10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Professionalization Of Teachers To Support Digitally Supported Inquiry Learning In Heterogeneous Classes
Patrizia Weidenhiller, Susanne Miesera, Claudia Nerdel
Technical University of Munich, Associate Professorship of Life Sciences Education
Presenting Author: Weidenhiller, Patrizia
Inclusion and digitization are key issues in the professionalization of teachers. The heterogeneity of students in inclusive classes brings different needs of learners. Consequently, instruction needs concepts that enable all students to participate, especially in science classes and its specific processes and procedures such as inquiry learning. Inquiry learning is an active method of learning that involves posing questions, problems, or scenarios and scientific methods such as conducting experiments. Many barriers can arise in this complex process (Baur, 2018; Stinken-Rösner & Abels, 2021). The use of digital media can enable access and avoid barriers through multimedia design (Kerres, 2018). In order to effectively use digital media to promote inquiry learning and reduce barriers, teachers need professional knowledge and competencies. The TPACK model describes teachers' professional knowledge as the interplay of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Besides professional knowledge, there are other factors that influence teaching actions. These include attitudes, motivation, and self-regulation (Baumert & Kunter, 2006). Looking more closely at attitudes, it appears that positive attitudes, along with high self-efficacy expectations, are an important predictor of planned behaviour (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). For example, teachers with positive attitudes toward inclusion teach more effectively for all students (Jordan et al., 2009). Positive attitudes and high self-efficacy are also shown to be predictors of inclusive teaching (Sharma & Jacobs, 2016). Furthermore, participation in courses on inclusion is shown to have a positive impact on attitudes toward inclusion (Sharma, 2012; Miesera & Gebhardt, 2018; Miesera & Will, 2017). In the topic area of digitalization, teachers' attitudes are also shown to be crucial for its use in the classroom (Eickelmann & Vennemann, 2017). All these findings indicate that attitudes and self-efficacy expectations are important factors for the implementation of both inclusive teaching and the use of digital media. However, in order to apply these general statements about inclusive teaching and media use to subject-specific issues such as inquiry learning, the topics must be considered in conjunction with each other. The aim of the study is to train teachers specifically for the use of digital media in heterogeneous classes in biology education. On the one hand, the question arises whether the targeted transfer of knowledge about the areas of inclusion and digitization in an intervention has an effect on the professional knowledge of the teachers in the TPACK domains. On the other hand, the attitudes of the teachers towards the topics of inclusion and digitization are to be investigated. This leads to the question which correlations exist between the self-assessment in the TPACK domains and the attitudes towards inclusion and digitization.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study design consists of a teacher training with pre and post survey. Biology teachers of German secondary schools take part in a one-day digital teacher training dealing with "digital supported inquiry learning for all students". The training aims at increasing teachers' professional knowledge according to the TPACK model (Mishra & Köhler, 2006). Therefore, teachers plan and perform an experiment on the enzymatic browning of apples, which is digitally supported in all phases (planning, implementation, evaluation). In addition, they take into account the needs of students and elaborate possible barriers. The outcome of the training is a planned experiment supported by digital media to differentiate the phases of the inquiry process. Participants are randomly assigned to three experimental groups. The experimental groups differ in the instruction phases in advance of the work phase. The first group focusses on the design of digital media, media didactics and the use of digital media in science teaching. The second group focuses on approaches to inclusive didactics, concepts for differentiation and their implementation in science lessons. The last group has an integrated format for the instructions. This includes the mentioned aspects of digital media from the first experimental group as well as the aspects of differentiation of the control group. The pre-post survey contains scales about teachers’ attitudes towards digitalisation and inclusion. The scale attitudes towards