99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Bridging the Gap: Understanding Stakeholders' Perspectives on Future Teacher Competencies
Hilde Storroesaeter, Karen Birgitte Dille
NTNU, Norway
Presenting Author: Storroesaeter, Hilde
In 2017, the Norwegian teacher education program for primary and lower secondary teachers underwent a transformation, transitioning from a four-year program to a master's degree program. By the spring of 2022, the inaugural cohort of primary and lower secondary teachers graduated, equipped with newly earned master's degrees in teaching.
Norway's official framework for primary and lower secondary teacher education, as outlined by the Ministry of Education and Research (2016a and 2016b), explicitly emphasizes the necessity for teacher education programs to exhibit both high academic quality and coherence. This coherence, although not exclusively, extends to the integration of learning activities conducted on campus and practical experiences, with the latter also referring to organized practicums for teacher education students. However, it is acknowledged that practical experience encompasses various activities beyond structured practicums.
According to the official framework, a teacher education student is required to undergo no less than 110 days of practicum, distributed over the five years of their academic studies. Furthermore, the framework underscores the importance of establishing a close relationship between academic institutions and the professional field represented by practicum schools.
Despite the explicit description of the relationship between theory represented by the teacher education institutions and practice, here represented by the practicum schools, in the official framework, there remains a perceived gap or lack of coherence. Munthe et al., (2020) characterize the nexus between theory and practice in teacher education as a context where diverse arenas converge to support the comprehensive knowledge and competence development of teacher students. The lack of such cohesion is not a novel issue within teacher education, evident in both Norwegian and international contexts (ibid). The perceived situation becomes explicit in for example Canrinus et al., (2017) where teacher students report on a gap between theory and practice, and in Thorsen (2019) where it is highlighted a lack of consensus between school-based and university-based educators when they collaborate during teacher students' practicum.
During practicums, school-based and university-based teacher educators often collaborate in supporting, mentoring, and evaluating teacher students, forming a formalized partnership. In this partnership, both parties contribute their expertise to facilitate the learning of teacher education students, creating a synergy that enhances the learning environment beyond individual capabilities (Lillejord & Børte, 2014). However, there is a potential risk that a lack of coherence in this partnership may widen the gap between the university and schools rather than narrowing it. Considering the perception of the gap between theory and practice as well as the evolving specialized direction of teacher education, there is a keen interest in examining how school-based and university-based teacher educators perceive the competencies essential for future teachers. Our research question is “How do school-based and university-based teacher educators perceive the competencies future teachers require, and are there any discernible tensions in these perceptions?” And we are curious whether this is a place where they agree or disagree with one another, and if so on what.
As mentioned earlier, we want to know how different groups see the skills needed for future teachers. We expect to find tensions, but we do not necessarily know much about what these tensions consist of. A deeper understanding of the present situation will help us focus on improving cooperation between the different parties in this partnership. The goal is to contribute to bridging the gap between theory and practice in teacher education. As we see it, a way to get there is to strengthen the relationship between academic institutions and the professional field represented by practicum schools.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedIn December 2023, educators overseeing the third year of two teacher education programs, encompassing both school-based and university-based settings, participated in a survey comprising both qualitative and quantitative inquiries. This survey was administered in advance of a practicum period. Survey data were collected via Nettskjema.no and carried out in Norwegian to avoid miscommunication. The participants filled out the survey online, anonymously. Subsequently, in the spring of 2024, a follow-up survey will be disseminated post the practicum period's conclusion. This subsequent survey will address aspects of a revised framework for the third-year practicum, specifically focusing on a redesigned composition of students within their practicum groups. Emphasis will be placed on aligning the academic backgrounds of the four students with those of the university-based and school-based teacher educators. Historically, practicum groups have comprised of two students from one academic subject and two from another, lacking a systematic approach to ensuring compatibility between the academic backgrounds of the students and their respective educators. The proposed structural changes can be seen as integral to the ongoing specialization of the teacher education programs. Our sample can be described as a homogenous sampling process (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2009).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsInitial findings indicate tensions in the perceptions of various stakeholders regarding the competencies they see as essential for future teachers. Preliminary results revealed two main categories: Resource oriented or problem oriented. Further we see a notable portion of primary school-based educators expressing a critical stance toward practicum organization that aligns with the objective of cultivating specialized teachers. They emphasize the necessity for teachers with broad competence and assert that specialization may impede this broader perspective. In other words, they see the current development in the direction of specialization as a problem. Lower secondary teachers, along with a substantial number of university-based teacher educators, embrace this specialization and see it as a resource for professional learning, development, and reflection. Lower secondary teachers also report a positive and optimistic view on the structure of the group, pointing out that the teacher students will have other academic subjects than the one they have in common, which will help ensure a broad practicum experience and view on what it means to be a teacher.
