistically significant positive correlation coefficients values between enjoyment of science lesson and the scales of TCB suggest that enjoyment of lessons can be improved by improving TCB. Enjoyment of science lessons is more strongly associated with understanding and friendly, and, challenging behaviours of teachers. Teachers are perceived to be fairly understanding and friendly (3.7 out of 5) by `students. However, the mean value of 3.7 suggests that there is scope for improving upon this factor. Similarly, there is a need for teachers to add more challenging questions in their lessons. Research suggests that questions asked by teachers are indicators of the quality of teaching (Carlsen, 1991; Smith, Blakeslee, and Anderson, 1993) and they promote relevance, encourage ownership, help students interpret their observations, link new learning to prior knowledge and promote students’ thinking (Deal and Sterling, 1997: King 1994). Moreover, this research supports a strong association between enjoyment of science lessons and teachers’ understanding, friendly, and

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

137

challenging behaviours. Since attitudes have been associated with academic achievement, it is therefore assumed that there is a grater chance of improving upon students’ achievement by improving teacher communication behavior. These scales have also been reported to strongly correlate with students’ academic outcomes. For example, She and Fisher (2002) reported that teachers’ improved understanding and friendly, and challenging behaviours will improve students academic achievement, and hence an increase in the number of students with a science qualification, that is required for the achievement of national goal, could be expected. Teacher training institutions can help to improve the teacher communication behaviour of pre-service teachers. Universiti Brunei Darussalam is the major teacher training institution in the country. The Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah Institute of Education, Universiti Brunei Darussalam (equivalent to Faculty of Education) should concentrate more upon improving teacher communication behaviour especially in the area of non-verbal support, and, encouragement and praise. The author believes that these factors are improving as a whole in the country as the government is replacing the foreign teachers with local teachers. This will bring more cultural understanding between students and teachers. There has been an undefined border between expatriate teachers and local students. Most of the expatriate teachers have been unaware of the extent to which the local culture will accept them and their own cultural expressions. They received no orientation in this regard. However, despite possible improvement on this front in the country, the institute of education still needs to review its curriculum to put more emphasis on improving teacher communication behavior. The ministry of education being the sole caretaker of school education in the country should concentrate on the staff development in this area. The seminars and workshops for the extant teachers in the area of teacher communication behaviour will be useful.

CONCLUSION The students’ perception of teacher communication behaviour and observation data revealed that although teachers are to some extent understanding and friendly, challenging their students with questions and controlling their classes, they lacked not only in praising and encouraging students but also in providing adequate non-verbal support. The perceptions of male and female students and of both Form 4 and Form 5 students were comparable. The enjoyment of science lessons significantly correlated with the teacher communication behaviour scales. To improve the enjoyment of science lessons, there seems to be strong need to improve the teacher communication behaviour. It is recommended that the teacher training institution focus on improving the teacher communication behaviour of pre-service teachers. Further research in developing the techniques to improve upon the teacher communication behaviour in the local cultural context is recommended. In order to verify the results reported here in this study it is highly desirable to replicate the study at lower secondary and tertiary level institutions. The research finding of such a study will hopefully provide insightful makers for making definitive recommendations to the ministry of education for to enhance improvements in science teaching and learning at schools.

138

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

REFERENCES Aikenhead, G. (1997). Student views on the influences of culture on science. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 419-428. Atwater, M. M. (1996). Social constructivism: Infusion into multicultural science education research agenda. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 821-837. Borneo Bulletin (2002). Brunei Yearbook. Gadong: Brunei Press SDN BHD, Brunei. BDSY(1996-97). Brunei Darussalam Statistical Yearbook. Brunei Darussalam: Statistical division, Department of Economic Planning and Development, Ministry of Finance. Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61, 157-178. Chan, E. (2004) Embracing cultural diversity and enhancing students’ learning environment. Triannual Newsletter 8(3). Singapore: NIE, Center for Development of Teaching and Learning. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for behavioural sciences. New York: Academic press. Cuboi. (2001, 10 September). Borneo Bulletin. Deal, D., and Sterling, D. (1997). Kids ask the best questions. Educational Leadership, 54, 61-63. DeBoer, G. E. (1984). A study of gender effects in the science and mathematics course-taking behaviour of a group of students who graduated from college in late 1970s. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(1), 95-105. Delpit, L. D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: power and pedagogy in educating other people’ children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280-298. Dhindsa, H. S. (2005). Cultural Learning environment of upper secondary science students. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 575-592. Dhindsa, H. S. and Anderson, O. R. (2004). Using a conceptual change approach to help preservice science teachers reorganize their knowledge structures for constructivist teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(1), 63-85. Erb, T. O. (1983). Career preferences of early adolescents: Age and sex differences. Journal of Early Adolescence, 3, 349-359. Fisher, D., and Rickards, T. (1997, April). A way of assessing teacher-studnets interpersonal relationshipd in science classes. Paper presented at the national Sceince Teachers Association Annual National Convention, New Orleans, USA. Fisher, D. L. and Waldrip, B.G. (1997). Assessing culturally sensitive factors in leaning environments of science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 41- 48. Fisher, D.L. and Waldrip, B.G. (1999). Cultural factors of science classroom learning environments, teacher – student interactions and student outcomes. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17(1), 83-96. Fraser, B. J. (1989). Assessing and improving classroom environment. What research says to the science and mathematics teacher, (Number 2), Perth, Australian: National Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology. Fraser, B. J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 493-541). New York: Macmillan.

Teacher Communication Behaviour and Enjoyment of Science Lessons

139

Fraser, B. J. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Eds.), The Inrternational Hansbook of Science Education (pp. 527-564). Dordrecht, The Neatherlands: Kluwer. Fraser, B. J. (2001). Twenty thousand hours: Editor’s introduction. Learning Environment Research, 4, 1-5. Gardner, P., and Gauld, C. (1990). Labwork and students’ attitudes. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and science curriculum (pp. 132-156). London, England: Routledge. Goh, S. C., and Fraser, B. J. (1998). Teacher interpersonal behaviour, classroom environment and student outcomes in primary mathematics in Singapore. Learning Environment Research, 1, 199-229. Good, T., and Brophy, J. (1991). Teacher-student relationships: Causes and consequences. New York: Holt. Jegede, O. J., and Olajide, J. O. (1995) Wait-time, classroom discourse, and the influences of sociocultural factors in science teaching. Science Education, 79(3), 233-249. Khadijah Mohd. Salleh and Dhindsa, H. S. (2004). Teachers’ predictions of students’ perceptions of sociocultural dimensions in science classes. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(1), 135-147. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 338-368. Liau, M. T. L. and Arellano, E. L. (2003, April). Learning environment in science classes in Penang secondary schools: Implications to secondary science education reform. Paper presented at the ICASE 2003 world conference on science and technology education, Penang, Malaysia. Monaliza, A-H (2001). The teaching and learning of heat energy in lower secondary science: A case study. Unpublished Master of Education, dissertation, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Brunei. Poh, S. H. (1995). An evaluation of O-level biology laboratory teaching across government secondary schools in Brunei Darussalam: process skills and learning environment. Unpublished M. Sc. project, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, SA, Australia. Rasool, J. A. and Curtis, A. C. (2000). Multicultural education in middle and secondary classrooms: Meeting the challenge the diversity and change. USA: Wadsworth. Rayn, A. M. and Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437-460. Rennie, L.J. (1998). Improving the interpretation and reporting of quantitative research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 237-248. Riah, H. (2000). Bruneian secondary students’ environment of Chemistry. In H. S. Dhindsa (Ed.). Teaching and learning of Chemistry (pp. 42-48). Brunei: ETC-Universiti Brunei Darussalam. Rosenholtz, S. J., Bassler, O., and Hoover-Dempsey, K. (1986). Organisational conditions of teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2, 91 – 104 Rowe, M. B. (1974). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic and fate control: Part one-wait time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(2), 81 – 94.

140

Harkirat S. Dhindsa

Salta, K., and Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward Chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88(4), 535-547. She, H-C. (1995). Elementary and middle school students’ perception of science, scientists, and their work. Proceedings of the National Science Council, Part D: Mathematics, Science , and Technology Education, 5(1), 19-28. She, H-C. (2000). The interplay of a biology teacher’s beliefs, teaching practices and genderbased students-teacher classroom interaction. Educational Research, 42(1), 100-111. She, H-C and Fisher, D. (2000). The development of a questionnaire to describe teacher communication behaviour in Taiwan and Australia. Science Education, 84, 706-726. She, H-C and Fisher, D. (2002). Teacher communication behaviour and its association with students’ cognitive and attitudinal outcomes in science in Taiwan. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 63-78. Smith, E. L., Blakeslee, T. D., and Anderson, C. W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 111-126. Thomas, E. (2000). Culture and Schooling: Building Bridges Between Research, Praxis and Professionalism. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Utmost, M. E. (1980). Occupational sex-role liberality of third-, fifth- and seventh-grade females. Sex Roles, 6(4), 611-617. van Tartwijk, J. (1993). Sketches of teacher behaviour (in Dutch). Docentgedrag in beeld. Utrecht, The Neatherlands:W.C.C. Wahyudi and Treaguest, D. F. (2003, April). Science classroom learning environments and their association with students’ cognitive and attitude outcomes in Indonesian lower secondary schools. Paper presented at the ICASE 2003 world conference on science and technology education, Penang, Malaysia. Walberg, H. J. and Haertel, G. D. (1980). Validity and use of educational environment assessments. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 6, 225-238. Waltzlawick, P., Beavin, J., and Jackson, D. (1967). The pragmatics of human communication. New York: Norton. Watts, M., and Bentley, D. (1987). Constructivism in the classroom: Enabling conceptual change by words and deeds. British Educational Journal, 13, 121-135. Weinburgh, M. (1995). Sex differences in students’ attitudes towards science: A meta analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 387-398. Wubbel, T., and Levey, J. (Eds.), (1993). Do you know what you look like? Interpersonal relationships in education. London, England: Falmer Press.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 141-162

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 6

PREPARING TEACHERS OF CHEMISTRY FOR A GLOBAL MARKET Deborah Corrigan Monash University, Australia

ABSTRACT Teacher education programmes throughout the world need to be mindful of teaching as a global profession. In similar ways to nursing, teaching has become a profession that transcends geographical boundaries in the current climate of a “global village.” This is also particularly evident in teachers whose main language is English, with their teaching abilities being widely sort after by non-English speaking countries as they enter the competitive world markets that are heavily reliant on English as the language of communication. This chapter looks at the issues surrounding the production of teachers for a global market using the preparation of chemistry teachers as a case study. Some of the important issues that will be highlighted are what frames are appropriate in terms of developing an effective teacher, the difficulties surrounding clinical placements in schools as well as the clear differences between the values systems that operate in different contexts and how that affects the values systems of the discipline. There are still many challenges to be surmounted in the quest for preparing teachers for a global market. Clearly the school experience needs to be developed further and there are many examples of the establishment of good partnerships with schools in this respect. The current trial has been largely with distance education students who receive materials in print with on-line support. Early indications with these off campus students as well as on campus students and online students reveal the need to explore the online environment’s ability to provide non-linear learning opportunities. Students would access materials in the different domains of knowledge and understanding, skills and attitudes and values as a need is generated. In this way students will be able to engage with the curriculum in ways of their choice. Such opportunities will provide good ways to model this type of learning as being more responsive to students’ needs and engage students in their learning to a greater extent. The notion of preparing teachers for a global market needs further exploration, particularly in terms of teaching in a variety of contexts. This will need to be more longitudinal in its

142

Deborah Corrigan orientation. However, it is clear that the challenge needs to be explored, as the teaching profession becomes increasingly global in its orientation.

INTRODUCTION Teacher education programmes throughout the world need to be mindful of teaching as a global profession. In similar ways to nursing, teaching has become a profession that transcends geographical boundaries in the current climate of a “global village”. This is also particularly evident in teachers whose main language is English, with their teaching abilities being widely sort after by non-English speaking countries as they enter the competitive world markets that are heavily reliant on English as the language of communication. This chapter looks at the issues surrounding the production of teachers for a global market using the preparation of chemistry teachers as a case study. Some of the important issues that will be highlighted are what frames are appropriate in terms of developing an effective teacher, the difficulties surrounding clinical placements in schools as well as the clear differences between the values systems that operate in different contexts and how that affects the values systems of the discipline. Universities throughout the world demonstrate great similarity between chemistry curriculum and pedagogy courses offered in teacher education programs. Generally, chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies are about preparing teachers to teach chemistry through curriculum organization in chemistry and principles and methods of instruction applied to teaching chemistry. The curriculum organization in chemistry generally translates to teaching to a particular chemistry curriculum eg the curriculum that is local to the university of instruction. For Monash University this would mean the Curriculum Standards and Framework (CSF) and the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) curriculum documents in the Victorian education system in Australia. This becomes clouded in the case of Monash University (and many other universities), which is becoming increasingly “global” in its approach to education and currently offers Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies both on and off campus, creating the situation where off-campus students may not be local but nationally or internationally situated. In this sense then is it possible to create a Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies for the Global Market?

WHAT IS REQUIRED TO PREPARE TEACHERS? While there are particular requirements necessary to prepare chemistry teachers it is important to remember that their specific preparation is part of a larger teacher education program and this brings its own set of requirements. At Monash University, we have a view as teacher educators that the professional knowledge base of teaching about teaching is central to the development of our pedagogy and translates into a more professional understanding and valuing of professional practice in our student teachers. In order to achieve this we believe that it is important in understanding the teaching/learning relationship that students have the opportunity to experience situations as learners since their own learning experiences have been seen through the eyes of a student.

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

143

They need to experience being a learner through the lens of a teacher so that they can bring their experiences to bear in their own teaching. Hence there are lots of opportunities for students to experience situations as learners themselves throughout the course. They experience good models of practice as units are specifically designed to allow for these opportunities rather than provide lecture/tutorial experiences. Students are given the opportunities to reflect on their experiences to make sense of what they are experiencing and learning. The opportunity to reflect on your own practice is fundamental in terms of becoming a reponsibile, independent, life-long learner. Students are asked to keep journals/learning logs etc to track their progress and develop professional teaching portfolios based on their theoretical understandings and their practical experiences. Students are encouraged to undertake research which involves reading current research literature, planning a research project and undertaking the project by collecting and analysing data. These research opportunities are varied but certainly assist students in developing necessary skills to research their own practice. Students are encouraged to develop a personal philosophy of what it means to be a teacher, of what it means to be a teacher of a particular subject and what it means to be a professional teacher. Assessment of students is diverse as it is important to model the use of assessment for its purpose. We also give students the opportunities to engage with different learning situations such as problem-based learning, professional learning commmunities and peer review to name a few. In the final year, core units focus on the teacher as a professional both within the classroom and as a member of a profession. While it is easy to make such claims, another central tenant of teacher education at Monash University is to research our own practice and this applies to its staff and students. There have been many instances of research (Doecke Loughran & Brown, 2000; Loughran & Corrigan, 1995) being reported on parts of our teacher education courses which support the assertion that our methods are successful.

WHAT IS REQUIRED TO PREPARE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS? Chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies is about preparing teachers to teach Chemistry. The curriculum and pedagogy unit must reflect why Chemistry is an important study for students to undertake. According to Fensham (1994) the study of chemistry is important to society for two main reasons: for providing future chemistry specialists (in a broad range of fields) and citizens, well educated in chemistry and science. The need for future chemistry specialists is critical as some 10% of western society’s workforce is involved in occupations that rely on chemistry to some extent. The need for a chemistry literate population is also critical in many day-to-day decisions such as food composition and preparation, to name just two. As DeVos, Bulte and Pilot (2002) suggest, students need to experience roles in which chemistry is important. The main roles they suggest are: •

Chemistry should give students some notion of what it might be like to be a scientific researcher and that new knowledge is created as a result of scientists working in communities of practice and from emerging consensus.