digitalization addresses different aspects of learning with digital media like anchoring in the curriculum, influence on the teaching level and on the student`s activity (Vogelsang, Finger, Laumann, & Thyssen, 2019). The scale attitudes towards inclusion contains two main constructs “schooling and support” and “social inclusion” (Kunz, Luder, & Moretti, 2010). Furthermore, the survey covers self-efficacy assumptions regarding inclusion and digitalisation in accordance with the TPACK model (modified according to Graham et al., 2009). For this purpose, the TPACK scales of Graham et al. (2009) were modified and adapted to the content of the intervention. The pilot study with 60 participants shows very good reliabilities of the scales (α > .812). The intervention took place from June 2021 to January 2022 as one day teacher trainings. A total of 141 Bavarian secondary school biology teachers (70% female) were trained in small groups of up to ten people.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsA Rasch analysis was performed to determine the quality of the scales, carried out with Winsteps software. The reliabilities (> 0.8) and separation indices (> 2) for all scales are quite satisfactory, except for the item separation reliability of the TCK scale, which is slightly below the desired values. To compare pretest and posttest results, the item difficulty of the pretest was anchored and then the person ability was calculated on the posttest. The person abilities were compared between the measurements using a t-test with connected samples. The t-tests were performed with IBM SPSS. With the exception of the TK scale, there are significant improvement in teacher ratings in attitudes towards inclusion (t = 2.840; p = 0.006; n = 52), attitudes towards digitalization (t = 2.795; p = 0.007; n = 52) and the TPACK scales (TPACK: t = 5.294; p < 0.001; n = 52; TCK: t = 2.772; p = 0.008, n = 52; TPK: t = 2.274, p = 0.027, n = 52) after the intervention. We conclude the effectiveness of the intervention to support teachers’ professional knowledge to use digital media in teaching in general and especially for inquiry learning in heterogeneous classes. However, there are no significant differences between the three experimental groups. This shows that the influence of theoretical discussion is too small compared to other factors such as practical work and discussion about implementation using real subject examples. A follow-up survey will provide more information about the actual use of digital media for differentiation in the classroom and show whether there is a difference due to the knowledge input after the application of the learned contents. In summary, the study shows how teachers can be effectively prepared for experimenting with digital media in heterogeneous groups through practical training.
ReferencesBaumert, J. & Kunter, M., (2006) Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 9(4). 469-520. DOI: 10.1007/s11618-006-0165-2.
Baur, A. (2018). Fehler, Fehlkonzepte und spezifische Vorgehensweisen von Schülerinnen und Schülern beim Experimentieren: Ergebnisse einer videogestützten Beobachtung. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 24(1), 115–129.
Eickelmann, B. & Vennemann, M. (2017). Teachers’ attitudes and beliefs regarding ICT in teaching and learning in European countries. European Educational Research Journal, 16(6), 733–761.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and Changing Behavior. The Reasoned Action Approach. New York, Hove: Psychology Press.
Graham et al. (2009) TPACK Development in Science Teaching: Measuring the TPACK Confidence of Inservice Science Teachers. TechTrends. 53 (5). 70-79.
Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for inclusive classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.010
Kerres, Michael (2018): Mediendidaktik. Konzeption und Entwicklung digitaler Lernangebote. 5. Aufl. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Kunz, A., Luder, R., & Moretti, M. (2010). Die Messung von Einstellungen zur Integration (E-ZI). Empirische Sonderpädagogik, 2, 83–94.
Miesera, S., & Gebhardt, M. (2018). Inklusive Didaktik in beruflichen Schulen - InkDibeS - ein Konzept für die Lehrerbildung: Videobasierte Fallkonstruktio-nen inklusiver Unterrichtssettings. In D. Buschfeld & M. Cleef (Eds.), Vielfalt des Lernens im Rahmen berufsbezogener Standards. QUA-LIS Schriftenreihe Beiträge zur Schulentwicklung. Münster, New York: Waxmann.
Miesera, S., & Will, S. (2017). Inklusive Didaktik in der Lehrerbildung – Erstellung und Einsatz von Unterrichtsvideos. Haushalt in Bildung und Forschung, 6(3), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.3224/hibifo.v6i3.05
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. A new framework for teacher knowledge. In: Teachers College Record 108 (6), S. 1017–1054.