References-Canrinus, E. T., Bergem, O. K., Klette, K., & Hammerness, K. (2017). Coherent teacher education programmes: Taking a student perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(3), pp. 313-333.
-Lillejord, S., & Børte, K. (2014). Partnerskap i lærerutdanningen: En forskningskartlegging. [Partnerships in teacher education. An overview of research]. Oslo: Kunnskapssenter for utdanning.
-Ministry of Education and Research (2016a). Regulations relating to the framework plan for primary and lower secondary teacher education for years 1-7. UHR. national_guidelines_for_the_primary_and_lower_secondary_teacher_education_programme_for_years_1_7.pdf (uhr.no)
-Ministry of Education and Research (2016b). Regulations Relating to the Framework Plan for Primary and Lower Secondary Teacher Education for Years 5–10. UHR. national_guidelines_for_the_primary_and_lower_secondary_teacher_education_programme_for_years_5_10.pdf (uhr.no)
-Munthe, E., Ruud, E. & Malmo, K.A.S. (2020). Praksisopplæring i lærerutdanninger
i Norge. En forskningsoversikt. [Practical Training in Teacher Education in Norway: A Research Overview]. Kunnskapssenter for Utdanning, Universitetet i Stavanger.
-Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage, London.
-Thorsen, K.E. (2019). Utvikling av faglig kompetanse i praksis. I Teoretiske og praktiske kunnskaper i lærerkvalifisering – sammenhenger og spenninger (pp. 25-34). [Development of Professional Competence in Practice. In Theoretical and Practical Knowledge in Teacher Qualification – Connections and Tensions]. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Teacher Decision Making for Instructional Practices, Pedagogical Reasoning and the Role of the Student
Mirjam van der Sprong1, Eddie Denessen2, Christine Espin3
1The Hague University of Applied Sciences; 2Radboud University Nijmegen; 3Leiden University
Presenting Author: van der Sprong, Mirjam
Introduction, Research Objective, and Context:
Handling differences in the classroom is complex for teachers. Both internationally and specifically in the Dutch context, the emphasis on adapting to differences among students in education is strongly emphasized, by both the Ministry of Education (Van Casteren et al., 2017) and the annual reports of the Education Inspectorate. This research aims to gain a better understanding of how teachers use various sources of information about the student and their development and whether teachers actively involve their students in dealing with differences in the classroom. By gaining a better understanding of the teacher's pedagogical reasoning, this can contribute to teacher education regarding handling differences in the classroom.