Deborah Corrigan

144 • • •

There are many professions requiring chemistry knowledge. Students should explore the processes and products in a representative range of these professions The role of consumer – in a critical manner The role of responsible citizen and the ability to participate in the decision-making process.

Teachers need to be able to meet the challenges provided by such purposes and this will necessitate the continued participation of students in the study of Chemistry. If this is to happen, students must be engaged in their study of Chemistry so that they see it as intelligent, plausible and fruitful.

THE VOCATIONAL NATURE OF CHEMISTRY METHOD Chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies is different from many undergraduate or graduate units in that it is developing pedagogical chemistry knowledge (or more generally pedagogical content knowledge - PCK) or the knowledge required to teach chemistry discipline knowledge. For this to occur, students must have a sound chemistry discipline knowledge as this will form the context in which they will learn their pedagogical chemistry knowledge. In this sense Chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies is more of a vocational unit in that it is developing knowledge “to be able to do” rather than a more traditional academic approach of knowledge “to know” a defined body of conceptual knowledge. Vocational units have the dual characteristics of knowledge and pathway. Multiple pathways in vocational education are designed to meet the interests of both young and mature age persons in accessing multiple careers and creating second chances at learning. The multiple pathways of vocational units are not apparent in Chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies. Multiple pathways exist in a very limited sense in terms of entry to the curriculum and pedagogy studies unit – eg via Undergraduate Double Degree Programs (4 years) and year long Graduate Diploma of Education programs. It is important that these groups continue to mix in order to facilitate learning from a diverse range of experiences within the cohort. Multiple pathways are also achieved to some extent through the offering of this unit in oncampus and off-campus modes. Further work needs to be done on creating units/modules in flexible mode, where students can have choice about the ways they want to study. However, the notion of chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies as a vocational unit that offers the knowledge and pathway characteristics of such an approach is useful for thinking of the preparation of chemistry teachers for a global market as it includes the notion of students from a wide range of educational settings – only some of whom will be “local”. Stakeholders in vocational education traditionally articulate standards of behaviour or competencies for particular professions and occupations. While teacher education in the UK certainly has the competency-based training approach to teacher education (or as I prefer to term it, teacher training), this notion is not entirely adequate for developing professional teachers. The need for reflective practitioners that are responsive to the different contexts in which they teach, extends beyond the mere competence level. Indeed, while many

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

145

professional accreditation bodies throughout the world have defined teacher competencies or standards, these standards are often minimalist in their approach.

KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY FOR TEACHING CHEMISTRY What is the knowledge necessary for teaching chemistry? Shulman (1987) suggests seven knowledge domains essential for effective teaching. These are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

content knowledge pedagogical knowledge school knowledge knowledge of pupils curriculum knowledge pedagogical content knowledge knowledge of educational ends, purposes and values

These terms are defined as:

Content (or Discipline) Knowledge The knowledge includes understanding the “big ideas” in chemistry. The “big ideas” in Chemistry include substance, atomic structure and states of matter, and reactions.

Pedagogical Knowledge The knowledge of teaching in ways that will facilitate learning in students that is responsive to needs of their students, while facilitating understanding and providing challenge.

School Knowledge How schools operate.

Knowledge of Pupils How young people develop and exist within their community. How they learn.

Deborah Corrigan

146

Curriculum Knowledge This includes knowledge of how curriculum is designed and for what purpose, as well as how it is delivered and received.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge The knowledge of how to relate specific content in a way that particular students can learn it.

Knowledge of Educational Ends, Purposes and Values This is knowledge of the purposes of education and the values that developed through the experience of education. There have been other knowledge domains proposed, for example Tamir (1998) proposed six domains, specifically for science teachers, focussing on subject matter, pedagogy, subject matter specific pedagogy, general liberal education, personal performance and foundations of the teaching profession. There are many similarities between Shulman and Tamirs’ domains, particularly in terms of subject/content knowledge, pedagogy and subject/content specific pedagogy. Clearly these are critical aspects for any chemistry teacher. However, there are differences in emphasis in other areas, where Shulman’s domains are more identifiable with aspects of school, while Tamirs are less specific and more about personal performance. For the purposes here, that of developing chemistry teachers for a global market, the domains identified by Shulman will be used as a frame for mapping knowledge necessary for teaching chemistry. Koballa, Graber, Coleman and Kemp (1999) in an investigation of prospective chemistry teachers’ conception of the knowledge base for teaching at the German Gymnasium proposed a nested structure for participants’ conceptions (see Figure 1) where the different layers may be viewed as differing levels of personal experience. They hypothesise that: The participants’ conceptions may represent different levels of personal experience that individuals accumulate when learning to teach chemistry. For example, it seems likely that prospective teachers experience university chemistry as important for chemistry teaching before considering knowledge of students or curriculum knowledge. (p283)

It is not surprising that Koballa et al (1999) found little evidence of pedagogical content knowledge in the participants as the prospective teachers had little school experience and complete their major school experience after their university studies.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge The term pedagogical content knowledge was first used by Shulman to acknowledge the importance of the transformation of subject matter knowledge into subject matter knowledge

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

147

for teaching. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is the knowledge of how to relate specific content in a way that particular students can learn it (Shulman, 1987).

Learner-Orientated Multidimensional knowledge Mutli-dimensional Knowledge

University chemistry knowledge

School chemistry knowledge

Figure 1: Prospective Teachers’ Conception of the Knowledge Base for Chemistry Teaching (Koballa et al 1999, P276)

In relation to teaching chemistry, teachers must know and use their discipline or content knowledge in a variety of ways. If they are to motivate students to learn chemistry, they must be responsive to needs of their students, while facilitating understanding and providing challenge for their students.

STRUCTURING A CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM AND PEDAGOGY STUDIES COURSE What is the purpose of chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies in a teacher education program? From the beginning, units such as Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy are taken as paired units – A and B for students at Monash University. Their purpose is to introduce students to the knowledge, skills and attributes required to teach Chemistry in secondary schools. In order to do this, the broad aims have been: 1. To realise and justify the importance of teaching Chemistry in the secondary school curriculum. 2. To demonstrate an awareness of issues associated with the study of Chemistry. These issues include:

Deborah Corrigan

148 • • •

the relationship between science, technology and society; real world chemistry; the barriers raised by science and chemistry curricula

In addition there are a number of learning objectives for these units. These are split up into the areas of knowledge and understanding, skills and attitudes and values. These are outlined below:

Knowledge and Understanding By the end of the series of topics and associated experiences, students will develop knowledge and understanding about: • • •

appropriate Chemistry content for Years 7 - 12 that takes into account the intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness of this content. appropriate contexts for the teaching of Chemistry content, that accounts for the experiences, social and cultural backgrounds of their clientele. appropriate teaching strategies and support resources (human and material) for teaching Chemistry.

Skills The units will develop the skills of: • •

selecting and using a range of teaching procedures that will foster motivation and purposeful, independent learning in their students. critical understanding of the curriculum and pedagogy of chemistry

Attitudes and Values The following attitudes and values are important outcomes for the units: • • • • •

developing a philosophy for what Chemistry teaching means. developing an appreciation for the relationship between science, technology and society. being aware of the barriers raised by science and chemistry curricula. valuing the practice of real world chemistry. developing professionals that are knowledgeable, skillful, flexible, and compassionate in their practice and who are guided by a sense of social and ethical responsibility.

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

149

Each of these domains are explored for both Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A and Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies B in order to make the intentions in this course of study explicit.

CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM AND PEDAGOGY STUDIES A Many students come to Chemistry curriculum and pedagogy studies with excellent qualifications in Chemistry, but have had little opportunity to explore their own understanding of chemical concepts. This is an important part of the process in learning to become a chemistry teacher. This unit introduces students to the knowledge, skills and attributes necessary for teaching chemistry. In the first unit, Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy studies A, students are required to follow through on one of the big ideas in chemistry in the first instance by researching the literature on their chosen big idea, exploring what students think on this big idea and plan a sequence of lessons designed to facilitate student acceptance of the big idea. In addition, students are required to keep a learning log, documenting their own learning as they progress through this sequence of activities. These ideas will be explained further in the discussion below. Table1: Knowledge Map for Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A Topic

Content knowledge

1 2 Ass 1-A 3 Ass 1-B 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Learning Log School Experience

        

 

Pedagogical knowledge

School knowledge

           

Knowledge of pupils

Curricu -lum knowledge





  





  

 



Pedagogical content knowledge

   

Knowledge of educational ends, purposes & values 



 

 

 

 

   

Knowledge Shulman’s seven domains of knowledge have been used to explore the knowledge necessary to be an effective chemistry teacher. Table 1 below maps the curriculum content of

150

Deborah Corrigan

Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A against Shulman's seven knowledge domains for an effective teacher. From Table 1 it is clear that certain knowledge domains are well represented here. For example content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge are represented in 11 and 12 of the possible 14 areas mapped. Knowledge of pupils is also quite well developed with it mapping onto 9 on the possible 14 areas and similarly curriculum knowledge maps with 8. Pedagogical content knowledge and knowledge of educational ends, purposes and values maps onto 6 of the fourteen areas, whereas school knowledge only maps onto 2. The focus of the unit is very much on the individual level of learning within the classroom rather than a “big picture” perspective of what is appropriate learning in chemistry in secondary schools. The discussion below focuses on the teacher’s intention for each curriculum area within this curriculum and pedagogy unit. Throughout this unit, students are required to keep a learning log, based on Kortagen’s model (Kortagen, 1993) that is designed to provide a measure for matching the curriculum intentions with the experienced curriculum. The discussion below details the intentions for each part of the Curriculum and Pedagogy unit.

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM FOR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES A IN THE KNOWLEDGE DOMAIN The following discussion has been categorised within topics as outlined in Table 1 above. Each topic details the intentions in the development of these topics.

Topic 1: Introduction to Chemistry Content knowledge is prompted as students are required to think about what is chemistry and recall their own high school chemistry experiences. The knowledge of educational values and beliefs are also prompted in that the recall of the experiences is based on their capacity for recall, their likes and dislikes as well as framing these responses in terms of how students may perceive chemistry.

Topic 2: Children’s Science The conceptions children have about particular topics are introduced reinforcing the importance of knowledge of pupils. Examples of how this is manifested in the classroom are presented, introducing elements of pedagogical knowledge. The notion of conceptual change is also introduced and again encourages the development of pedagogical knowledge as students need to consider aspects of teaching that will encourage conceptual change. In a general sense, some introduction to how such a perspective influences the science curriculum in schools is also introduced. At this stage Assignment 1 – Part A is introduced. This requires students to review the research literature in a chosen (one of three) area of chemistry. The three options for choice

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

151

are substance, atomic structure and states of matter, and reactions. These topics are chosen purposefully as they represent “big ideas” in chemistry. In this activity, students need to access the alternative conceptions literature in their chosen area and list the main conceptions that may be held by their students in this topic. It is hoped that through this activity, students will be exposed to questioning their own subject content knowledge, as well as access some ideas from the literature about pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge of others.

Topic 3: Clinical Interviews This topic prepares students with the necessary knowledge and skills in researching their students’ ideas on particular topics through the use of the technique of clinical interviews. While it is an important aspect of this course to understand pupils’ knowledge, skills and attitudes which can be explored through this technique, it is also hoped that the use of such a technique will also challenge the students own views on a particular topic and how they may need to modify their own understandings and descriptions in the light of teaching this topic to someone. In this way the subject matter knowledge is challenged as well as the development of the student’s pedagogical content knowledge is encouraged. It also represents an introduction into research methods that are appropriate when researching your own teaching practice. Such ideas are further developed through the completion of Assignment 1 – Part B, where students are asked to conduct a clinical interview with three people (they do not have to be school children, although this would be preferable) in their chosen topic area. In this instance, some development of pedagogical knowledge is also developed as students will need to think about how to create a context in which to situate the interview.

Topic 4: Lesson Planning The topic focuses on planning a lesson or sequence of lessons. While there is a great deal of skill development on this topic, it also encourages the development of pedagogical knowledge as students make judgements about how they will teach a particular lesson and all the factors that need to be considered. In addition, Assignment 1- Part C builds on the previous two parts of assignment 1 as students are required to prepare a sequence of lessons that will facilitate their students acceptance of the “scientific” view on the knowledge involved in their chosen topic. This may involve the task of changing some students’ conceptions based on what the literature in Part A and their own experiences of student conceptions in Part B have attributed to their ideas. In this sense the development of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is encouraged. As highlighted by many writers on PCK, such knowledge can only be developed in a particular area, with recognition for their students’ ideas and with experience of teaching this topic to students. By choosing one of the three big ideas in chemistry, giving experience of clinical interviewing and requiring the planning of a teaching sequence it is hoped that the development of PCK is encouraged. Ideally the subsequent teaching of this sequence would be ideal in furthering such development, however the field experiences are generally

152

Deborah Corrigan

controlled by the school mentor (supervisor) and while it is possible that they will be teaching in one of these areas, there is no guarantee that these students will be teaching chemistry as opposed to general science. In lesson planning, the knowledge domains as identified by Shulman should become integrated. In this experience this is the intention, although since the planning is happening outside a school context, this aspect of the knowledge domain can only be developed while on teaching experience. Some parameters can be sent to school mentors to encourage this knowledge domain a little further, but it would remain hypothetical until such time as some teaching experience had been undertaken.

Topic 5: Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) The inclusion of this topic does not necessarily mean that this knowledge domain will be developed here. However, it does make explicit, the intention that the development of pedagogical content knowledge is important for any teacher. This topic would however add to the pedagogical knowledge of the students as well as provide challenge for the reconstruction of their own subject matter knowledge as it provides insights into experienced chemistry teachers as well as prospective chemistry teachers’ PCK. The task students are asked to complete in this topic, requires them to examine their own PCK in relation to the topic they have chosen for assignment 1. The intention is to be explicit in requiring students to make some assessment about their own PCK.

Topic 6: Concept Maps This topic begins a section of the course design to increase the pedagogical skills of the students by developing a wider repertoire of strategies to assist their teaching of chemistry. The content here becomes the teaching strategies, while specific chemistry content knowledge is used as contexts in which to explore these strategies. For this topic, the context is atomic structure. In this way, the pedagogical knowledge and the subject matter knowledge (SMK) are developed at the same time.

Topic 7: Stoichiometry The topic of stoichiometry is used as the context for developing a range of strategies to assist students in using and understanding stoichiometry. A number of strategies are introduced here and they require the student to undertake and respond to a number of learning experiences with themselves as the learner. It is the intention here to again develop the SMK and pedagogical knowledge (PK) at the same time. Since the students are experiencing these strategies as being learners themselves, it is also the intention that the development of curriculum knowledge occurs through the students having first-hand experience of the curriculum and are similar to those that would occur in many western chemistry classrooms. The learning experiences include the use of advanced organisers to track what is essential learning and when is this learning appropriate or necessary. Through these experiences, the knowledge of pupils should also be developed both for the teacher and the students.

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

153

Topic 8: Venn Diagrams This topic is similar to Topic 6 in that Venn Diagrams and Concept Maps are strategies that are known as relational diagrams. They represent student understanding in a particular topic. In this topic, student understanding about acid, base and alkalis; solutions of weak acid, solutions of strong acid, strongly acidic solutions, weakly acidic solutions; and strong electrolyte, weak electrolyte and non electrolyte are explored. Again, students are placed in a learning setting so that their SMK and their PK is developed at the same time. It is important to emphasise that for both topics 6 and 8, they are a person’s individual conception and so there are no right answers. In this instance, students are given access to Venn Diagrams that are representative of the accepted “scientific view” as a mechanism for evaluating their own understanding.