Sharma, U. (2012). Changing Pre-Service Teachers’ Beliefs to Teach in Inclusive Classrooms in Victoria, Australia. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(10). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n10.6
Sharma, U., & Jacobs, D. K. (2016). Predicting in-service educators' intentions to teach in inclusive classrooms in India and Australia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.004
Stinken-Rösner, L., & Abels, S. (2021). Digitale Medien als Mittler im Spannungsfeld zwischen naturwissenschaftlichem Unterricht und inklusiver Pädagogik. In S. Hundertmark, X. Sun, S. Abels, A. Nehring, R. Schildknecht, V. Seremet, und C. Lindmeier (Eds.), Naturwissenschaften und Inklusion, 4. Beiheft Sonderpädagogische Förderung heute (S. 161–175). Weinheim Basel: Beltz Juventa.
Vogelsang, C., Finger, A., Laumann, D., & Thyssen, C. (2019). Onlinematerial zum Beitrag: Vorerfahrungen, Einstellungen und motivationale Orientierungen als mögliche Einflussfaktoren auf den Einsatz digitaler Werkzeuge im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht. Retrieved from https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1007%2Fs40573-019-00095-6/MediaObjects/40573_2019_95_MOESM1_ESM.docx
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Results Matter: A Reconstruction and Verification of the Theory on the Growth of Teacher Self-efficacy
Yangyong Ye1, Yue Yin2, Wei Wu3, Sheng Cui1
1Renmin University of China, China, People's Republic of; 2Jiangnan University; 3Educational Science Research Institute of Shenzhen
Presenting Author: Ye, Yangyong;
Cui, Sheng
This study proposes a new framework and verifies its propositions on how teacher self-efficacy (TSE) grows. Bandura (1977) proposed four sources of self-efficacy, including performance accomplishment, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological states. Most of the studies on the sources of TSE proceeded from the four-sources theory (Morris, Usher, & Chen, 2017; Usher & Pajares, 2008). However, the results of these studies remain empirically and theoretically unsatisfactory. We argue that the four-sources theory needs to be refined since there are overlaps and internal relations among the four sources. This is because Bandura did not differentiate the concepts of actions, outcomes, and the interpretation of outcomes in the selection of words describing the four sources.
The new framework clearly differentiate and definde actions, outcomes, and the interpretation of outcomes, specifically considering the characteristics of teaching activities. The framework is derived from social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1997), attribution theory (Weiner, 1985), and locus of control theory (Rotter, 1966). We define actions as goal-directed behaviors. Regarding TSE, it refers to any behavior with goals of improving teaching capability. Teaching-related actions include teaching, observing others teaching, reading materials on teaching, and listening to lectures on teaching. Outcomes are the consequences of actions (Bandura, 1997, p. 22; 2001, p. 6). We argue that outcomes are objective information that teachers derive from their actions. As a consequence of teaching-related actions, resultant, evaluative, knowledge, physical, and physiological outcomes are produced. Physical and knowledge information play an intermediary role, evaluative and physiological information play a supplementary role, and resultant information plays the final role in the growth of TSE. The interpretation of outcome information is the process that teachers attach meaning to this information.
The formation of TSE is a cognitive processing of information. Teachers combine various outcome information and make a judgment on their teaching capability. We argue that it takes three steps to reach a judgment of self-efficacy. These are goal comparison, attribution of discrepancy, and self-efficacy appraisal. The formation of TSE goes as this: Teachers take teaching-related actions, and “action will produce certain outcomes” (Bandura, 1977, p. 193), teachers process outcome information to form self-efficacy, which motivates them to take actions again (Bandura, 1988, 1997). The process above repeats until TSE is stabilized.
The first implication of the framework is that we should focus on outcome information, especially resultant information. Existing studies show that TSE is associated with students’ orderly behavior (Lee, Dedrick, & Smith, 1991; Newmann, Rutter, & Smith, 1989), student engagement (Depaepe & König, 2018; Guo, Justice, Sawyer, & Tompkins, 2011), student achievement (Guskey, 1987; Klassen & Tze, 2014). Second, we argue that the level of correspondence between TSE and resultant information in terms of teaching tasks is related to the strength of the relationship between the two. Third, many external factors influence educational goal attainment and TSE, including student abilities (Guskey, 1987; Raudenbush, Rowan, & Cheong, 1992), teaching resources (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2007), distributed and instructional leadership (Fackler & Malmberg, 2016; Liu, Bellibaş, & Gümüş, 2021).