Theoretical Framework:
How teachers respond to diversity by deciding about the education of their students has been described by Richard Snow (1997) as an ‘awesome balancing act’ in which teachers continuously need to make decisions about when and how (or not) to adapt to the characteristics and needs of their students (Parsons et. al, 2018). Responding to what a student needs requires knowledge and skills to do this properly (Corno, 2008; Keuning et al., 2021). This is a complex process and there is little research available that specifically draws attention to what practicing teachers actually do to address student differences (Corno, 2008; Loibl et al., 2020) and on the basis of which information they make decisions for their educational actions (Gasse & Acker, 2023; Park & Datnow, 2017). The internal cognitive process of adaptive teaching and differentiated instruction can be perceived as a process of pedagogical reasoning. Loughran (2019) describes pedagogical reasoning as 'the thinking that underpins informed professional practice'. Based on information sources, teachers make decisions to differentiate. Differentiated education implies a proactive alignment of instruction and activities (Denessen, 2017). Additionally, teachers use adaptive education based on diagnostics of affective, cognitive, motivational, and socio-cultural variables of students. It is therefore essential for teachers to carefully collect and analyze the knowledge they acquire about students. Adaptive education can be shaped from different perspectives, one being curriculum-focused and contextual, requiring teachers to have diagnostic skills (Van Geel et al., 2019) and an understanding of the student as an individual to establish effective alignment between the student and the curriculum. Another perspective is student-focused, exploring the extent to which the student is a co-owner of the learning process.
Research Questions:
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA mixed methods sequential explanatory design (Creswell, 2013) was used to collect and analyze the quantitative (teacher surveys) and qualitative data (interviews). The quantitative questionnaire data were analyzed to describe which sources of information teachers use in the different phases of the differentiation process. The information sources questioned are based on research by Jager et al. (2021). Prast et al.'s model (2015) was used as a framework for examining the use of information sources by teachers. With interviews, qualitative information was obtained about the pedagogical reasoning of teachers about how and why teachers use these sources of information to base their instructional decisions on. Research shows that the use of teacher-student dialogue can be beneficial for the self-reflective capacity of the teacher (Hudson-Glynn, 2019), getting to know the student better (Vygotsky, 1978; Hudson-Glynn, 2019) and autonomy of the student (Fletcher, 2012; Black & Mayes, 2020). The teacher survey therefore included questions on these three topics. To clarify the role of the student, the horizontal participation ladder of Smit et al. (2011) has been employed.
This study was conducted with primary school teachers in the Western part of the Netherlands, a demographically diverse area with schools in both urban contexts and schools in suburbs and villages. 26 teachers, teaching grades 4 (age 7/8) to 8 (age 11/12), completed the teacher survey. 19 teachers were female, 5 were male and the amount of teaching experience ranged from a few months to 35 years. 13 of these teachers were interviewed, 11 female, 2 male.
The participants completed an online questionnaire using Qualtrics. Teachers were asked about which information sources (study of the student's work, observation, teaching method-related tests, curriculum planning, teacher student dialogue, standardized test scores, student file, information from last year's teacher, teacher parent dialogue) and the frequency of use of these information sources to determine the educational needs of students, set goals, shape differentiated instruction and practice and evaluate the process and progress of students. Components of effective student consultation (timing, focus and purpose, teachers’ feedback and follow-up to pupils) as outlined by Morgan (2011) were added to the questionnaire.
The data from the questionnaires have been summarized in frequency tables. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interviews, using a coding framework based on the topics used of the questionnaire. Here, a deductive approach was used with predefined categories serving as the basis for identifying themes in the collected data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsResults and Supported Conclusions:
In the differentiation process, teachers use various information sources to different extents and combinations in different lesson phases for differentiation decisions. The collected data on students are mainly used to infer educational needs. Less frequently, students are asked to articulate their educational needs themselves.
Teachers mainly perceive students as 'research objects'; observed but not actively engaged in a dialogue. Although teachers express a desire to use the 'teacher-student dialogue' more often for shaping adaptive education, practical constraints such as time, group size, curriculum, materials, and space hinder its implementation.
Teachers mainly tailor their approach to differences from a didactic perspective focused on gathering information for appropriate didactic choices and less from a social-constructivist perspective focused on actively involving students in their learning process.
ReferencesBlack, R., & Mayes, E. (2020). Feeling voice: The emotional politics of ‘student voice’ for teachers. British Educational Research Journal, 46(5), 1064-1080.