Topic 9: The Role of Practical Work The role of practical work is fundamental in the study of chemistry. This topic highlights what the role of practical work could be and what it often is in the school context. In this way, students explore practical work in terms of the knowledge of educational purposes, ends and values. Students are then given examples of how practical work can be modified to encourage student understanding which includes students doing a practical investigation on density. Again the emphasis is on experiencing the topic as a learner and extending this into how you might restructure this for teaching purposes. It is clearly introducing some new PK but at the same time encouraging the development of PCK. Some knowledge of curriculum is also developed as students examine the role of practical work in teaching chemistry as well as reviewing current practices in their local chemistry curriculum.

Topic 10: An Introduction to Assessment Again, PK is the aim of this topic, with students asked to think about the purposes of assessment and how it can be undertaken. Students are asked to develop an annotated list of a number of possible assessment strategies.

Learning Log The learning log (based on Kortagen’s model, 1993), is designed to help students develop the necessary skills to become a reflective practitioner. Importantly, students are encouraged to be responsible for their own learning, and detail that learning in this log. Students are given a set of questions to provide a structure that help them to develop the necessary skills to become “reflective”. In addition, a set of meta-reflection questions are provided for students to guide them to look back over what they have learnt and help them to devise plans and goals for their future learning. It is a requirement that these meta-reflections are handed in periodically. This requirement will be a useful tool in assessing student’s development and

Deborah Corrigan

154

learning over the period of this course and as such can provide some rich data on the success or otherwise of planned intentions. In this respect, it is expected that the learning log should help students focus on all they have learnt in the course, in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes. One area of knowledge that may be deficient is school knowledge, as this is very dependent on the teaching practice experience.

School Experience This is a critical element of the course and brings together all of the elements for application. It is important that students have an experience on which they can base a great deal of the subsequent learning and this is the site for learning about school knowledge. As most researchers would agree, practical experience is critical in terms of putting your learning into practice. While the above discussion outlines the important knowledge domains, it is also important to consider the skills that are developed in this unit.

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM FOR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES A IN THE SKILLS DOMAIN Throughout the unit there is the development of particular skills. These include: • • •

• • • • •

Literature searching skills Preparing questions for clinical interviews Ability to plan a lesson – skills of setting goals, planning for experiences to realize goals, make judgements about the teaching approach and how successful has the plan been in realising the goals. Assessing student understanding through the use of appropriate tools Problem solving skills Manipulative skills Organizational skills Reflective and meta-reflective skills

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM FOR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES A IN THE ATTITUDES AND VALUES DOMAIN The development of attitudes and values is also promoted through the following activities: • • •

Own attitude to chemistry and chemistry teaching Recognition of the attitudes and beliefs of their students Recognition of the important of the context in which the teaching is to take place

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market • •

155

The notion of chemistry knowledge being generated through the consensus amongst the community of chemists and that it is dynamic rather than static The importance of being responsible for your own learning

Table 2: A Curriculum Map of Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies B Topic

Content knowledge

1 2 3 4 5 Ass-1 6 7 8 Ass-2 9 10 Learning Log School Experience

          

Pedagogical knowledge              

School knowledge

Knowledge of pupils

Curriculum knowledge

  



  

      





Knowledge of educational ends, purposes & values  







Pedagogical content knowledge

         

  

   

         

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM FOR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES B IN THE KNOWLEDGE DOMAIN While Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A is designed to look at the more microscopic aspects of chemistry or the building block concepts of chemistry, Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies B looks at a more macroscopic view or big picture view of learning to teach chemistry. This unit will also be mapped using Shulman’s seven knowledge domains outlined previously. Table 2 is a curriculum map of Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies B using this framework. As can be seen from Table 2, the development of content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge is still a strong focus with these two domains mapping onto 11 and 14 of the 14 areas respectively. This unit places more emphasis than the previous unit on the development of knowledge of educational purposes and ends (maps onto 12 of the 14 areas), curriculum (11 of the 14 areas) and knowledge of pupils (10 of the 14 areas). A similar focus on pedagogical content knowledge is intended as in the previous unit (8 out of the 14 areas) and there is also an increased focus on knowledge of the school (7 out of 14 areas). This last increased emphasis is possible due to students having had clinical experience in a school in the previous unit, building on this experience in this unit while undertaking another clinical experience.

Deborah Corrigan

156

The curriculum intentions of the different topics in this unit are outlined below.

Topic 1: Use of Visual Media This topic is designed to explore the potential for using visual media to stimulate and motivate students through the use of visual images via video, digital footage and simulations, popular movies, molecular modelling and so on. Visual images cater for the visual learners, but also allows teachers to help students construct mental models of quite abstract ideas such as molecular structure in Chemistry. In this instance the content of the structure of water is initially used to provide the context for the topic, while later on the techniques involved in forensic chemistry are explored through popular TV programs such as CSI (Crime Scene Investigation – USA). The last context focuses on the work of scientists and their values through the comparisons of movies such as “Contact” and “The Dish”.

Topic 2: Creative Writing and Role Plays Catering for different learning styles is an important aspect in the pedagogical development of any teacher. In this topic, catering for kinaesthetic learners through role-plays and linguistic learners through the use of creative writing allows chemistry teachers the opportunity of developing students’ knowledge in a variety of ways. The content knowledge is also developed in the areas of bonding, photochemistry and energy which are used as the contexts in which these teaching strategies are developed. There is also an intention here, to develop teachers’ PCK through the use of non-traditional teaching strategies to teach content areas of chemistry. The use of creative writing and role plays also allows students to express themselves and their views through the creative element of these activities.

Topic 3: Assessment of Student Learning This topic builds on topic 10 in Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A and explores the particular topic of assessing practical investigations in Chemistry. The topic builds pedagogical knowledge with respect to designing the learning activities associated with practical investigations. Since practical work is such an integral part of any study on chemistry, the preservice teacher’s knowledge of curriculum and how practical work develops critical aspects within the chemistry curriculum is also developed. This is particularly the case through the use of a specific part of the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) Chemistry curriculum as an example, but examples from other curriculum documents would be equally suitable. Such an example also helps to reinforce what preservice teachers have experienced in their school experience.

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

157

Topic 4: Learning Technologies In this topic students explore the use of learning technologies in a particular content area. In this instance preserivce teachers are developing the content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, although the range of the last is developed within the narrow field of learning technologies.

Topic 5: Chemistry Teaching Portfolio This topic introduces the notion of a teaching portfolio that provides evidence of professional practice, but also importantly the preservice teachers’ philosophy of what it means to be a chemistry teacher. The preservice teachers will need to be very selective about what to include in their teaching portfolio and it is designed to draw together the threads of the pre service teacher’s development as a chemistry teacher. Consequently it should touch on all knowledge domains as well as the domains of skills and attitudes. This manifests itself in the first assignment for this unit, which is the production of a chemistry teaching portfolio. The portfolio is trialled in a peer assessment setting and an employment setting where its function is to support a job application and interview process.

Topic 6: Values and the Nature of Science for Chemistry Teachers This topic explores the Nature of Science and how it is and can be portrayed in the science classroom. This is an important topic for students in developing their notion of how science is constructed and contributes to their content knowledge, and the knowledge of educational ends, purposes and values. The Nature of Science is also a critical element of any chemistry curriculum and consequently contributes to the knowledge base of curriculum also.

Topic 7 & 8: Exploration of Chemistry Curriculum These topics review the structure of curriculum, its purposes and role in education. It explores the intended curriculum, the implemented curriculum and the experienced curriculum. It also importantly contributes to the educational ends, purposes and values knowledge of preservice teachers and attempts to make them more aware of the political role curriculum plays in any educational system. The implemented curriculum also contributes to a teachers’ pedagogical knowledge as it explores the emphases that are implicit or explicit in any curriculum. The experienced curriculum focuses on the learners and contributes to the preservice teacher’s knowledge of students. Of course curriculum does not occur without content and so preservice teachers need to confront “knowledge of worth” within curricula and how it occurs in schools. The knowledge of schools is developed here in a broader sense as it is knowledge of “school as context” in this instance.

158

Deborah Corrigan

Assignment 2 is designed to focus students’ ideas on different curricula as it requires them to compare and contrast the view of chemistry portrayed in two senior chemistry curricula. The curricula examined should be their local senior chemistry curriculum, other senior curricula from around the world eg O and/or A levels, IB, VET Certificate level I, II and III or VCAL Intermediate and Senior Level subjects that are chemistry-related. This assignment draws upon students’ knowledge of content, pedagogy, schools, pupils, curriculum and educational ends, purposes and values.

Topic 9: Future Directions in Chemistry Education Research This topic is included to prepare the preservice teachers for their role as researchers. Teacher researchers are at the edge of where chemistry education needs to occur. What do we know about how children learn chemistry? What is important that they should learn when studying chemistry? This topic is included to prompt thinking in the areas of pedagogical knowledge, curriculum knowledge, knowledge of pupils, pedagogical content knowledge and the knowledge associated with educational ends, purposes and values.

Topic 10: Review and Reflection This topic is included to prompt thinking on what the student teacher has learnt this year in Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies A and B as a whole. Have they learnt about the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to be a teacher of chemistry (anywhere in the western world, not just their home state, territory or country). For this reason, such a topic should prompt their thinking in all areas.

Learning Log The learning log is designed to help students develop the necessary skills to become a reflective practitioner. Importantly, students are encouraged to be responsible for the own learning, and detail that learning in this log. Students are given a set of questions to provide a structure to help them to develop the necessary skills to become “reflective”. In addition, a set of meta-reflection questions are provided for students to guide them to look back over what they have learnt and help them to devise plans and goals for their future learning. It is a requirement that these meta-reflection responses are handed in periodically. This requirement will be a useful to tool in assessing student’s development and learning over the period of this course and as such can provide some rich data on the success or otherwise of planned intentions.

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

159

School Experience This is a critical element of the course and brings together all of the elements for application. It is important that students have an experience on which they can base a great deal of the subsequent learning and this is the site for learning about school knowledge. As most researchers would agree, the practical experience is critical in terms of putting their learning into practice. This second experience should build upon the first and involve “risktaking” on behalf on the preservice teachers. The ultimate goal is to feel well-equipped to continue their learning journey as a teacher of chemistry.

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM FOR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES B IN THE SKILLS DOMAIN Throughout the unit there is the development of particular skills. These include: • •

• • •

Communication skills Ability to plan curriculum– skills of setting goals, planning for experiences to realize goals, make judgements about the teaching approach and how successful has the plan been in realising the goals. Assessing student understanding through the use of appropriate tools Organizational skills Reflective and meta-reflective skills

THE INTENDED CURRICULUM ROR CHEMISTRY AND CURRICULUM PEDAGOGY STUDIES B IN THE ATTITUDES DOMAIN The development of attitudes and values is also promoted through the following activities: • • • • •

Own attitude to chemistry and chemistry teaching Recognition of the attitudes and beliefs of their students Recognition of the importance of the context in which the teaching is to take place The notion of chemistry knowledge being generated through the consensus amongst the community of chemists and that it is dynamic rather than static The importance of being responsible for your own learning

STUDENT RESPONSES These Chemistry Curriculum and Pedagogy Studies units have initially been trialed with off-campus students who receive their material in the print medium. These students have been

160

Deborah Corrigan

located locally (within Victoria), nationally (within Australia) and internationally (Ireland and the Asia-Pacific region). It has been an important part of this trial to support the students with on-line resources such as discussion forums, so they can support each other in their learning. The next phase of this project is to involve both on and off campus students with the curriculum and the final phase will be to develop these units in an on-line version. Small examples of all these have been piloted. The intentions of all the different parts of these units are given to the students so that they may match the intended curriculum with what they have experienced. This articulation of the intentions has been a real addition to the student understanding as they have realised that I, as the teacher, have been very open with them and in some ways they feel I have taken a risk by articulating these intentions before they have engaged with the material. In feedback from their learning logs they have commented on how helpful it has been to have the intentions made explicit as it has taken away the need to “guess what’s in the teacher’s head” and clearly demonstrated that I have valued their experiences. The learning logs have been invaluable tools in not only promoting students’ responsibility for their own learning, gaining an understanding of what the students have learnt, but also as a research tool for monitoring the learning of students as they interact with the materials. They have provided invaluable feedback in terms of how students are experiencing the curriculum with respect to the intended curriculum. In terms of developing the knowledge domains identified by Shulman, the learning logs have highlighted a reasonably good match between the intentions and the experiences of students. Students clearly identify the need to develop their subject matter knowledge with comments such as: The one feeling that has overshadowed my learning in all of these areas is my lack of knowledge of the basic chemistry involved in the examples presented. I am feeling increasingly concerned about how much I have forgotten and, although it comes back reasonably well on reading a few textbooks, I have a lot of reading to do to feel comfortable again. (Trudi) and then proceed to outline how the course has helped in the development of this knowledge.

The development of pedagogical knowledge through the introduction of teaching strategies such as Venn Diagrams, Concept Maps, Strategies to use in Stoichiometry and so on have clearly been developing both pedagogical knowledge, but also skills and attitudes that reflect the expertise a teacher needs to improve the learning for their students. From the learning logs it has become quite clear that the sequence of events as outlined by assignment 1 (Part A – literature search, Part B – Clinical 2 and Part C – Sequence of lesson) has clearly been of great benefit as evidenced by comments such as: I found the literature search really enjoyable. By the end of the assignment I really understood about alternative conceptions. …The assignment was challenging but extremely useful. It reinforced my belief that I learn best by doing (Trudie) I hadn’t realised that misconceptions were so prevalent. It is a major consideration for my teaching and I know I have to build on students’ ideas. (Diane)

Such comments reinforce the intentions outlined previously, with students acquiring research skills, developing different attitudes to science than those they held previously and

Preparing Teachers of Chemistry for a Global Market

161

the development of the different knowledge domains such as content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge. Students commented that they found the concept of pedagogical content knowledge difficult, but after examining experienced teachers’ examples of PCK, combined with the school experience, students began to recognise the benefits in developing this type of knowledge. I found the idea of PCK difficult at first. But I read through some of the examples provided in Loughran et al’s paper and these were really helpful. When I was on teaching rounds I found that my content knowledge and my PCK were really improving. (Trudie)

The learning log also revealed that students found the units very challenging, but were grateful that they focussed on the “micro” level before the “Macro” as this seemed to match their learning experiences and they felt more comfortable. Initially I found the readings and the content really challenging. But after a bit of help – it was really interesting. It was good to focus on a particular content area – substances- and follow that through the initial part of the course with some very practical examples. The five weeks of teaching practice I really saw evidence of my teacher and then myself in linking the theory I had experienced with the practice in the classroom. I saw practical examples of the theory – the links were there! I’m glad I had the opportunity to look at the micro level before I had to look at the curriculum study- the big picture stuff. I didn’t know teaching was so complex. But it has given me the courage to raise the level of science in my class than what I saw and experienced on the teaching rounds. (Evan)

The school experience component of these units needs further development. The role of the supervisor teacher in schools has been largely independent of the university component, unless visits by the university personnel are made with school staff. This is not possible when the student elects to study off campus at some distance. This remains an area for future development with clearly a need for the school supervisor to become more responsible for the teaching of the curriculum contained within these units. The intentions of the course will need to be made clear to the school staff and the role will need to change from that of supervisor to one of mentor. Capturing professional practice while on rounds is also an issue, although the production of a professional teaching portfolio that is based on being a Chemistry Teacher has been incredibly valuable in this respect.