We test the propositions using the Teaching and Learning International Survey 2018 (TALIS2018) data, which include most of the European countries (OECD, 2019). First, we choose the resultant information on students’ cognitive activation, teacher-student relation, and disciplinary climate. Second, we choose class autonomy as an external factor to demonstrate its impact on TSE. Third, TALIS provides information on TSE in classroom management, instruction, and student engagement, we test whether the level of correspondence between TSE and resultant information in terms of teaching tasks is related to the strength of the relationship between the two. Forth, we test the generality of relationships mentioned above across countries.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedWe use the OECD TALIS 2018 dataset to test the hypotheses elaborated above because it includes survey questions on TSE and other relevant variables (OECD, 2019). The TALIS 2018 data include teachers from 48 countries or economies, most of which are in Europe. At least a minimum sample of 200 schools were randomly drawn from each participating country or economy. At least a minimum of 20 teachers were randomly sampled from each participating school. The final dataset used in the study includes 46 countries or economies, with sample sizes ranging from 827 to 6439 teachers.
The method invented by Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) was used to measure TSE in the TALIS 2018 (Ainley & Carstens, 2018). Teaching tasks were categorized into three specific areas: classroom management, instruction, and student engagement. The variables on disciplinary climate, teacher-student relation, cognitive activation, classroom autonomy are latent variables, which were measured through expressed opinions on a set of items. These items were chosen based on theoretical underpinnings (Ainley & Carstens, 2018). The calculation of scores of the constructs went through internal consistent analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), measurement invariance testing, final scale modeling, and scale score computation.
A multilevel model was used for each country or economy because teachers were sampled via the two-strata strategy in the TALIS and teachers were clustered in schools (Snijders & Bosker, 2012). Specifically, this study uses the multilevel model to test the relationships between students’ cognitive activation, teacher-student relation, disciplinary climate, class autonomy and TSE. The dependent variable is TSE, including TSE in the three task areas. The independent variables of interest are teacher-student relation, cognitive activation, disciplinary climate, and class autonomy. Gender, teaching experience and its square are included as controlling variables. We only use a random intercept multilevel model without a random slope.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe empirical part of this study has made several contributions to the literature on TSE. First, the results of data analysis show that educational results, such as cognitive activation, supportive teacher-student relation, and disciplinary climate are significantly associated with the growth of TSE. Second, class autonomy is significantly associated with the growth of TSE.
Third, this study shows that specific resultant information has more predictive power on TSE in similar task areas. For example, resultant information on students’ cognitive activation has a stronger relationship with TSE in student engagement than TSE in classroom management, disciplinary climate shows a stronger negative association with TSE in classroom management than TSE in student engagement and instruction, and class autonomy has a stronger association with TSE in instruction than in classroom management and student engagement.
Forth, this study shows that TSE theory is cross-cultural. The theory of self-efficacy was created in the context of western culture. Much research was done in western countries (Fackler, Malmberg, & Sammons, 2021). It was debated whether or to what extent the theory is applicable to eastern culture (Yada et al., 2019). The findings of this study reveal that the development of TSE shares similar conclusions across different countries regardless of cultural orientations, with a few exceptions.
Finally, many studies on TSE were limited by small samples or non-random sampling (Morris, Usher, & Chen, 2017; Usher & Pajares, 2008). This study’s sample was randomly drawn from the population of lower secondary teachers in each of 46 countries or economies. Thus, its findings are more robust than those of small-sample studies.
ReferencesAinley, J., & Carstens, R. (2018). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 Conceptual Framework (No. 187; pp. 1–108). Paris: OECD Publishing.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.
Depaepe, F., & König, J. (2018). General pedagogical knowledge, self-efficacy and instructional practice: Disentangling their relationship in pre-service teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 69, 177–190.
Fackler, S., & Malmberg, L. E. (2016). Teachers’ self-efficacy in 14 OECD countries: Teacher, student group, school and leadership effects. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 185–195.