Corno, L. (2008). On Teaching Adaptively. Educational Psychologist, 43(3), 161–173.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
Denessen, E. (2017). Verantwoord omgaan met verschillen: sociaal-culturele achtergronden en differentiatie in het onderwijs. Universiteit Leiden.
Hudson-Glynn, K. (2019). Lessons learnt by student teachers from the use of children’s voice in teaching practice. In J. Wearmouth & A. Goodwyn (Ed.), Student teacher and family voice in educational institutions (pp. 15 - 32). New York: Routledge.
Jager, L., Denessen, E., Cillessen, A. H., & Meijer, P. C. (2021). Sixty seconds about each student–studying qualitative and quantitative differences in teachers’ knowledge and perceptions of their students. Social Psychology of Education, 24, 1-35.
Kahneman, D., Frederick, S., Holyoah, K., & Morrison, R. (2005). A model of heuristic judgment. The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. J. Holyoak. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Keuning, T., van Geel, M., & Smienk-Otten, C. (2021). Differentiëren in 5, 4, 3...: Stem je onderwijs af op verschillen tussen leerlingen. PICA.
Loibl, K., Leuders, T., & Dörfler, T. (2020). A Framework for Explaining Teachers’ Diagnostic Judgements by Cognitive Modeling (DiaCoM). Teaching and Teacher Education, 91, 103059-.
Loughran, J. (2019). Pedagogical reasoning: the foundation of the professional knowledge of teaching. Teachers and Teaching, Theory and Practice, 25(5), 523–535.
Morgan, B. (2011). Consulting pupils about classroom teaching and learning: policy, practice and response in one school. Research Papers in Education, 26(4), 445-467.
Park, V., & Datnow, A. (2017). Ability grouping and differentiated instruction in an era of data-driven decision making. American Journal of Education, 123(2), 000-000.
Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., Pierczynski, M. & Allen, M. (2018). Teachers’ instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of educational research, 88(2), 205-242.
Prast, E. J., Van de Weijer-Bergsma, E., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2015). Readinessbased differentiation in primary school mathematics: Expert recommendations and teacher selfassessment. Frontline Learning Research, 3(2), 90–116.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Ascd.
Urhahne, D., & Wijnia, L. (2021). A review on the accuracy of teacher judgments. Educational Research Review, 32, 100374-.
Van Casteren, W., Bendig-Jacobs, J., Wartenbergh-Cras, F., van Essen, M., & Kurver, B. (2017). Differentiëren en differentiatievaardigheden in het primair onderwijs. Nijmegen: ResearchNed, 2004-2006.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Teachers’ Perceptions and Experiences of Peer Observation and Its Influence on Their Professional Development in One School in South Kazakhstan
Ainur Rysbayeva
NIS Taldykorgan, Kazakhstan
Presenting Author: Rysbayeva, Ainur
Peer observation is observing fellow teachers’ lessons or being observed by them with the purpose of professional growth. It is believed to be an effective tool for both training future teachers (Engin & Priest, 2014) and supporting experienced teachers’ professional development (O’Leary, 2014; Wragg, 2002). If used effectively, peer observation can become “a valuable tool for improving the quality of teaching” (Wragg, 2002, p. VIII).
Nevertheless, despite its positive impact on teacher professional development, peer observation might still cause negative attitudes and resistance among teachers due to several reasons such as negative feedback that teachers might receive after being observed (Dos Santos, 2016) or poor organization of this process at school (Engin & Priest, 2014; Gosling, 2002). Engin and Priest (2014) state that “teachers who have experienced such contexts may not see the learning value of peer observation” (p. 2). Although peer observation is an important part of teaching practice in many schools around the world including Kazakhstan, it is often imposed on teachers (Gosling, 2002), which is another reason why they do not view it as a tool for professional growth. Therefore, studying teachers’ perceptions of this process and their experiences in peer observation can help better organize this process at schools and make it a valuable tool for continuous development.