FUTURE CHALLENGES There are still many challenges to be surmounted in the quest for preparing teachers for a global market. Clearly the school experience needs to be developed further and there are many examples of the establishment of good partnerships with schools in this respect. Indeed research undertaken by Jones and myself (Jones, 2003) in initial benchmarking research undertaken between Durham University and Monash University has indicated some components of such partnerships that will be useful in this respect. The current trial has been largely with distance education students who receive materials in print with on-line support. Early indications with these off campus students as well as on

162

Deborah Corrigan

campus students and online students reveal the need to explore the online environment’s ability to provide non-linear learning opportunities. Students would access materials in the different domains of knowledge and understanding, skills and attitudes and values as a need is generated. In this way students will be able to engage with the curriculum in ways of their choice. Such opportunities will provide good ways to model this type of learning as being more responsive to students’ needs and engage students in their learning to a greater extent. The notion of preparing teachers for a global market needs further exploration, particularly in terms of teaching in a variety of contexts. This will need to be more longitudinal in its orientation. However, it is clear that the challenge needs to be explored, as the teaching profession becomes increasingly global in its orientation.

REFERENCES DeVos, Boult & Pilot. (2002) Chemistry Education Curriculum in Gilbert, J.K., DeJong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D. & VanDriel, J. (Eds.) Chemical Education: Towards ResearchBased Practice, Kluwer, Dordrecht. Doecke, B., Loughran J. & Brown, J. (2000) Teacher Talk: the role of story and anecdote in constructing professional knowledge for beginning teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, pp. 335-348. Fensham, P.J. (1994) Beginning to teach Chemistry in Fensham, P.J., Gunstone, R.F. & White, R.T. (eds) The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. Falmer Press, 14-28. Jones, M. (2003) Personal correspondence associated with project :Developing Reflective Pracitioners – A benchmarking approach. University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom. Kortagen, F.A.J. (1993) Two modes of reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(3), 317-326 Koballa, T., Graber, W., Coleman, D. & Kemp, A. (1999) Prospective teachers’ conceptions of the knowledge base for teaching chemistry at the German Gymnasium. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(4), p269-86. Loughran, J.J. & Corrigan, D.J. (1995) Teaching portfolios: a strategy for developing quality in learning and teaching in pre-service education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(6), 565-577. Shulman, L. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: Foundation of new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 15(2), 4-14 Tamir, P. (1989) Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

In: New Teaching and Teacher Issues Editor: Mary B. Klein, pp. 163-182

ISBN 1-60021-214-X © 2006 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 7

THE PEDAGOGICAL VALUES BEHIND TEACHERS' REFLECTION OF SCHOOL ETHOS Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu University of Helsinki, Finland

ABSTRACT In this paper we investigate the content and structure of teachers’ pedagogical values that guide their everyday work at school. We have used the process of value clarification with 24 teachers to encourage them to recognize, articulate and express their own values and beliefs related to their professional morality and to their school community. The main goal of the project was to increase the ethical knowledge of the teachers. The project was carried out as a collaborative action research project in which the researchers and teachers worked together. In the first phase of the project the teachers identified 10 theses that should guide their work in the school. This process produced a list of 42 descriptive statements. In the next phase of the project, two researchers investigated and interpreted the teachers’ expressed pedagogical values in their statements by using three-step dialectical procedure. On this interpretative level, in looking for evidence for major conceptualizations the researchers were not interested primary in statements having an outward form of a principle, but rather in the way such statements operated in structuring school values. The analysis produced three meta school values - social and communal values, relational values, and individual values - and their respective six applied school values – service and inclusion, justice and care; co-operation, autonomy and consideration; excellence, and self-esteem. The values and beliefs identified in this first phase will guide the project to continue the value clarification process with the teachers. In the second phase of the project the teachers will discuss the practical implications of these values to their school community. The whole process of recognizing, articulating and expressing pedagogical values will increase teachers’ ethical knowledge and help them to develop their school towards learning community that acknowledges ethical dimensions of the school ethos.

164

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

1. INTRODUCTION Nowadays, schools are under a pressure to create safe, orderly, and effective learning environments where students can acquire social as well as academic skills that will allow them to succeed in school and beyond. Over the last two decades, student populations – but also teachers – have become increasingly diverse. Students and teachers sharing the same school can come from a broad rage of cultures and socio-economical backgrounds. Schools face the challenge of creating pedagogical environments that are sensitive to numerous individual backgrounds in order to support students’ social and academic success. Schools can no longer afford to focus solely on delivering academic curricula; they are also responsible for establishing and maintaining school-cultures that empower students - and teachers alike – to negotiate the diverse values and social norms of our communities. The aim is to improve social competence among all pedagogical participants. This is because social curricula are crucial for mutually productive interactions and durable interpersonal relationships. However, students benefit not only socially, but also academically, when they are supported by caring classroom and school environment (Noddings, 1992; Wentzel, 2003). In this paper we investigate the content and structure of teachers’ pedagogical values that guide their everyday work at school. According to earlier empirical studies, teachers are noticeably unaware and even unconscious of the ethical ramifications of their own actions and overall practice (Jackson et al. 1993; Tirri 1999). The current discussion on teacher knowledge has neglected the ethical dimensions of such things as pedagogical content knowledge, classroom knowledge, and curriculum. We need more clarification and discussion on ethical knowledge of teachers and the values and beliefs underlying that knowledge. A more transparent sense of ethical knowledge could provide the teachers a renewed sense of professionalism and a basis for renewed school cultures in which the moral dimensions of all aspects of teacher’s work are discussed. Furthermore, teachers’ ethical knowledge could provide the theoretical and practical framework for renewed teacher education and professional learning (Campbell, 2003). In the moral domain students have certain learning challenges in school, in addition to those in the cognitive, affective and social domains. Some of these learning goals are explicitly expressed in the Finnish national curriculum, for example, knowledge and application of the Golden Rule (Framework Curriculum for the Comprehensive School, 1994). In addition to this very abstract guideline, schools and classes have established their own ethical rules that the students should learn to follow. In the best cases, teachers and students have negotiated these rules together, according to the idea of just community promoted by Kohlberg and his followers (Kohlberg et al., 1975; Oser, 1996). However, a great deal of moral learning takes place unplanned through the general moral messages delivered by teachers and other students in school. In this study we have used the process of value clarification with 24 teachers to encourage them to recognize, articulate and express their own values and beliefs related to their professional morality and to their school community. The main goal of the project was to increase the ethical knowledge of the teachers. The project was carried out as a collaborative action research project in which the researchers and teachers worked together. In the first phase of the project the teachers identified 10 theses that should guide their work in the school. This process produced a list of 42 descriptive statements. In the next phase of

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

165

the project, two researchers investigated and interpreted the teachers’ expressed pedagogical values in their statements by using three-step dialectical procedure. On this interpretative level, in looking for evidence for major conceptualizations the researchers were not interested primary in statements having an outward form of a principle, but rather in the way such statements operated in structuring school values. The analysis produced three Meta school values - social and communal values, relational values, and individual values - and their respective six applied school values – service and inclusion, justice and care; co-operation, autonomy and consideration; excellence, and selfesteem. The values and beliefs identified in this first phase will guide the project to continue the value clarification process with the teachers. In the second phase of the project the teachers will discuss the practical implications of these values to their school community. The whole process of recognizing, articulating and expressing pedagogical values will increase teachers’ ethical knowledge and help them to develop their school towards learning community that acknowledges ethical dimensions in their ethos.

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND School Values and Social Curriculum Value education is a direct and indirect intervention by the schooling institution that aims to affect the moral development of a person including one’s behaviour, one’s ability to think about and perceive issues of right ands wrong, and the actual opinions of right and wrong one holds (Lipe, 2004, p. 2). The definition is broad in two ways. First, the definition encompasses not only deliberate, acknowledged efforts and effects of a school institution on the moral development a pupil, but also accidental, unplanned effects on a pupil’s development. Second, according to the school’s pedagogical functions, the aim of the value education is to take account: “(1) actual behaviour of a person in a situation involving right and wrong; (2) the person’s ability to think critically about moral problems; and (3) the actual moral opinions held by an individual” (ibid.). Without these preconditions, value education could easily turn into indoctrination, i.e., teaching a given set of values without considering other views and the evidence for or against such views. Many educational scholars have recognized the school’s role in value education and in moral development. Already Dewey (1934) viewed value education as crucial to the basic purpose of a school. According to him, “the child’s moral character must develop in a natural, just, and social atmosphere. The school should provide this environment for its part in the child’s development” (p. 85). The statement reflects the general motion that the school should help to develop pupils’ values. Later, i.e. Jackson et al. (1993), Goodman & Lesnick (2001), Campbell (2003), and Slattery & Rapp (2003) have emphasized the ethos of the school in the pupils’ value construction. They all deliver the message that schools simply cannot avoid being involved in the (moral) values of pupils. This is because pupils absorb in and are affected both by the formal instruction and its unintentional side effects. All and all, the ethos of the school makes pupils’ pedagogical practice. Clark (1995) argues that the most effective moral lessons are the virtuous responses to students’ needs or the failures to provide these responses. He lists ten basic needs of

166

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

students/children: i.e., to be led, to be vulnerable, to make sense, to have hope, to be known, and to be safe. Clark has also suggested virtuous responses to each of those needs that every student/child deserves. He claims that these responses, or the negative manifestation of them, are the value-laden educational events that carry moral messages and can change and shape students’ lives (Clark, 1995, pp. 25-28). As presented, in the value domain students have important learning challenges in school, in addition to those explicit and formal goals in the cognitive, affective and social domains. Some of these learning goals are explicitly expressed in the National Curriculum (Framework Curriculum for the Comprehensive School, 1994). Such basic values as student welfare and the importance of schools in helping students grow into active citizens are emphasised. In order to achieve these ends, the responsibility of all members of the school community is highlighted within the framework of the operation culture of schools. It is believed that these basic values operate as principles that help define the professional practices taken place in schools. These fundamental values and tasks of the school include i.e. personal growth, individual freedom and integrity, and participatory citizenship. They must be taken into consideration in all pedagogical activities of schools. The national framework curriculum forms the basis for drawing up local curricula in schools. Within this process, the basic values of national curriculum must be seen as instruments of orientation and interpretation. Teachers are not free to choose whatever they personally regard as valuable. The task of teachers is to make already given – and abstract value prescriptions to work in practice. In addition to these broad guidelines, schools establish their own, and often more specific, rules that the students should learn to follow.

School Values and Teacher Reflection Teacher reflection is considered as an important means for developing teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. As research has shown, a common perception of teaching is the tendency to work in isolation from colleagues (Jackson, 1968; Lieberman & Miller, 1992; Lortie, 1975; Waller, 1961). However, because teachers work in increasingly diverse schools where multiple (and often contra dictionary) reforms are implemented, reflection defined as a technical and isolated skill is insufficient to support meaningful teacher learning (LadsonBillings, 1999). Among others, Dewey (1933) and Schön (1983) have argued for a proactive and learner centred form of reflection in which the teacher becomes the subject and the owner of her/his own reflection. According to this vision of reflection, it is vitally important that teacher reflection focuses on the socio-historical and institutional contexts in which students are educated. How teachers use reflection must be understood as situated in the activity systems of schools, classrooms, and professional development events (cf. Engeström et al., 1999). A key premise of this starting point is the social origin of teacher learning. Professional learning emerges first in a social plane in relations with people and is subsequently appropriated as psychological and pedagogical categories. As Hoffman-Kipp et al. (2003) formulate it: “Reflection without participation is as impossible as thought without language” (p. 251). Teacher reflection in social context occurs as teachers engage in and share their reflection in many ways. Whether through writing, speaking, or simply listening teachers are participating in a construction of their pedagogical knowledge as well as their professional

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

167

identities. In professional communities, teachers can function as resources for one another, providing each other with assistance on which to build new ideas. An accomplished teacher understands what must be taught, as well as how to teach it. Therefore, teacher reflection must be framed both as a meta cognitive effort and a social practice (Hoffman-Kipp et al., 2003). According to the former, to teach in a compatible way, a teacher must understand “both the first principles of the problems, topics, and issues of the curriculum … their rationale, [and] their relationships to one another (Shulman & Shulman, 2004, p. 262). In addition to that knowing, s/he must be capable of performing those activities that are necessary to transform the goals and visions into pedagogical action. The category of this kind of understanding and reflection is large. It hosts many elements that are commonly included in the knowledge base of teaching. The domain includes: • • • • •

•

Disciplinary and content knowledge; Curriculum understanding; Pedagogical content knowledge and case-based knowledge of multiple instances; Knowledge and skills of classroom management and organization; Capability to understanding and act simultaneously on many levels of school community (classroom, department, school, local community, and larger sociopolitical contexts); Understanding learners (students and teachers) intellectually, socially, culturally, and personally in a developmental perspective. (Shulman & Shulman, 2004, p. 262)

The analysis of teacher reflection and learning of this kind moves away from a concern with individual teachers and their learning to a conception of teacher learning within a broader context of school institution, politics, and profession. It is important to note that a failure to ensure this kind of professional reflection easily leaves the field open to common sense and often superficial considerations as the sole guides of pedagogical action: “These are the values of our society, and that’s that, so we’ll better fit the line” – type of argument. In turn, teacher reflection and learning should lay the foundations for thinking about the goals of learning more generally, for students in a variety of settings, and for teachers as well.

Values and Teacher Community School values concern teachers’ judgements of approval towards abilities, qualities and behaviours teachers think worthy of striving for. To speak of school’s values implies that the holding of those values is definitive of membership of the particular school in question. As Aristotle (1955) argues, the essential cement of solidarity among group members is a shared conception of the good. On the more practical level, we find Bellah & colleagues’ (1985) definition of community to be useful. According to them, community is “a group of people who are socially interdependent, who participate together in discussion and decision making, and who share certain practices that both define the community and are nurtured by it” (p. 333).

168

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

Schools can be regarded as such communities. In them, teachers and students ‘share many pedagogical practices’ that ‘define the school as educative community.’ All participants in educational undertakings are ‘socially interdependent’ and, to a certain extent, should ‘participate together in discussion and decision making.’ Regarding teachers, members of the same profession share a sense of identity and relatively common (professional) values. They also share the same (formal) role definitions and professional language. Ultimately, teachers control the reproduction of their professional community through socialization process as well. As Grossman et al., (2001) report, such communities are not quickly and easily formed. It is crucial how the formation of group norms occurs and how they come to define school community. Norms represent the shared moral life of a school community – that element which encourages participants to discipline their desires for the sake of membership in the group (Carter, 1998). Since so much more than rational beliefs are involved in the values teachers hold (attachment, emotions, identity, and so on), mutual reflection is vital in the process of value clarification and change in school communities. Also, if the process of value clarification is to be educational and not mere social engineering, it needs to be undertaken with degree of understanding the process on the part of the teachers involved (Wringe, 1998). The aim is to change behaviour by clarifying and changing values, and this is a social process. Teachers cannot successfully teach and transmit values if their institutions are not committed to their applications in real school life situations. This study regards values as a legitimate mode of community discourse and reflection. Therefore, critical reasoning should be a crucial element in the process of value clarification taking place in schools. If values are understood as something generated by members of a school community - rather than received by some distant authority - then shared experience of a positive kind is the principal way in which they are to be acquired. Therefore, this study regards values as essentially social and positive, not prohibitions and prescriptions. The concern is not just with a good behaviour in schools (i.e. school discipline), but with influencing he pupils’ long-standing value commitments and in consequence their whole future way of life. Those relevant experiences need to be enjoyed in a pedagogically supportive atmosphere and subject to appropriate guidance and supervision. A key rationale for teacher community is that it provides an ongoing venue for teacher learning (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2001). Reflective discussions with colleagues are a crucial aspect of the teachers’ professional development. Also, teachers’ perceptions of their level of empowerment are significantly related to their feelings of commitment to the school organization they are working at (Bogler & Somech, 2004). It is a question of “a process whereby school participants develop competence to take charge of their own growth and resolve their own problems” (Short et al., 1994, p. 38). If such a condition prevails, teachers believe that they have the capability and knowledge to improve a situation in which teachers operate.