Fackler, S., Malmberg, L. E., & Sammons, P. (2021). An international perspective on teacher self-efficacy: Personal, structural and environmental factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 99, 103255.
Guskey, T. R. (1987). Context variables that affect measures of teacher efficacy. Journal of Educational Research, 81(1), 41–47.
Klassen, R. M., & Tze, V. M. C. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, personality, and teaching effectiveness: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 12, 59–76.
Morris, D. B., Usher, E. L., & Chen, J. A. (2017). Reconceptualizing the sources of teaching self-efficacy: A critical review of emerging literature. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 795–833.
Newmann, F. M., Rutter, R. A., & Smith, M. S. (1989). Organizational factors that affect school sense of efficacy, community, and expectations. Sociology of Education, 62(4), 221.
OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 and TALIS Starting Strong 2018 User Guide. Paris: OECD.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1–28.
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956.
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of Self-Efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 751–796.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573.
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Exploring Teacher Thinking on the Effective Ways of Assessment and Teaching
Mária Hercz1, Ferenc Pozsonyi1, Peter Okiri Ochieng2
1Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary; 2University of Szeged, Hungary
Presenting Author: Hercz, Mária
Strategies and methods for effective learning are a rarely disputed topic in tertiary education. One of the core questions of contemporary teacher training is how to transform teacher candidates’ traditional and non-professional views which are highly influenced by their preceding educational experiences (Bruner, 1996, Falus, 2004). It is essential to map their current views in order to be able to increase the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004-5). Scientific observations suggest that examples set during teacher candidates’ traineeship and the experiences of their first year in service leads them back to traditional assessment views (Falus, 2004). This phenomenon can cause a troublesome situation since the teacher candidates in present-day tertiary education should soon become the educators of the generation alpha. That generation prefers active and experience-based learning, demands to be participant and controller of the teaching-learning process instead of playing the role of a passive agent in the assessment committed with traditional methods (Oblinger, 2005). The change in learners’ personality was monitored by the top researchers who induced a rapid paradigm-shift with their works. It was established that traditional evaluation methods are not able to motivate students (Black and Wiliam, 1998), and at the same time positive effects of formative assessment was revealed (Wiggins and McTighe, 1998). Besides the necessity of emotional and personal involvement (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick, 2006), the importance of clear goals and continuous supervision were also exposed (Hattie and Timperley, 2007). This evolution has been in parallel with the Hungarian tendency which put an emphasis on the modernization of the pedagogical practice and evaluation after the Millennium leading to the introduction of competency-based educational projects, text-based assessment, and a postgraduate course to train experts of pedagogical assessment (Csapó, 2015). Despite the positive results, initiatives were being cancelled; however, the inevitable nature of the issue thematized it again after some year. Based on teacher-thinking researches it is reasonable to assume that outside innovation is not viable without inner support and change in teachers’ views. In order to be able to support this transformation, teacher training institutions and services should be aware of their clients’ views.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe authors of the present paper hypothesized the following: (1) For teacher candidates tertiary education serves as a primary source of knowledge of pedagogical assessment, then their views are reconsidered and overridden as they aggregate on-field experience. (2) Teacher candidates suppose that they are able to give an objective and trustworthy assessment. (3) The belief in the role of the modern assessment methods for the effective teaching-learning process is more peculiar to teacher candidates than more experienced teachers.
To test the abovementioned ones, a quantitative empirical study was constructed applying positivist research paradigm. An online-and-paper-filled questionnaire was used (84 items; Cronbach's alpha = 0.847), its items had been designed not to ask for sensitive information or hurt respondents’ well-being. Completing the phase of process development, questions were structured in four thematic subscales into six-question blocks: (1) sources of knowledge of assessment, (2) views on evaluation and assessment, (3) factors of effective assessment and school performance, (4) views on effective assessment methods, and learners’ assumed views on them, (5) effectiveness and the frequency of application of non-traditional assessment tools, (6) self-evaluation related to the accuracy and difficulty of assessing learners.