This study aims to investigate school teachers' perceptions regarding peer observation and their experiences of peer observation at one school in South Kazakhstan. To achieve this purpose, the study analyses teachers' viewpoints on peer observation, both from the perspective of observing their colleagues and being observed themselves. Furthermore, it delves into an examination of their experiences and practices in the context of peer observation, as well as the impact of these experiences on their professional development.
The following research questions were identified to guide this study:
1. What are the schoolteachers’ perceptions of peer observation?
2. What are their experiences in peer observation?
3. How does peer observation affect teachers’ professional development?
Teacher professional development should happen in collaboration with others and be ongoing (Darling-Hammond & Richardson, 2009; Garet et al., 2006). Bandura’s social learning theory and the professional learning community offered by Darling-Hammond and Richardson (2009) as a new paradigm might help to explain this need for collaboration and the importance of consistent teacher learning. These theories also support the importance of peer observation for teacher professional development.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedSince the purpose of this study is to explore the teachers’ perceptions and experiences of peer observation, the qualitative research study was chosen as the most appropriate method for this research. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted to answer the research questions and learn about teachers’ perceptions and experiences of peer observation.
As stated by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), certain fields like education or health employ a research design called ‘basic qualitative study’. The basic qualitative study aims to understand how people “make sense of their life and experiences” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 24), while the other types of research design in qualitative research have additional purposes. In addition, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state that based on this design “researchers simply describe their study as a “qualitative research study” without declaring a particular type of qualitative study” (p. 23). The current study employed this design due to the necessity to understand people’s experiences and perceptions.
Drawing on empirical evidence and related literature, this interview-based study aimed to discover the perceptions and experiences of teachers in peer observation. Six semi-structured interviews were conducted to answer the research questions of this study. This helped to learn the individual experiences and perceptions of the participants in-depth. Five interviews were conducted face to face as “the interaction produced when the researcher and participants meet in the shared space produces humane and sensitive data that reflects the interest of both parties” (Kamarudin, 2015, p. 14). One participant asked for an online interview as it was more convenient for them in terms of time. Document analysis was used as an additional instrument. The school has an online system that is used during the lesson observations and analyzing this system assisted in understanding teachers’ perspectives and experiences of peer observation at this school.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsFrom the data obtained, it can be concluded that the participants consider peer observation to be an important part of the teaching profession and understand how crucial it is for teachers’ professional development and collaboration. It can also be concluded that the teachers at this school are willing to observe and be observed, although one participant mentioned that there is a small number of teachers who avoid this practice (Participant 2). As there is no clear division between peer observation and lesson observation, the participants do not differentiate between these two terms and use them interchangeably. The school culture of peer observation which highlights its importance for professional development, the fact that peer observation is used as support for younger and new teachers as well as the frequent observations by various visitors can be the reasons why teachers have such a positive attitude to peer observation at this school. Additionally, the participants stated that they feel more comfortable when peer observation happens within their subject departments. Unconstructive and negative feedback was mentioned by most participants as a reason for some stress during peer observations.
ReferencesDarling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters. Educational leadership, 66(5), 46-53.
Dos Santos, L. M. (2016). How do teachers make sense of peer observation professional development in an Urban School. International Education Studies, 10(1), 255. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v10n1p255
Engin, M. (2014). Observing teaching: A lens for self-reflection. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v2i2.90
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038004915
Gosling, D. (2002). Models of peer observation of teaching.
Kamarudin, D. (2015). Comparing online and traditional interview techniques: A qualitative study of the experiences of researchers and participants in the Malaysian context (dissertation).
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
O'Leary, M. (2014). Classroom observation: A guide to the effective observation of teaching and learning. Routledge.
Wragg, E. C. (2002). An introduction to classroom observation. Taylor & Francis e-Library.
|