The Importance of Visions and Ideals Professions are usually described as a complex set of role characteristics and skills in matters of importance to society. Also, and more often implied, is the normative aspect of a profession that is set as a standard of responsible behaviour. Teachers are expected to be

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

169

persons of integrity whom students and parents and trust and who can contribute to the good of a society and advance the quality of human life. This study presents these normative aspects of pedagogical professionalism as ideals defining the standard of good professional conduct within schools. However, the emphasis on prescriptive rules should not give an impression that being a competent professional means no more than following a variety of rules governing the conduct of teachers. As Flores (1988, p. 2) argues, while this approach has its value in giving teachers general guidance as to how they ought to act, it also has its limits and can distort our understanding of the normative aspects of teaching profession. This paper examines both the normative and descriptive foundations of pedagogical values. The emphasis is not how teachers and students should act given a catalogue of value prescriptions, but on what kind of ethos/value structure could prevail in schools in order they can be considered true educative institutions – and professional communities. In accordance with Flores (1988), we emphasize the claim that teaching profession should be understood as a complex of virtues and ideals that are essential to success in a teacher role. Hence, teaching as a normative concept can be defined as an idealized way of being (in a certain role) that contributes to the realization of the goods central to the profession. Hammerness (2003) proposes that understanding teachers’ vision – teachers’ images of their ideal school practices – may provide a means to for us to better appreciate what decisions teachers make and what experiences they have in their classrooms. According to Feiman-Nemser & Floden (1984), the visions and images that teachers create can provide good means of studying teachers’ knowledge, especially its tacit and implicit dimensions. This is because “images mediate between thought and action … and show how different kinds of knowledge and values come together in teaching” (p. 33). Visions and images express the teachers’ purposes. Because they are loose and open, visions largely guide teachers intuitively. According to Duffy (1988), vision is a concept and a vehicle that makes intuitive sense to teachers and can provide access to teachers’ ‘sense of purpose.’ Vision can provide a sense of reach that inspires and motivates teachers, and also invites them to reflect on their work. Darling-Hammond (1990) argues that one of the most powerful predictors of teachers’ commitment to teaching is a “sense of efficacy – the teachers’ sense that he or she is making a positive difference in the lives of students” (p. 9). Here, visions are helpful in three ways: First, they provided a means to surface and examine teachers’ beliefs. Making visions explicit may also help provide a foundation for the development of teachers’ professional knowledge. Second, vision may offer possibilities to ‘dig deeper’ teachers’ beliefs and goals by examining, challenging, and further articulating their beliefs through the sharing of visions. Finally, examining visions may provide teachers possibilities to deal with the gap between their hopes and their practice. Learning to navigate the gap between vision and practice may be helpful in developing the contextual understanding of teaching. With the aid of visions, teachers can select and create contexts in which they can sustain their feelings of agency. However, it is not very helpful to talk about visions and the role they can play in teachers’ professional development without considering the contexts in which teachers actually work. Whether teachers feel that their contexts provide support – or not – is focal to their ability to carry out their visions. A supportive or unsupportive school context refers to a teacher’s perception of degree to which such aspects as classroom resources, collegial environment, and school leadership are consistent with her/his professional vision. As

170

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

Shulman & Shulman (2004) argue, a developed and articulated vision can serve as a goal toward which teacher development is directed. Also, it can set a standard against which teachers’ thoughts and actions can be evaluated.

3. METHOD OF THE STUDY Value Clarification Values clarification was introduced as a new alternative in the 1970’s to teach ethics to any age level (Simon et al., 1972). This approach was claimed to be more effective than the traditional indoctrination, that had been proven to be ineffective in teaching children moral values (Hartshorne & May, 1930). In values clarification, the emphases are not on the content of people’s values but on the process of valuing. The three goals of values clarification are choosing, prizing and acting. People involved in the process are encouraged to choose their values freely among as many alternatives as possible, to prize and affirm choices, whatever they may be, and to act upon their values consistently and with repetition (Simon et al., 1972, 18-22). The approach does not presume to identify or justify the desirable values. The moral values are considered to be personal values, not right or wrong, true or false. Thus this approach can be labelled values neutral and relativistic in the extreme. The goals of recognizing, articulating and expressing their own and others’ views and feelings about the values are relevant for teachers and school communities. We can assume that the process of clarifying one’s values is a prerequisite for making responsible judgments in the everyday moral dilemmas faced. A values clarification approach has the potential to promote empathy, interpersonal skills and courage that are needed in moral decision-making. On the other hand, the values clarification approach fails to provide teachers with the cognitive aspects of ethical inquiry needed in the attempt to combine justice, care and truthfulness. The other danger of this approach is its potential to promote self-regarding, prudential reasoning that may be associated with narcissim and subjectivism (Howe, 1986, 10). However, the activities in values clarification are important steps in the teachers’ critical reflection on values, but they are insufficient by themselves in the meeting the aims of increasing ethical knowledge of teachers. Earlier research on teachers’ pedagogical value clarification has demonstrated that values are conceived as teachers’ pedagogical identities. Values are the principles or standards of each teacher’s choices and judgments concerning the importance or worth of using certain pedagogical identities in his/her teaching (Chin & Lin, 2001). In the school communities value statements can be considered carriers of values that are goal-directed descriptions, indicating values by which a school intends it practices to be guided, setting out the values the school intends to promote and which it intends to demonstrate through all aspects of its life. Values may be developed through clarification. In this process it is through articulation, reflection, and discussion that the implicit values teachers hold become explicit and are refined through practice. The approach gives the teachers a way of encouraging each other to spend more time and energy on value-related thought; to focus people’s attention on aspects of their own living; to accept others’ positions in a non-judgmental way; to reflect on values

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

171

more intensively and comprehensively; and to nourish a sense of the possibility for thoughtful self-direction (Raths, Harmin, & Simon, 1978). In our project we conceive teachers’ pedagogical values as their implicit social and individual characteristics concerning pedagogy. It is assumed that these values might become explicit through a dialectical process of social interaction between thoughts and words within mutual discourses. Inspired by the work of Chin & Lin (2001), we used Vygotsky’s notion of inner speech and social speech to help teachers explicitly express their pedagogical values and to be aware of such values. We planned a collaborative action research project in which school and university educators aim toward a process of working together. In collaborative action research teachers can explore the social, cultural, and political/power experiences in the school as well as the pedagogical intentions and expectations in their classroom. Collaborative action research can foster democratic participation in the school community (Oja, 1989). In our project the main research task was to experiment how or in what ways can we as researchers assist teachers to concisely explicate their pedagogical values to outsiders, i.e., how can we help teachers develop their spontaneous concepts (implicit values) into more coherent and appropriate thinking and working tools (explicit values)?

4. THE CASE: THE SCHOOL AND THE PROCESS The case study method and design, including three phases of interaction between researchers and teachers, were used as the major approach of inquiry to explore the pedagogical values of teachers in a particular school. The school is an urban elementary school with grades 1 to 6. The school has a male principal and a female wise principal. The total number of teachers is 24. Most of the teachers are quite young and inexperienced. They have expressed a need for inservice education regarding pedagogical values and ethical knowledge in general. The school has three older teachers who are going to retire within a year. The teachers of the school form teams according to the grade level taught. Each team consists of 2-4 teachers. The school has invited researchers to visit their school earlier and the teachers have reflected these visits in the teams. The earlier topics of inservice education have included themes such as curriculum planning and intercultural learning. The researchers planned the collaborative process of reflecting the values and beliefs of the school with the principal and the wise principal. The principals had discussed the needs and wants of the teachers before contacting the researchers. Thus the initiative for starting the collaborative process became from the school. The teachers expressed a need to reflect on issues such as teacher’s ethics, ethical dilemmas in teaching, the values and beliefs of the school and co-operation between teachers, students and parents. The researchers planned a period of six months which included three face to face interactive sessions between researchers and teachers. The first interactive session was used to assess the current values and beliefs of teachers and the most common ethical dilemmas experienced by them. Every session included some sharing of current research findings concerning teacher’s ethics. Furthermore, the teachers were given articles and books to read related to the topics discussed. After each interactive session the teachers were given assignments to reflect in their teams. These assignments were later discussed together with the researchers. The last interactive session was used to draw conclusions from the earlier work and to establish the

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

172

common educational theses to guide the teachers in their work. The program given to the teachers in the first session can be seen in Table 1. Table 1. The phases in collaborative process

TIME

Starting session

PROGRESS

Fall 2002

(3 hours)

CONTENT

The teacher as moral educator: • What kinds of teachers are in our school? • Ethical codes in teaching • Teacher’s ethics The assignment for teacher teams: • What is the vision of our school? • How do the individual and community values interact with each other in our school? • What kind of leadership we have in our school? • Are we committed to our work?

Middle session

Winter 2003

(3 hours)

The ethos of our school: • The ethical dilemmas in our school • The solving strategies used in our school • Discussing the assignment from the last session The assignment for teacher teams: • Create 10 educational theses for the school

The Final session (3 hours)

Spring 2004

Collaborating together: • Discussing the assignment from the last session • Choosing the common values and beliefs • Planning the future collaboration

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

173

5. DATA ANALYSIS The material produced in teachers’ assignments form the research material for our study. In this paper we will use the data produced by the teacher teams between the middle and final interactive session. The teacher teams had produced ten educational theses that they wanted to reflect the ethos of their school. In the last session these theses were collected together to form a total of 42 theses. After that the teachers were asked to select the ten most important theses out from 42. The phases reflected the process of valuing in values clarification method. In the assignment given in the middle session the teachers were practicing the first step of choosing in value clarifiction process. They had the chance to choose their own values freely among as many alternatives as possible. The values chosen in this phase were demonstrated in the 10 educational theses for the school as expressed by each teacher team. In the final session teachers proceeded to the second step in value clarification process which is called prizing. In this phase teachers had to prize all the 42 theses created by the teacher teams. The common prizing produced 10 mutual theses that reflected the values and beliefs of their school. These theses were affirmed in the final session together with teachers and researchers. The final step of acting in value clarification was left for the teachers to actualize in their everyday life in school. The idea of acting includes teacher behavior that reflects the chosen values consistently and with repetition. The analysis of the data was first done independently by the two researchers. Both researchers read the 42 theses produced by the teacher teams and interpreted the teachers’ expressed pedagogical values in them. The analysis was done inductively without any given theoretical framework. However, our earlier work on teachers’ knowledge and ethics guided our understanding and gave us theoretical concepts to use in our analytical work (Tirri, 1999; Tirri et al., 1999; Tirri & Husu, 2002; Husu & Tirri, 2003; Tirri & Kansanen, 2003). After the first reading of the theses the researchers established a coding category for the value statements reflected in teachers’ theses. The pedagogical values of teachers were coded into three different categories: individual values, social & communal values and relational values. Each researcher coded the theses into these three categories autonomously. After the coding, the researchers checked the reliability of the coding categories by comparing their analysis with each other. In mutual discussions, some of the values were changed into a different category. All coding disagreements were discussed to reach common interpretation of the nature of the values. We named the values coded into these three main coding categories as meta school values. The meta school values were reflected in the six subcategories of more practical nature. The subcategories within each category were named applied school values. The summary of our analysis with both meta and applied values can be seen in Table 3. Table 2. Summary of the school values statements

Teachers of this school: • •

respect each other’s physical and psychological intimacy emphasize the interests of our community more than individuality and selfishness

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

174

Table 2. Summary of the school values statements (Continued) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

educate to tolerate differences respect and follow the common rules we have agreed on aim to create a peaceful and caring atmosphere try to concentrate on our work and maintain a peaceful working environment behave the way we would like the others to behave create co-operative methods that support learning take responsibility of our own work and learning are learning to accept our mistakes and failures and learn from them take care of our belongings we need at school are self-directed and active think with our own brains are consistent in our efforts justify the decision we make to each other practice to live in peace with each other and work together work and we try hard are responsive to each other’s needs respect ourselves and others help and encourage each other take responsibility of ourselves, each other and our environment are learning to discern between right and wrong act according to our roles aim learning to learn are trying to reach the best possible individual standards in knowledge and skills are open and honest to all are democratic in co-operation are flexible and ready to change try to reach the goals we have established are here for students take care of the good spirit in our school co-operate with people outside our school co-operate with parents give each other peace to work listen/are attentive to each other trust ourselves and try our best take responsibility of ourselves and our assignments aim to complete our tasks take a positive attitude to work transfer values to each other/We respect tradition have a positive attitude toward nature and environment are learning to evaluate our work honestly

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

175

RESULTS Basic Values of a School’s Social Curriculum The process of value clarification calls for a synthesis of statements made in order to see possible commonalities among them. Table 2 shows a list of school-based value statements the teachers produced during their two conferences. The components are not new ideas and goals. Rather, they are mainly focusing on what the teachers saw as characteristics of a good and effective school – or community at large. All and all, they identify and promote skills that both teachers and students need if they are to be able to navigate successfully through the complex institutional life taking place in schools. Perhaps their main message is that the teachers recognized their school not only as an intellectual, but also as a social and emotional place (cf. Norris, 2003). A closer look at the value statements reveals that the notion of school values among teachers is diverse and vague. Confusion surrounding the concept of value is evident. Depending on the issue, teachers see values as norms: As a standard or pattern of social behaviour that is accepted in or expected is a school. Also, school values are seen as cultural ideals (“We are open and honest;” “We respect ourselves and the others”) that are common to all people in a society. The statements are not, and nor they should or could, knowledge based: Instead, they are goal-directed beliefs with good intentions. In many cases they present (at least implicit) behavior probabilities and expectations: Statements like “We are flexible and ready to change;” or “We take positive attitude to our work.” are optimistic in their tone. Most of them can be used as assessments of action: The statements define values as moral judgments without clarifying the procedures that they presuppose. As such, they can be used as an occupational reward structure and/or system. Finally, they can be seen as a set of generalized attitudes that stress on conformity. The list of school values concerns those norms, ideals, and attitudes that are supposed to govern the conduct of teachers. It emphasizes the inherent normative meanings that determine the appropriateness of teachers’ professional practices. The normative core of school values, therefore, provides ways to appraise the merits and to judge the significance of educational practices taken place in schools. In analyzing the statements and their internal structure, one could identify that the data mainly echoed “straight” reasoning. The list of school values could be read as a list of “rules of practice” (Elbaz, 1983, Husu, 2000). The rules of practice are brief, clearly formulated statements of what to do in particular situation frequently encountered in practice (Elbaz, 1983, p. 132). According to their nature, they can be applied to broader situations.