The reliability of the questionnaire is acceptable, and the values of KMO (0.701; sig=0.000) and Bartlett criteria make it appropriate for factor analysis. Although the researchers did not have the possibility to use a representative sample, they were eager to retrieve data from different Hungarian regions having diverse level of economic development. Data collection covered half of the country (nine counties and the capital), and the distribution of the respondents according to their living place was the following: villages 12%, small towns 26%, towns 44%, and cities 18%. Nine percent of the respondents were male. The average of time-span spent in service was 22.7 years with a deviation of 9.11. The sample (N=695) consisted four subsamples: 127 lower primary school teachers, 260 upper primary teachers, 116 primary school teachers having postgraduate diploma as pedagogical assessment specialist, and 192 teacher candidates from three different teacher training institutions were willing to give anonymized answers after stating their consent. Statistical analysis was performed with the help of SPSS Statistics.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe first surprising result suggests that tertiary education is the last possible source of knowledge of assessment, even for teacher candidates. Comparing the groups there is a significant difference (mean=2.9) and it appeared among youngsters’ answers (3.5). It is thoughtful that individual experience is the first source in every age-group. Respondents were asked to evaluate their abilities related to objective and trustworthy assessment in order to deduce its efficiency. There is a significant difference between teacher candidates and experts of assessment in adjudging the successfulness of qualitative and quantitative assessment. Candidates believe that they are better at qualitative assessment, e.g. behaviour, interrogation, essays. Since these fields are hard to be examined properly, lack of knowledge could be the cause of their sense of safety. Factor analysis of the influencing classroom-related factors separated cognitive and affective (emotions towards subjects, cursors of well-being) ones. The importance of the traditional features is overemphasized, mainly for experts. Teacher candidates’ answers are significantly positive (difference=1.1; significance=0.001, scale of five). A similar tendency was revealed in the question of effective assessment methods and the frequency of usage. As it was presumed, teachers consider modern assessment methods and tools (e.g. peer-assessment, portfolio) useful but they cannot apply them in practice (mean=0.4...0.9, scale of five).
The more a teacher spends in service, the less the modern pedagogical views are present in their thinking. Socialization in an educational institution overwrites modern views established in tertiary education: experienced teachers prefer traditional evaluation. In summation, teacher candidates do not consider university as the source of knowledge, and they do not trust in their familiarization in assessment. Although their views imply the basics of assessment for learning, a stable and institutional-pressure-proof structure has not been articulated yet. The reconsideration of these is inevitable in favour of practice-centred teacher training.
ReferencesBlack P., Wiliam D. 1998. Inside the Black Box. Raising standards through classroom assessment. Department of Education and Professional Studies, Kings College, London.
Bruner, J. 1996. The Culture of Education. Harvard University Press
Csapó, B. 2015. A kutatásalapú tanárképzés: nemzetközi tendenciák és magyarországi lehetőségek. In: Iskolakultúra, 25. 3–16.
Falus, I. 2004. A pedagógussá válás folyamata. In: EDUCATIO, 3. 359–374.
Gibbs, G., Simpson, C. (2004-5): Conditions under which assessment supports student learning. In: Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1 (1). 3–31.
Hattie, J., Timperley, H. 2007. The Power of Feedback. In: Review of Educational Research, 77:1, 81–112.
Nicol, D., Macfarlane-Dick, D. 2006. Rethinking Formative Assessment in Higher Education: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice. University of Glasgow.
Oblinger, D. G. , Oblinger, J. L. 2005. Educating the Net Generation. University of Colorado Boulder.
Wiggins, G., McTighe, J. 2000. Understanding by design. Prentice Hall, New York.