Perspectives Behind the Value Statements Next, the list of 42 statements was further analyzed. The data could also be interpreted through more inclusive concepts. In search for justifying evidence for these larger concepts, the focus was not primarily in statements having an external form. Rather, the analysis was expended to concentrate on determining how the statements operated in structuring teachers’ pedagogical reasoning. For example, the statements concerning of recognizing and respecting

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

176

one’s emotions, controlling impulses, and focusing on strengths of positive feelings about self and others were interpreted under the value concept of “self esteem”. The statements related to the issues of managing relationships, showing sensitive to social clues, and exercising social decision-making and problem-solving skills formed became part of the value concept of “co-operation.” Altogether, the analysis produced six applied school values: Service and inclusion, justice and care; co-operation, autonomy and consideration; excellence, and selfesteem. Finally, we tried to uncover some basic values behind the applied value statements. According to Brown et al. (1991), within the domain of moral and value judgement, a global assessment comes before more specific practical actions. Therefore, we aimed to construct certain basic concepts, meta values, that could relate both the individual value statements and the applied school values. The analysis produced three value frames embedded in teachers’ professional practice: Social and communal values, relational values, and individual values. Table 3 presents the results of the analysis: According to the analysis and interpretation, social and community values address for societal and local community awareness and involvement. They emphasize the right of self and others, and address for injustice in school community and in society in general. Increasing empathy and sensitivity to others and understanding others’ perspectives are in a key focus in these value prescriptions. Overall, they strive for learning how to increase and develop active and democratic participation for the use of everyday life both inside and outside school institution. Table 3. Summary of school values: their kinds and relationships Value structure

Number of value statements out of total 42

SOCIAL & COMMUNAL VALUES SERVICE & INCLUSION

13 (7)

JUSTICE & CARE

(6)

Examples of the included value statements

 We emphasize the interests of our community more than individuality and selfishness  We co-operate with people outside our school  We have a positive attitude toward nature and environment  We aim to create a peaceful and caring atmosphere  We acknowledge each other’s needs  We are here for students

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

177

Table 3. Summary of school values: their kinds and relationships (Continued) Value structure

RELATIONAL VALUES CO-OPERATION

Number of value statements out of total 42

12 (5)

Examples of the included value statements

 We help and encourage each other  We respect and follow the common rules we have agreed  We justify the decisions we make to each other

AUTONOMY & CONSIDERATION

INDIVIDUAL VALUES

(7)

 We respect each other’s physical and psychological intimacy  We listen/are attentive to each other  We educate to tolerate differences

17

EXCELLENCE

(10)

 We work and we try hard  We are learning to accept our mistakes and failures and learn from them  We try to reach the goals we have established

SELF-ESTEEM

(7)

 We respect ourselves and others  We take responsibility of ourselves and our assignments  We think with our own brains

Relational values focused more on the process and practice of interpersonal relationships. In their views, teachers stressed that it is vital for all participants – both teachers and students alike - to keep in mind the needs of other people, and relate them with kindness and tolerance. Working and willing to assist each other to achieve these curricular goals demands collegiality and co-operation. Social skills in handling relationships require that teachers are

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

178

motivated to recognize strengths in and are able to mobilize positive feelings about students, school, and themselves as skillful professionals. R E L A T I O N A L

CO-OPERATION: Working and willing to assist each other to achieve the curricular goals S O C I A L

V A L

V A L U E S

AUTONOMY & CONSIDERATION: Keeping in mind the needs of other people, with kindness and tolerance; being true and respect for self and others

I D I V

JUSTICE & CARE: Addressing the right of self and others, and addressing injustice in school community and in society in general

SERVICE & INCLUSION: Addressing for societal and local community awareness and involvement

EXCELLENCE: Constant challenging of each student/person to achieve the best of his/her potential

I D U A L

INDIVIDUAL & INSTITUTIONALIZED VALUE REFLECTION SELF-ESTEEM Developing a sense of self-worth and self-discipline with the hope and belief for betterment and positive future

U

V A L

E

U

S

E S

Figure 1. A framework for teacher reflection of school values

In their statements, teachers expressed their will to constantly challenge each student to achieve the best of his/her potential. This is done by focusing tasks at hand, setting short and long-term goals, working toward optimal performance states, and activating hope and optimism among students – but also among colleagues. These individual values aim to develop a sense of self-worth and self-discipline with the hope and belief for betterment and positive future. With the aid of these value conceptions, Figure 1 presents a preliminary spectrum of teachers’ school values.

CONCLUDING REMARKS In this paper we have described a collaborative action research project with two educational researchers and twenty-four teachers of an elementary school. The project used the value clarification process to recognize, articulate and express the beliefs and values of this particular school community. The researchers analyzed the nature of values expressed by the teachers and established a framework for school values. The school values reflected individual, social and relational values. According to the teachers, all these meta values are important in a pedagogical context. The most important values chosen by teachers came from all these three main categories of values. The theses “We emphasize the interests of our community more than individuality and selfishness “reflected important social values of the

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

179

school and it was chosen to represent the social ethos of the school. The theses “We educate to tolerate differences” reflected important relational values of the school and it was chosen to represent relational ethos of the school. Individual values were reflected in the theses “We think with our own brains” and “We work and we try hard”. These theses were chosen for the teachers to actualize in their school ethos and in their own behavior. We tend to have erroneous ideas about the role that values, beliefs and principles play in influencing human behavior. Our eagerness to posit normative judgements has a tendency to make values programmatic in their orientation to education: “A set of duties or obligations that if well-enough defined and well-enough followed will produce the [ethical] behaviour desired” (Todd, 2001, p. 436). According to the stance, education is seen as a fulfilment or failure of prior principles of goodness and rightness - prior actual encounters between teachers and students. What it tends to forget is the uncertainty and unpredictability of the pedagogical encounter itself (Reid, 1979; Husu, 2002). Both teachers and students bring a host of idiosyncrasies and unconscious associations in pedagogical situations, which cannot be predicted or controlled. Therefore, instead of asking what ought to be, we should also ask what makes values possible in pedagogical settings. Therefore, we should not oversell the process of value clarification. Also, it should be anchored to real values expressed in real world school problems (Husu & Tirri, 2001). If a teacher says s/he values honesty, we should ask her/him to explain what that would mean to her/him in terms of real-world classroom or school behaviour. Consequently, we should encourage teachers to identify practical examples where there is a gap between values and their behaviour, either on an individual level, or an organizational level. We should develop ways of doing things that bring behaviour in-line with our values. This is vital because we are not going to alter a teacher’s values by talking about them. At best, value clarification provides an opportunity to take the first step on the road of getting to know them – and finally, live with them. So far, we have started discussing the vision of the good school – and society. The point is that school must be a school based an awareness of the importance of values, bring them fore and give students and teachers time to reflect on and discuss such issues.

REFERENCES Aristotle (1955). Ethics (translated and edited J. A. K. Thompson). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Bellah, R. N., Madsen, N., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers’ organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 277-289. Brown, L. M., Depold, E., Tappan, M., & Gilligan, C. (1991) Reading narratives of conflict and choice for self and moral voices: A relational method. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development. Volume 2: Research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum. Campbell, E. (2003). The ethical teacher. London: Open University Press.

180

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

Carter, S. K. (1998). Civility: manners, morals, and the etiquette of democracy. New York: Basic Books. Chin, C, & Lin, F. L. (2001). Mathematics teacher’s pedagogical value clarification and its relationship to classroom teaching. Proceedings of the National Science Council, Part D: Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education,11(3), 1-12. http://nr.stic.gov.tw/ejournal/ProceedingD/v11n3/114-125.pdf (09/18/2004). Clark, C. (1995). Thoughtful teaching. New York: Teachers College Press. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in Education, 24 (pp.249-306). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Darling-Hammond, L. (1990). Teacher professionalism: Why and how? In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Schools as collaborative cultures: Creating the future now. London: The Falmer Press. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Chicago, IL: D. C. Heath. Dewey, J. (1934). A common faith. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Duffy, G. G. (1988). Teaching and the balancing of round stones. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(10), 777-780. Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge. London. Croom Helm. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R. (Eds.) (1999). Perspectives on activity theory: Learning in doing social, cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Feiman-Nemser, S., & Floden R. (1984). The cultures of teaching. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching. Flores, A. (Ed.) (1988) Professional ideals. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Framework Curriculum for the Comprehensive School (1994). Helsinki: National Board of Education. Goodman, J. F. & Lesnick, H. (2001). The moral stake in education: contested premises and practices. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers College Press, 103(6), 942-1012. Hammerness, K. (2003). Learning to hope, or hoping to learn? The role of vision in the early professional life of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 43-56. Hartshorne & May (1930). A summary of the work of the character inquiry. Religious Education, 25, 607-619. Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & López-Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection: Teacher learning as praxis. Theory Into Practice, 42(3), 248-254. Howe, (1986). A conceptual basis for ethics in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 5-12. Husu, J. (2000). How teachers justify their practical knowing? Conceptualizing general and relative justifications. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education and Development, 3(1), 163-186. Husu, J. & Tirri, K. (2001). Teachers’ Ethical Choices in Sociomoral Settings. Journal of Moral Education, 30 (4), 361-375.

The Pedagogical Values Behind Teachers' Reflection of School Ethos

181

Husu, J. (2002). Representing the practice of teachers’ pedagogical knowing. Turku, FIN: Finnish Educational Research Association. Husu, J. & Tirri, K. (2003). A case study approach to study one teacher’s moral reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(3), 345-357. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Jackson, P. W., Boostrom, R. & Hansen, D. T. (1993). The moral life of schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kohlberg, L., Wasserman, E. & Richardson, N. (1975). The just community school: The theory and the Cambridge cluster school experiment. In Collected papers on moral development and moral education. Harvard University, MA: Center for Moral Education. Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A critical race-theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211-247. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1992). Teachers-their world and their work: Implications for school improvement. New York: Teachers College Press. Lipe, D. (2004). A critical analysis of values clarification. In http://www.apologeticspress.org/research/Critical_Analysis_of_Values_Clarification.pdf (09/04/2004). Lortie, D. C. (1975). School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2001). Secondary school teaching in context. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago of Press. Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York: Teachers’ College Press. Norris, J. A. (2003). Looking at classroom management through a social and emotional learning lens. Theory Into Practice, 42(4), 313-318. Oja, S. N. (1989). Collaborative action research. A developmental approach. London: Falmer Press. Oser, F. (1996). Kohlberg’s dormant ghosts: The case of education. Journal of Moral Education, 22(3), 253-275. Raths, L. E., Harmin, M., & Simon, S. B. (1978). Values and teaching: working with values in the classroom (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles & Merrill. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Reid, W. (1979) Practical reasoning and curriculum theory: in search of a new paradigm. Curriculum Inquiry, 9, 187-207. Short, P. M., Greer, J. T., & Melvin, W. M. (1994). Creating empowered schools: Lessons in change. Journal of Educational Research, 32(4), 38-52. Shulman, L. S. & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and what teachers learn: A shifting perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(2), 257-271. Simon, S., Howe, L., & Kirschenbaum, H. (1972). Values clarification. New York: Hart Publishing Company. Slattery, P. & Rapp, D. (2003). Ethics and the foundations of education: teaching convictions in a postmodern world. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Tirri, K. (1999). Teachers’ Perceptions of Moral Dilemmas at School. Journal of Moral Education, 28(1), 31-48. Tirri, K., Husu, J., & Kansanen, P. (1999). The epistemological stance between the knower and the known. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(8), 911-922.

182

Kirsi Tirri and Jukka Husu

Tirri, K. & Husu, J. (2002). Care and responsibility in “the best interest of the child”: Relational voices of ethical dilemmas in teaching. Teachers and Teaching, 8 (1), 65-80. Tirri, K. & Kansanen, P. (Eds.) (2003). Special Issue: Current research on moral education: International perspectives. Educational Research and Evaluation, 9(1). Todd, S. (2001) ‘Bringing more than I contain’: Ethics, curriculum and the pedagogical demand for altered egos. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(4), 431-450. Waller, W. (1961) The sociology of teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Russel & Russel. Wentzel, K. R. (2003). Motivating students to behave in socially competent ways. Theory Into Practice, 42(4), 319-326. Wringe, C. (1998). Reasons, values and community in moral education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 46(3), 278-288.

INDEX A academic achievement, 137 acceptance, 68, 149, 151 access, 61, 64, 69, 105, 111, 141, 151, 153, 162, 169 accountability, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 17, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48 accreditation, vii, 145 accumulation, 101 accuracy, 36, 40 achievement, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, 21, 43, 83, 99, 105, 111, 113, 114, 116, 120, 137 achievement test, 43 acid, 153 action research, x, 163, 164, 171, 178, 181 activities, 11, 20, 40, 118, 121, 130, 133 activity theory, 180 adaptation, 80 administration, 12 administrators, 36 adolescents, viii, 97, 98, 114, 138 adult, 47 adult education, 18, 45 adulthood, 12 advances, 23 affect, viii, 2, 8, 11, 16, 71, 80, 97, 100, 102, 165 Africa, viii, 97, 98, 99, 100, 112 age, 6, 13, 120, 144, 170 agent, 109 AGFI, 14 alertness, 52 alternative(s), 3, 23, 43, 80, 121,151, 160, 170, 173, 181 ambiguity, 2 American Educational Research Association, 44, 162, 180 anger, 130 ANOVA, 121, 125, 127, 128

anxiety, 114 appetite, 58 appropriate technology, 84 argument, 69, 167 Aristotle, 167, 179 articulation, 160, 170 Asia, 71, 72, 117, 160, 180 assessment, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 22, 23, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 84, 86, 87, 89, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 101, 143, 152, 153, 176 assessment procedures, 75 assessment techniques, 48 assessment tools, 6, 13 Assessment Tools for Teaching and Learning (asTTle), 1, 45 assignment, 6, 21, 58, 64, 67, 136, 151, 152, 157, 158, 160, 172, 173 association, viii, 35, 73, 90, 92, 99, 102, 115, 116, 117, 131, 132, 136, 140 attachment, 168 attention, 4, 9, 17, 65, 67, 84, 105, 116, 133, 134, 170 attitudes, viii, 5, 47, 48, 52, 59, 85, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 113, 114, 116, 137, 139, 140, 141, 148, 151, 154, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162, 175 Australasia, 7, 48 Australia, ix, 7, 9, 13, 46, 117, 132, 133, 139, 140, 141, 142, 160 authenticity, 80 authority, 122, 168 autonomy, x, 6, 64, 163, 165, 176 awareness, 59, 147, 176, 179

Index

184

B banks, 13 barriers, 29, 104, 148 basic needs, 165 batteries, vii, 1, 15, 21, 29, 41 beginning teachers, 44, 71, 162 behavior, vii, viii, 4, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 173, 175, 179 belief systems, 41 benchmarking, 161, 162 benign, 41 bias, 134 biology, 117, 139, 140 blame, 11 blocks, 7 blood, 103 body, 9, 12, 35, 63, 102, 104, 133, 144 bonding, 156 bonds, 86 boredom, 63 boys, 122 breeding, 112 Britain, 9 burn, vii

C California, 46 case study, ix, 45, 71, 72, 95, 111, 112, 139, 141, 142, 171, 181 catalyst, 81 categorization, 3 census, 22 certificate, 90 CFI, 14, 19 change, 25, 31, 36 chemistry curriculum, ix, 142, 144, 147, 153, 156, 157, 158 childhood, 3, 12, 43 children, 13, 16, 28, 29, 46, 75, 76, 80, 87, 88, 92, 93, 105, 111, 112, 117, 122, 138, 139, 150, 151, 158, 166, 170 China, 51, 112 citizens, 143 citizenship, 166, 179 class size, viii, 97 classes, viii, 6, 60, 64, 80, 82, 98, 100, 102, 109, 111, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 125, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 164

classification, 121, 127 classroom, vii, viii, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 58, 61, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 87, 91, 92, 93, 94, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 122, 126, 129, 130, 133, 134, 135, 136, 138, 139, 140, 143, 150, 157, 161, 164, 167, 169, 171, 179, 180, 181 classroom culture, 81 classroom environment, 81, 91, 114, 118, 138, 139 classroom management, 106, 167, 181 classroom practice, viii, 73, 74, 82, 83 classroom skills, 111 classroom teachers, ix, 74, 87, 91, 92, 116 classrooms, viii, 46, 47, 75, 83, 91, 93, 100, 111, 115, 117, 122, 128, 138, 139, 152, 166, 169, 181 cluster analysis, 29, 36 clusters, 36, 37, 40, 41 coding, 173 cognition, 71, 93, 108 cognitive development, 112 cognitive effort, 167 cognitive process, 10 cognitive processes, 10 cognitive tool, 94 cohort, 144 collaboration, 69, 94, 172 Columbia, 45, 47 commitment, 86, 89, 110, 168, 169, 179 common rule, 174, 177 communication, viii, ix, 19, 42, 81, 100, 103, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 125, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 140, 141, 142 communities, 13, 121 community, x, 54, 81, 82, 94, 106, 110, 145, 155, 159, 163, 164, 165, 167, 168, 172, 173, 175, 176, 178, 180, 181, 182 Community, 23 community(ies), 121 Comparative Fit Index, 14 competence, 21, 54, 60, 63, 67, 68, 70, 144, 168 competency, 144 competition, 63 competitiveness, 98 complex, 7, 9, 13, 18, 128, 135 complexity, 8, 59, 66, 79 compliance, 41 components, 53, 73, 76, 77, 92, 98, 99, 108, 124, 161, 175 composition, 121, 143 comprehension, 47, 88 computer, 118

Index concept, 21, 135 Concept Maps, 152, 153, 160 conception, vii, 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 23, 26, 28, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 53, 62, 146, 153, 167 conceptions, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 concrete, 106, 107 conduct, viii, 7, 17, 97, 151, 169, 175 confidence, 11, 18, 59, 62, 65, 74, 78, 84, 86, 103, 108, 126 confidence interval, 126 conflict, 2, 179 conformity, 40, 175 confound, 15 consensus, 143, 155, 159 consequence, 13, 26 consequences, 6, 48, 139 construction, vii, 3, 10, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 63, 69, 81, 139, 166 constructivist learning, 116 consumer, 19, 20 consumers, 100 content, vii, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 20, 120, 128 content knowledge, viii, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 92, 93, 94, 145, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 152, 155, 156, 157, 161 context, vii, viii, 3, 4, 12, 13, 21, 22, 41, 43, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 73, 74, 75, 77, 80, 86, 88, 117, 121, 122, 125, 135, 137, 144, 151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 159, 167, 169, 178, 181 contexts, 48, 119, 121 control, 11, 80, 109, 127, 130, 134, 139, 168 conviction, 11 coping, 9, 63, 67 core, 41 correlation, ix, 29, 74, 79, 102, 113, 115, 116, 118, 124, 125, 131, 133, 134, 136 correlation coefficient, 135, 136 corruption, 20 coverage, 88 covering, 12, 118, 121 creative writing, 156 creativity, 7, 67 credibility, 74, 91, 92, 112 credit, 90 crime, 20 critical analysis, 181 critical thinking, 107 cross-validation, 43 CSE, 46 CSF, ix, 142

185

cultural, 18, 42 cultural values, 117 culture, viii, 11, 51, 70, 77, 82, 85, 86, 89, 92, 93, 94, 117, 118, 121, 122, 137, 138, 166 cultures, 117, 119, 121 curriculum, vii, viii, ix, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 26, 28, 29, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 53, 55, 70, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 92, 94, 95, 97, 106, 111, 112, 116, 137, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 164, 166, 167, 171, 181, 182 curriculum development, 10, 74 curriculum knowledge, 78, 79, 85, 145, 146, 150, 152, 158 cycles, 56, 57

D danger, 170 data analysis, 45, 56 data collection, 56, 118, 133, 135 data set, 14, 40 database, 18 decision, 8 decision making, 70, 167, 168 decision-making, 8 decision-making process, 8, 144 decisions, 61, 75, 83, 143, 169, 177 definition, 83, 98, 165, 167 demand, 136, 182 democracy, viii, 97, 180 demographic characteristics, 22 density, 153 dependent, 6, 118 dependent variable, 118 deprivation, 4 designers, 106 desire, 103 detachment, 54 developed countries, ix, 115, 117 developing countries, 114, 117 development, 3, 10, 12, 13, 20, 38, 41, 43, 129, 138, 140 Development, 18, 30, 31, 36, 48 deviation, 15, 126, 127, 134, 136 devolution, 13 dialogue, 138 differences, ix, 14, 15, 29, 115, 119, 126, 127, 128, 134, 135, 136, 140 differentiation, 84 digital footage, 156

Index

186

dimensions, 18, 37, 45, 116, 117, 118, 119, 121, 127, 128, 129, 133, 134, 135, 139 direct observation, viii, 115 disaster, 99 discipline, 26, 58, 64, 74, 75, 76, 77, 116, 130, 144, 147, 168 discourse, 81, 139, 168 discrimination, 20 disposition, 98 dissatisfaction, 103 distance education, 141, 161 distribution, 23, 36, 123 diversity, 121, 138, 139 division, 138 domain, 5, 75, 76, 118, 152, 164, 166, 167, 176 dominance, viii, 115 drawings, 79, 80 drive, 45 dualism, 40

E economic, 4, 11, 22 economic status, 8, 18, 22, 23 education, 3, 5, 12, 16, 17, 18, 35, 37, 40, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 120, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140 Education, 1, 5, 12, 13, 22, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 education reform, 139 educational assessment, 35, 46 educational practices, 175 educational process, 3, 5, 13 educational psychology, 43, 48 educational research, 46, 85, 178 educational settings, 144 educational system, 134, 157 effective, 3, 9, 14, 16, 18, 37, 41, 46 elaboration, 76 electricity, 122 electrolyte, 153 elementary (primary) school, vii, 1, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 35, 40, 46, 48 elementary school, 48, 103, 104, 105, 111, 114, 171, 178 elementary teachers, 103, 104, 105, 108, 112, 113, 114 emotion, 18, 98, 99 emotional well-being, 64 emotions, 168, 176 empathy, 170, 176 empirical research, 7, 12 employment, 12, 17, 157 empowerment, 168, 179

encouragement, ix, 78, 86, 105, 115, 116, 118, 127, 128, 131, 133, 134, 137 energy, 20, 139, 156, 170 England, 5, 6, 13, 139, 140 English, 1, 6, 43, 45, 120 English Language, 57, 58, 60, 61, 64 English language proficiency, 121 enthusiasm, 103 environment, viii, 3, 11, 20, 21, 64, 65, 77, 81, 101, 105, 110, 115, 116, 117, 118, 124, 132, 138, 139, 140, 164, 165, 169, 174, 176 Environment, 28 EPA, 67 epistemology, 5, 40, 49 equilibrium, 54, 55 equipment, 5, 77, 91, 103 equity, 122, 134 estimating, 14, 44 ethics, 170, 171, 172, 173, 180 ethnicity, 23, 117 etiquette, 180 evaluation, 3, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 80, 86, 139 everyday life, 94, 107, 173, 176 evidence, x, 3, 5, 10, 11, 13, 44, 65, 77, 92, 146, 157, 161, 163, 165, 175 examinations, 4, 6, 7, 18 exercise, viii, 59, 67, 115, 119, 130 expectation, viii, 85, 97, 98 Expectations, 47 expertise, 74, 91, 160 experts, 18, 74, 89, 92, 135 expression, 106, 110, 130 external environment, 11 external locus of control, 11 extraction, 13, 19

F facial expression, 64, 98, 130 Factor, viii, 14, 17, 31, 32, 34, 115, 123, 124 factor analyses, vii, 1, 5, 14, 23, 124 factor analysis, 12, 13, 14, 15, 29, 37, 45, 46, 48, 124, 125, 133 factors, vii, ix, 1, 4, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 24, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 44, 45, 115, 122, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 132, 133, 136, 137, 138, 139 factual knowledge, 98 failure, 11, 59, 81, 167, 179 faith, 180 family, 11, 110, 114 family factors, 11 fatigue, 59

Index feedback, 3, 8, 16, 40, 56, 59, 65, 68, 74, 78, 79, 82, 84, 160 feelings, viii, 62, 83, 97, 100, 104, 105, 168, 169, 170, 176, 178 female, ix, 22, 115, 119, 120, 121, 127, 129, 130, 134, 137 females, 119, 120, 140 financial resources, 111 Finland, 163 flexibility, 61 focusing, 56, 79, 85, 88, 109, 175, 176, 178 food, 143 formal reasoning, 107 framework, 46 framing, vii, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 150 free, 12 free recall, 136 freedom, 119, 132, 166 frequency, 43 Frequency, 22, 23

G GCE, 128 gender, viii, 8, 18, 97, 112, 113, 117, 119, 122, 126, 127, 128, 130, 134, 138, 140 gender differences, 119, 126, 127, 128, 134 gender effects, 138 gender equity, 122, 134 gene, 22 general education, 53 generalization, 45, 118 generation, 76 girls, 122, 134 global village, ix, 141, 142 goals, 4, 10, 11, 12, 35, 77, 78, 83, 84, 116, 153, 154, 158, 159, 164, 166, 167, 169, 170, 174, 175, 177, 178 Goodness of Fit, 14 governance, 12 government, 12, 119, 120, 122, 136, 137, 139 grades, 6, 7, 41, 119, 171 grading, 46 gradings, 135 Greece, 140 greed, 28, 37, 38 grouping, 119 groups, 6, 7, 36, 81, 90, 107, 109, 128, 129, 131, 134, 136, 144 growth, 52, 53, 67, 70, 71, 90, 111, 166, 168 guidance, 74, 81, 82, 83, 92, 168, 169 guidelines, 12, 47, 55, 77, 166

187

H hands, 82, 106, 107 happiness, 130 heat, 139 height, 68 helplessness, 58 high school, 103, 107, 113, 140, 150 higher education, 44, 47, 53 hip, 91 Hong Kong, 44, 45, 51, 55, 57, 72 host, 179 human behavior, 179

I ideas, 9, 74, 77, 79, 80, 81, 83, 85, 86, 89, 92, 101, 104, 106, 129, 145, 149, 151, 156, 167, 175, 179 identification, 15, 40 identity, 63, 168 idiosyncratic, 2 images, 156 imagination, 111 implementation, 74, 80 inadmissible, 24, 26 incentive, 22 incidence, 130 inclusion, 152 independence, 118, 124 independent variable, 118 India, 111 indicators, 13, 109, 118, 136 indices, 43 indigenous, 121 individual character, 171 individual characteristics, 171 individual development, 10 individual differences, 46, 63, 65 individual students, 101, 111, 118, 129, 132 individualism, 3 individuality, 173, 176, 178 indoctrination, 165, 170 Indonesia, 117 influence, viii, ix, 2, 10, 11, 21, 47, 60, 63, 81, 84, 97, 100, 101, 103, 105, 106, 109, 110, 115, 116, 122, 139 initiation, 11 innovation, 41, 86 innovations, 11, 13 input, 67 insight, 29, 104 inspections, 12

Index

188

institutions, 117, 121, 137, 168, 169 instruction, ix, 2, 3, 6, 16, 20, 35, 45, 46, 76, 79, 93, 101, 104, 105, 107, 108, 142, 165 instructional procedures, 76 instructors, 18 instruments, viii, 5, 11, 14, 15, 21, 23, 45, 115, 118, 122, 126, 166 Instruments, 15, 120, 122 integrity, 88, 166, 169 intellect, 9 intelligence, 20 intensity, 54 intent, 10, 18 intentions, 9, 18, 40, 149, 150, 154, 156, 158, 160, 161, 171, 175 interaction, ix, 8, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 60, 64, 69, 88, 100, 107, 115, 140, 171 interactions, 82, 84, 88, 90, 109, 116, 117, 118, 138, 164 interest, 11, 68, 99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 106, 109, 136, 182 interference, 125 internal consistency, viii, 25, 26, 27, 115, 118, 124 internalization, 76 internet, 1 interpersonal relations, 91, 138, 164, 177 interpersonal relationships, 164, 177 interpersonal skills, 170 interpretation, 29, 56, 71, 139, 166, 173, 176 interpreting, 5 Interval, 126 intervention, 81, 83, 84, 136, 165 interventions, 41 interview, 5, 55, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 116, 151, 157 intimacy, 173, 177 intuition, 7 investment, 105 Iran, 180 Ireland, 160 isolation, 43, 54, 166 issues, 35, 41, 43, 45 iteration, 80

J Jones, Bill, 2, 3, 11, 35, 44 justice, x, 163, 165, 176

K knowledge, viii, x, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 19, 20, 43, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 88, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 100, 101, 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 111, 112, 113, 116, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 180 knowledge acquisition, 70 knowledge of pupils, 145, 150, 152, 155, 158 Kuwait, 112

L lack of confidence, 103 language, ix, 12, 45, 58, 59, 61, 66, 76, 78, 103, 117, 120, 121, 133, 139, 141, 142, 166, 168 language policy, 66 language proficiency, 121 language skills, 12 lead, 41, 73, 86, 92, 102, 106, 108 leadership, 11, 63, 81, 86, 101, 138, 169, 172 learners, viii, 2, 9, 10, 18, 75, 78, 80, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 110, 142, 152, 156, 157, 167 learning, vii, viii, x, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 120, 122, 124, 128, 131, 132, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 171, 174, 176, 177, 180, 181 learning environment, viii, 20, 101, 109, 111, 112, 115, 116, 117, 124, 132, 138, 139, 140, 164 learning goals, 78, 83, 84 learning log, 143, 149, 150, 153, 158, 160, 161 learning outcomes, 8, 41, 47, 78, 82, 83, 84, 88, 89, 90, 116 learning process, 8, 109, 122 learning styles, 136, 156 learning task, 8 legislation, 12 lens, 143, 181 lesson plan, 61, 66, 152

Index liberal education, 146 life experiences, 57 likelihood, 13, 19, 29 limitation, 118 links, 110, 161 listening, 166 literacy, 1, 12, 18, 43, 47, 95, 98, 111, 112, 121 literature, 7, 35, 116, 119, 132, 135, 140 local community, 167, 176 location, 8, 117 Locke, 40, 46 locus, 11 logic, 139 love, 60, 63, 100 loyalty, 90

M Mainland China, 57 Malaysia, 117, 139, 140 male, ix, 115, 119, 120, 121, 127, 129, 130, 134, 137 males, 119, 120, 130 management, 10, 12, 77, 81, 86, 92, 101, 106, 109 manipulation, 108 mapping, 9, 146, 150, 155 market, ix, 141, 142, 144, 146, 161, 162 markets, ix, 141, 142 mastery, 102 material resources, 111 mathematics, 2, 7, 11, 12, 42, 44, 47, 48, 74, 94, 112, 114, 138, 139 mathematics tests, 12 matrix, 43 meals, 58 mean, 15, 18, 29, 35, 37, 41, 118, 119, 120, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 133, 134, 136 Mean, 14, 18, 33, 126, 127, 128 meanings, 52, 53, 57, 66, 175 measurement, 1, 5, 7, 15, 16, 17, 43, 46, 47, 48, 107 measures, 5, 14, 16, 17, 22, 35 media, 156 mediation, 66, 76 membership, 125, 133, 167, 168 memory, 9 mentor, 43, 71, 152, 161 mentoring, 55, 70, 71, 72 meta analysis, 140 meta-analysis, 47 metaphor, 66 methodology, 5, 45 Michigan, 7 Ministry of Education, 12, 13, 22, 46, 48, 93, 100 misconceptions, 160

189

mode, 108, 144, 168 modeling, 43, 45, 46, 81, 83, 91 modelling, 14 models, 2, 3, 5, 8, 14, 15, 23, 43, 47, 53, 76, 79, 95, 143, 156 modules, 144 molecular modelling, 156 molecular structure, 156 money, 91 monitoring, 86, 160 monograph, 42 moral behavior, 179 moral development, 165, 181 moral judgment, 175 morale, 81 morality, ix, 163, 164 morning, 90 mother tongue, 57, 66 motion, 165 motivation, 2, 7, 11, 40, 81, 106, 109, 110, 111, 139, 148 multicultural education, vii

N narratives, 179 national, 12, 13, 35, 41, 43, 44, 120, 136, 138 National Research Council, 35, 46 needs, 7, 16, 20, 29, 40, 61, 76, 79, 83, 85, 90, 92, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 117, 137, 141, 144, 145, 147, 158, 160, 161, 162, 165, 168, 171, 177 negative attitudes, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109 negative experiences, 59 negotiation, 68 Nelson, 2, 7, 47 Netherlands, 94 New Orleans, 138 New Zealand, vii, 1, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 19, 21, 22, 23, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 73, 80, 93, 94 noise, 130 non-verbal, ix, 115, 116, 118, 120, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 137 North America, 117 nursing, ix, 141, 142