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Teacher practicum experiences: Identified needs in different Socio-educational Contextos
Karin Roa, Catalina Jesús Zenteno Silva
Universidad de los Andes, Chile
Presenting Author: Roa, Karin;
Zenteno Silva, Catalina Jesús
In the context of increasingly diverse classrooms, a current challenge in school education is to avoid intra-system exclusions stemming from differing expectations and opportunities that are presented to different groups of students (UNESCO, 2020; Valdés-Morales et al., 2019). This is particularly critical in relation to girls and boys in situations of socio-educational vulnerability, understood as a situation of psychosocial and economic risk that makes the relationship between student and school precarious. This reality constitutes a priority educational challenge in Latin America and in Europe after the various waves of migration over the last ten years, not only because of its quantitative scope but also because there is a strong correlation between the socio-educational vulnerability of students and their academic results (González et al., 2015; UNESCO, 2016).
Faced with this situation, an inclusive approach is required, which, although understood as a systemic and multifactorial process, places teachers in a privileged position to support each child; that is, to believe that everyone can learn, and to individualize and calibrate methodologies, of educational curriculum and propose relevant, responsive, and transformative pedagogies for their students (Macura et al., 2019; Paris & Alim, 2017). Despite this, the literature is consistent in pointing out that teacher training in Chile and in european countries such as Spain and Portugal is still far from what is required to practice in schools with that diversity, including vulnerable or also called "challenging" schools (Apablaza, 2014; Chapman, 2008; Gairín-Sallán et al., 2019; González et al., 2015). That means that teaching for social justice, inclusion, and diversity of students is scarcely included in the training of teachers, and if it is, it is heterogeneous and insufficient in relation to groups called "vulnerable" (Liebner & Schmaltz, 2021; Ruffinelli, 2014; Venegas, 2013).
An additional complexity facing the challenge of teachers' professionalization for educational justice is that it is based on beliefs, judgments, and knowledge from various sources of socialization. For example, Levi and He (2008) quantified that 48% of these beliefs of the role came from the school and family experience; 15% would originate in the courses, readings, and theories exposed in university classes; and 37% of that beliefs came from experience in practicum. Also, in relation to these sources of influence, Debreli (2016) highlights the predominance of beliefs from "common sense" knowledge about groups that make up society, their roles, and the factors that allow a good education. Therefore, without a reflexive approach, it would tend to reproduce in the professional role the stereotypes that exist in the culture on groups, for example, according to the socioeconomic categories individuals are associated with.
To better guide these formative processes, this research sought to investigate future teachers' beliefs and perceptions about school contexts at the extremes of the socioeconomic continuum. To do this, pedagogical students' perceptions, and training needs after participating in a practicum in schools of high and low socioeconomic levels were compared.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo achieve the objectives, set, qualitative and analytical research was developed. The study universe was composed of all prospective teachers enrolled in the career (155). Of this group, 86 students voluntarily answered the questionnaire. Finally, of these 86 were selected for the study only those who according to the variable "educational vulnerability of the establishment in which they carried out the practical training" carried out practices in schools of high and very high concentration of vulnerable students (82% or more of vulnerable students), and the other pole consists of those who attended schools that serve a population with socioeconomic advantage or very low concentration of vulnerable students (between 0% of vulnerability and up to 12%).
Thus, 41 participants were included in the final sample. To characterize the level of vulnerability of the schools, the School Vulnerability Index of the National Equity Allocation System (IVE-SINAE Index) of the year 2020 was used, prepared by the National School Relief and Scholarships Board [JUNAEB] of the Chilean Ministry of Education [Mineduc]. This is an index used to target school subsidies, indicating the percentage of students considered to be in a situation of socio-economic vulnerability in each school.
The data collection tool was an online questionnaire sent to the prospective teachers after the end of the internship period of the school year (December). To access it, each student received invitations via email that included a link to a form that was answered anonymously.
We used a strategy of analysis of qualitative content coding by two independent analysts with software assistance Atlas.Ti (version 8), from the book of 32 predefined codes, and from emerging codes that were added (2 codes). The codes, oriented in the empirical literature, mainly refer to the behaviors or dispositions of students, their parents and families, or communities, grouping them around positive and negative behavioral poles. Subsequently, inter-encoder reliability was analyzed for the main semantic fields, a procedure that eliminated a semantic field and its codes from the final analysis because it did not have sufficient minimum reliability. The final analysis of the semantic fields included yielded an average reliability index considered adequate. The codes thus selected were the subject of a third analysis, differentiating them according to the degree of discursive force with which they appear within each semantic field, that is, according to their strong presence (PF) or weak presence (PD).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results show that prospective teachers who performed practicum in vulnerable school contexts highlighted the need to learn to regulate the student’s negative behaviour in the classroom, the reinforce boundaries, and the respect within student-teacher relationships. In contrast, those who practiced in schools of low vulnerability demand more preparation in generating motivation for students to learn. In both groups, students' need for support and content in the classroom was highlighted. However, for different purposes: those from vulnerable contexts need it to alleviate affective deficits and to cope with psychosocial risks, while those from the opposite socio-economic pole focus on managing diversification and meeting special educational needs to improve learning expectations.
Concerning the parents and families, all the prospective teachers of the study agree on a need for greater experiences and direct contact with the parents, and thus communication and participation strategies. Finally, regarding the perceived characteristics of the neighbourhood or community in which the schools are located, prospective teachers who attended high-vulnerability schools mentioned that neighbourhoods are unsafe due to crime and proximity to places where citizen demonstrations occur, which requires them to learn safety strategies.
In conclusion, coincidences and differences were found regarding the perceived needs and training areas to be strengthened in both contexts. It is worrying that the need to promote learning appears only among those who attend low-vulnerability schools, whereas behavioural emphases displace this focus among those in more vulnerable schools. However, the demand for better training to address the relationship with parents is transversal. These discussions problematize an aspect of teacher training that has been highlighted by European and Latin American studies: how to promote professionals prepared to identify differences and diversity among their students while equipping them with the ability to challenge stereotypes and set teaching expectations equally for all?
ReferencesApablaza, M. (2014). Representaciones sociales de profesores respecto de la diversidad escolar en relación a los contextos de desempeño profesional, prácticas y formación inicial. Estudios Pedagógicos, 40(1), 7-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052014000100001
Chapman, C. (2008). Towards a framework for school-to-school networking in challenging circumstances. Educational Research, 50(4), 403-420, 10.1080/00131880802499894
Debreli, E. (2016). Pre-Service Teachers’ Belief Sources about Learning and Teaching: An Exploration with the Consideration of the Educational Programme Nature. Higher Education Studies, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v6n1p116
Gairín-Sallán, J. Díaz-Vicario, A. del Arco, I., & Flores, Ó. (2019). Efecto e impacto de las prácticas curriculares de los grados de educación infantil y primaria: la perspectiva de estudiantes, tutores y coordinadores. Educación XX1, 22(2).
González, G., Barba, J., & Rodríguez, H. (2015). La importancia del aprendizaje reflexivo en el Prácticum de Magisterio: una revisión de la literatura. REDU, 13(3), 147-170.
Levi, B., & He, Y. (2008). Investigating the Content and Sources of PPTs. Journal of Teacher Education 59(1), 55–68.
Liebner, S., & Schmaltz, C. (2021). Teacher Training for Inclusive Education in Germany: Status Quo and Curricular Implementation. In J. Goldan, J. Lambrecht, & T. Loreman, (Ed.) Resourcing Inclusive Education- International Perspectives on Inclusive Education (pp. 133-145). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-363620210000015011
Macura, S., Čuk, I., & Peček, M. (2019). Beliefs of student teachers in Serbia and Slovenia about supporting vulnerable pupils in learning and social participation. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1607660
Paris, D., & Alim, S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.
Ruffinelli, A. (2014). ¿Qué aprenden los docentes en su primer año de ejercicio profesional?: representaciones de los propios docentes principiantes. Revista Pensamiento Educativo, 51(2), 56-74.
UNESCO. (2020). Inclusion and education: All means all. In Inclusive Education Across Cultures: Crossing Boundaries, Sharing Ideas (pp. 220-233).
UNESCO. (2016). Informe de resultados, tercer estudio regional comparativo y explicativo: reporte técnico.
Valdés-Morales, R., López, V., & Jiménez, F. (2019). Inclusión educativa en relación con la cultura y la convivencia escolar. Educación Y Educadores, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.5294/edu.2019.22.2.2
|