O objectives, 6, 10, 13, 17, 20 Objectives, 28 obligation, viii, 97 observation, 131

Index

190

observations, 107, 116, 117, 119, 121, 130, 134, 135, 136 optimal performance, 178 optimism, 11, 178 organization, ix, 103, 142, 167, 168 orientation, vii, 2, 8, 10, 15, 37, 40, 76, 106, 137, 142, 162, 166, 179 outline, 160 ownership, 80, 86, 110, 116, 136

P Pacific, 71, 72, 160, 180 parental influence, vii, 109 parents, viii, 87, 89, 97, 109, 122, 169, 171, 174 partnership, viii, 51, 69, 91, 110 pathways, 144 pedagogical content knowledge, viii, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 83, 84, 92, 93, 94, 144, 145, 146, 151, 152, 155, 157, 158, 161 pedagogical knowledge, 75, 77, 145, 150, 151, 152, 155, 156, 157, 158, 160, 161, 162 pedagogy, ix, 6, 62, 65, 67, 70, 75, 76, 93, 138, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 158, 171 peer assessment, 157 peer influence, viii, 97, 109 peer review, 143 peers, 53, 58, 99, 109, 110, 116 perception, 21, 40, 121, 126, 131, 134, 136, 137, 140 perceptions, viii, 44, 70, 101, 103, 109, 111, 113, 115, 118, 119, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 137, 139, 168 performance, 5, 6, 13, 15, 16, 17 permit, 40, 107 personal relations, 109 personal relationship, 64 personal values, 52, 170 personality, viii, 40, 44, 60, 97, 98, 101, 109, 111 personality dimensions, 44 personality traits, 98 perspective, 9, 15, 18, 19, 36, 38, 52, 71, 76, 77, 85, 95, 138, 150, 167, 181 Perth, 138, 139 physical activity, 98 physics, 103, 113 pilot study, 121 planning, 74, 83, 84, 86, 87, 88, 90, 143, 151, 154, 159, 171 plausibility, 148 policies, 2, 12, 41 policy, 12, 13, 35, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48 Policy, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47 politics, 167

pollution, 20 poor, 4, 11, 13, 19, 21, 23, 24, 26, 29, 59, 103, 108, 121 poor performance, 59 popular movies, 156 population, 20, 22, 23, 119, 120, 121, 143 portfolio, 90, 157, 161 portfolios, 80, 83, 143, 162 positive attitudes, viii, 81, 97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109 positive correlation, 136 positive feedback, 61, 65 positive relation, 82, 100, 105 positive relationship, 82 post-hoc analysis, 125 posture, 60 power, 6, 14, 40, 138, 171 practical knowledge, 54, 57, 60, 63, 64, 65, 180 prediction, 45, 113 predictors, 169 preference, 2, 106, 130 prejudice, 35 preparation, ix, 4, 5, 47, 61, 70, 104, 108, 109, 112, 114, 141, 142, 144 Preparation, 43 preservice teacher education, 70 preservice teachers, 112, 156, 157, 158, 159 pressure, 164 primary, vii, 1, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 28, 35, 40, 43, 46, 47 primary school, vii, 1, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 35, 40, 46, 73, 76, 82, 91, 92, 94, 95, 108 primary schools, 6, 12, 13, 21, 23, 46, 76, 91 principal component analysis, 18 principle, x, 81, 112, 163, 165 prior knowledge, 9, 136 probe, 19 problem solving, 8, 80, 93 problem-based learning, 143 problem-solving, 80, 107, 176 problem-solving skills, 176 problem-solving task, 80 procedural knowledge, 77, 79, 84 procedures, 35 processes, 80, 85, 144 producers, 100 production, ix, 141, 142, 157, 161 professional development, vii, viii, 12, 13, 41, 43, 51, 52, 62, 67, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 81, 82, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 110, 166, 169 professional growth, 55, 67 professional teacher, 143, 144 professionalism, 3, 6, 46, 87, 164, 169

Index professions, 144 program, 15, 71, 112, 125, 136, 142, 147, 172 programs, ix, 116 promote, 116, 136 psychology, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49 psychometric properties, 19 psychopathology, 14 public opinion, vii publishers, 35 pupil, 43, 63, 106, 165 pupils, 149, 150, 151, 155, 158

Q qualifications, ix, 6, 12, 13, 17, 101, 108, 115, 149 qualitative differences, 46 qualitative research, 71 quality assurance, 12 quantitative research, 139 questioning, 9, 78, 85, 92, 116, 151

R R&D, see research and development, 1 race, 117, 121, 181 racial, 20 radical, 12 random assignment, 136 range, viii, 6, 19, 25, 36, 40, 65, 66, 73, 74, 75, 76, 84, 100, 107, 111, 124, 125, 130, 135, 143, 144, 148, 152, 157 rating scale, 16 ratings, 43 rational, 10, 20 reading, 1, 10, 45, 66, 143, 160, 173 reading skills, 10 reality, 9, 54, 64 reasoning, 18, 41, 75, 102, 107, 168, 170, 175, 181 recall, 2, 8, 42, 88, 129, 133, 136, 150 recognition, vii, 51, 64, 69, 151 reconstruction, vii, 1, 9, 15, 19, 29, 37, 53, 57, 60, 62, 152 reflection, 52, 53, 69, 70, 80, 92, 153, 158, 162, 166, 167, 168, 170, 178, 180, 181 reflective practice, 86 reforms, 12, 166 regression, 132, 135 regulation, 71 reinforcement, 116 relational, 2

191

relationship, 6, 42, 44, 47, 48, 53, 54, 56, 58, 60, 63, 64, 65, 68, 74, 81, 86, 90, 91, 92, 99, 103, 104, 109, 110, 112, 114, 118, 135, 142, 148, 180 relationships, 14, 15, 57, 67, 68, 93, 131, 135, 139, 140, 167, 176, 177 relevance, 63, 80, 100, 102, 116, 136 reliability, viii, 19, 45, 115, 118, 119, 122, 124, 132, 133, 135, 173 religion, 117 remembering, 3, 9, 106 report, 13, 14, 43, 48, 132, 134, 136 reproduction, 8, 35, 168 research, viii, 1, 5, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 23, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 115, 117, 118, 119, 132, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139 research and development, 1 resilience, 11 Resilience, 11 resistance, 10, 13 resolution, 41 resources, 6, 11, 77, 91, 105, 108, 148, 160, 167, 169 response, 15, 19, 29, 35, 121, 129, 130 response format, 15, 121 responsibility, 10, 11, 12, 13, 65, 86, 105, 148, 160, 166, 174, 177, 182 responsiveness, 106 restructuring, 9 retention, 6 rewards, 9, 67, 68, 109, 139 rhythm, 59 risk, 58, 59, 60, 64, 65, 81, 85, 92, 159, 160 risk-taking, 159 RMSEA, 14, 16, 19, 24, 26, 27, 29 robustness, 14 role plays, 156 routines, 109 Ryan, Jack, 116

S sample, viii, 5, 14, 21, 22, 40, 41, 43, 68, 97, 100, 120, 124, 127, 133, 135 Sample, 14, 22 sampling, 23 satisfaction, 62, 67, 68 SC, 47 Scandinavia, 9 scheduling, 58 school, vii, viii, ix, x, 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 35, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 81, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100,

192

Index

102, 103, 104, 105, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 124, 125, 126, 128, 131, 132, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 145, 146, 147, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 181 school climate, 138 school community, ix, x, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 171, 176, 178 school culture, 11, 85, 92, 102, 164 school knowledge, 145, 150, 154, 159 schooling, 3, 5, 6, 12, 61, 71, 95, 165 school-wide change, viii, 73, 74 science, viii, 46, 73, 77, 78, 82, 85, 87, 88, 92, 93, 94, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 143, 146, 148, 150, 152, 157, 160, 161, 162 science curriculum, 150 science education, 93 scientific knowledge, 102 scientists, 143, 156 scores, vii, 1, 6, 13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 29, 36, 41, 48, 121, 124 Scores, vii, 1, 6, 13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 29, 36, 41, 48, 121, 124 search, 160, 175, 181 searching, 154 second order, 14 secondary, viii, 1, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 42, 43, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 127, 132, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140 secondary schools, 43, 76, 100, 104, 121, 139, 140, 147, 150 secondary sector, 13, 22 secondary students, viii, 42, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 133, 135, 139 security, 64, 68 selecting, 84, 148 selection, 5, 6, 11, 12 self, vii, x, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 20, 21, 22, 43, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 81, 85, 101, 103, 106, 114, 163, 165, 170, 171, 174, 176, 178, 179 self esteem, 176 self-awareness, 69 self-concept, 9, 52 self-confidence, 18 self-discipline, 178 self-efficacy, 3, 4, 5, 9, 11, 21 self-esteem, x, 18, 68, 81, 163, 165, 176 self-image, 52, 59

self-regard, 170 self-worth, 178 sensitivity, 176 series, 11, 12, 55, 78, 80, 83, 84, 88, 124, 148 SES, 23 sex differences, 134, 138 shade, 86 shape, 166 shaping, 53, 56, 66, 69, 101 sharing, 83, 86, 164, 169, 171 shock, 70 shortage, 20 sign, 110, 121 significance level, 134 similarity, ix, 29, 142 Singapore, 117, 138, 139 sites, 55 situation, 117, 121, 128, 130, 136 skills, 1, 5, 9, 10, 12, 16, 20, 46, 47, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 93, 102, 107, 111, 112, 113, 139, 141, 143, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 153, 154, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162, 164, 167, 168, 174, 175, 177 smiles, 120 social attitudes, 113 social behaviour, 175 social change, 10, 18, 40 social class, 117 social competence, 164 social context, 117, 122, 166 social environment, 139 social norms, 164 social psychology, 111 social roles, 119 social sciences, 45 social situations, 98 socialization, 168 socio-economic status, 8, 18, 23 software, 14, 15, 42 solidarity, 167 South Africa, viii, 97, 99, 100 spectrum, 38, 178 speech, 171 sports, 63, 65 SPSS, 14, 124, 125 stability, 48 staff, 12, 45, 137 staff development, 45, 137 stages, 80 standard deviation, 14, 15, 25, 26, 126, 127, 134, 136 Standard Deviation, 126, 127, 128 standard error, 7 standards, 6, 13, 17, 43, 46, 144, 170, 174 stasis, 67

Index statistics, 23, 29 stereotype, vii, 1, 40 stoichiometry, 152 strategies, 2, 9, 10, 42, 72, 74, 75, 76, 79, 83, 89, 106, 107, 109, 117, 140, 152, 153, 156, 172 strength, vii, 1, 8, 14, 29, 56, 63, 88 stress, 11, 20, 105, 175 structural changes, 12 structural equation modeling, 43, 45, 46 structuring, viii, x, 51, 69, 163, 165, 175 student achievement, 9, 11, 21, 102, 112 student development, 81 student learning, 74, 77, 79, 83, 84, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 94 student motivation, 2, 7, 11 student populations, 164, 181 student teacher, vii, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 64, 68, 69, 71, 72, 111, 142, 158 student teachers, 142 students, viii, ix, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 38, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 86, 87, 89, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 164, 166, 167, 168, 169, 171, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 182 students’ ideas, 129, 151, 158, 160 students’ understanding, 129 study, viii, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 124, 125, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139 subject knowledge, 74, 75, 78 supervision, 42, 55, 58, 59, 61, 72, 168 supervisor, 55, 58, 60, 61, 67, 72, 152, 161 supervisors, 55, 58, 59, 61 switching, 58 Sydney, 48 synthesis, 48, 101, 112, 175 systems, ix, 35, 40, 41, 86, 114, 141, 142, 166

T Taiwan, 117, 118, 132, 133, 135, 140 taxonomy, 9, 19 teacher attitudes, 48, 105 teacher development, 73, 89, 90, 92, 94 teacher education, ix, 75, 93, 142, 143, 144, 147, 162 teacher effectiveness, 3, 41, 100, 101, 114

193

teacher preparation, 72, 93, 108 teacher support, 79 teacher training, vii, 18, 43, 103, 109, 137, 144 teachers, vii, viii, ix, x, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59, 64, 68, 69, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147, 152, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 teaching, vii, ix, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 114, 117, 121, 122, 127, 128, 130, 131, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 162, 165, 166, 167, 169, 170, 171, 172, 180, 181, 182 teaching abilities, ix, 141, 142 teaching chemistry, ix, 142, 145, 146, 147, 149, 152, 153, 162 teaching experience, 57, 58, 61, 64, 67, 68, 107, 152 teaching strategies, 60, 100, 106, 111, 148, 152, 156, 160 team members, 91 technology, viii, 10, 20, 73, 74, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 103, 139, 140, 148 technology education, viii, 73, 74, 77, 79, 82, 83, 91, 92, 94, 95 tension, 54, 55, 59 tertiary, 1, 2, 12, 18, 117, 121, 135, 137 tertiary education, 121 test items, 120, 123 textbooks, 160 Theories, 48 theory, 11, 42, 47, 48, 72, 76, 93, 113, 118, 161, 180, 181 think critically, 165 thinking, 10, 16, 18, 20, 29, 43, 47, 58, 59, 63, 71, 77, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 106, 129, 133, 135, 136, 144, 158, 167, 171, 180 threat, 59 threats, 59

Index

194

time, 7, 10, 12, 19, 21, 81, 82, 88, 90, 91, 103, 106, 107, 109, 116, 129, 136, 139, 152, 153, 170, 179 TPI, 18, 47 tracking, 6 tradition, 174 traditional, 2, 3, 7, 13, 29, 40, 46, 122, 134, 136 traditions, 11 trainees, 7, 8 training, vii, ix, 13, 18, 22, 26, 41, 43, 51, 53, 56, 57, 63, 65, 116, 137, 144 training programs, ix, 116 traits, 15 transformation, 28, 35, 63, 76, 146 transition, 13 translation, 70 transmission, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 18, 29, 35, 37 treatment, 15, 121 trend, 118 trial, 82, 141, 160, 161 triangulation, 55 trust, 85, 130, 131, 169, 174 Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), 14

149, 150, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 181, 182 variability, 135 variable, 109, 118, 133 variables, viii, 14, 40, 79, 83, 97, 100, 101, 118, 125, 128, 132, 139 variance, 16, 24, 26, 37, 116, 118, 123, 124, 125, 131, 132, 133, 135 variation, 125 varimax rotation, 124 vein, 3 Venn Diagrams, 153, 160 village, ix, 121, 141, 142 vision, 166, 169, 172, 179, 180 visual images, 156 visual media, 156 vocabulary, 61, 78, 84 vocational education, 144 voice, 98

U

wait-time, 129 Wales, 111 water, 121, 156 wealth, 53 welfare, 166 women, 103 words, 8, 11, 15, 16, 37, 41, 103, 108, 119, 140, 171 work, viii, ix, x, 5, 9, 17, 18, 21, 29, 46, 51, 52, 55, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 68, 69, 73, 74, 76, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 94, 106, 109, 111, 117, 129, 130, 135, 140, 144, 153, 156, 163, 164, 166, 169, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 179, 180, 181 workers, 121 workload, 8, 15, 59, 64 worry, 67 writing, 61, 68, 106, 156, 166

UK, 44, 45, 48, 71, 93, 94, 144, 180 UK, see United Kingdom, 44, 45, 48 uncertainty, 83, 179 unfair to students, 17 United Kingdom, 162 units of analysis, 118, 124, 125, 131, 132, 133 universities, ix, 142 university, ix, 142, 146, 161

V validation, 43, 44, 48, 55, 114 validity, viii, 39, 41, 42, 115, 118, 119, 122, 124, 125, 133, 135 values, ix, x, 2, 6, 14, 15, 29, 36, 41, 52, 59, 105, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 141, 142, 145, 146, 148,

W