Determining the effectiveness of a teacher professional preparation course by examining the transfer of complex models of teaching by newly graduated teachers
Shelleyann Scott and Robert. G. BakerCurtin University of Technology
[ Proceedings Contents ] [ Forum 1998 Program ] [ WAIER Home Page ]
Determining the effectiveness of a teacher professional preparation course by examining the transfer of complex models of teaching by newly graduated teachersShelleyann Scott and Robert. G. BakerCurtin University of Technology |
|
The area of research interest in this study was the degree of transfer by newly graduated teachers of complex macroskills or Models of Teaching (Joyce & Weil, 1996) into their ongoing classroom practice. These skills are taught in the Graduate Diploma of Education, a one-year intensive professional preparation course for students who have completed an undergraduate degree in their particular field of interest. Outcomes of the study have been an assessment of the success of a coalescent curriculum structure specifically focussing on the teaching of complex skills in order to optimise the levels of transfer of teaching strategies within such a program and implications for further research.The population surveyed in this two year long study comprised all graduates of the 1994 and 1995 Graduate Diploma of Education course who were in their first year of teaching at the time of the study. The information sought was collected by means of a telephone survey using a structured interview schedule utilising both open ended and rating type questions.
This research found a higher rate of transfer of complex strategies than that reported in similar studies drawn from a review of the literature (Joyce & Showers, 1995; Joyce & Weil, 1996). The transfer rate emerged as relatively uniform across the two cohorts. In the 1995 sample a total of seventy two percent of the newly graduated teachers and sixty five percent of the 1996 group transferred at least one complex macroskill into their regular classroom practice. A third of the total number of respondents in both populations implemented three strategies with some being successful with five different complex models. Gender appeared to a factor affecting the ability to incorporate new learning into an individual's regular teaching skills. Approximately three quarters of the female teachers transferred complex teaching models compared with just over half of their male counterparts.
Those novice teachers who successfully utilised two or more complex strategies in their regular teaching practices appeared to exhibit high levels of self efficacy, sound self reflection techniques, and reported feeling more in control and less stressed than their colleagues.
Over half (60%) of the 1994 graduates obtained country teaching positions contrasting with under half (44%) the following year. The number and distribution of graduates in particular subject areas successfully gaining teaching employment were quite different across the two years. There were six English respondents in 1994 and slightly fewer in 1995 (5). Mathematics numbers employed increased from four teachers to five teachers the following year. There was a dramatic increase in language graduates employed, from two in 1994 to five the following year, similarly with science, with six teachers employed the first year and eleven the next. The number of Social studies teachers employed remained relatively stable in both years with four the first year and three the next. Art teachers did not fare well in the employment stakes with only three graduates gaining teaching positions in the first year and one contacted but none interviewed the following year. The number of Computer Education teachers employed, dropped from five to one, while Business Education numbers remained the same at two teachers across both years.
The vast majority of the 1995 sample teachers were in the 20-29 year age group (72%) with the rest of the sample evenly spread across the other age groups of 30-39 years of age (16%) and 40-49 years of age (13%). The first category age range was similar in the following 1996 sample with seventy one percent in the 20-29 year age group. However, the distribution in the other categories were slightly different with only six percent in the 30-39 years of age, fifteen percent in the 40-49 years of age group and nine percent in the 50-59 years of age group.
The gender distribution trend was similar across both sample groups displaying more females than males. There were nineteen females in the first sample and twenty four in the second g roup and thirteen males compared to ten in the second group.
Albert Bandura (1986) felt that there may be factors involved in the learning process other than purely cognitive. He stated that 'while learning may have occurred, it may not be demonstrated until the situation is right' where personal factors such as motivation and thinking may interact with environmental and behavioural factors in the process of learning (Woolfolk, 1993, p. 220). As a result of his research Bandura developed the Social Cognitive Theory, an expanded perspective, which emphasised that learning could take place through the observation of others (Bandura, 1986; Biehler & Snowman, 1993). The four important elements in observational learning were 1) attention - focussing on the item or skill that is to be learnt; 2) retention - remembering through mental rehearsing or practice; 3) production - practice, feedback and coaching in order to refine performance of behaviours (self efficacy, belief that we are capable of performing the behaviour, is developed through practice); and 4) motivation and reinforcement - once the behaviour has been learned it may not be performed unless there is the required motivation to do so. Reinforcement is when the learned behaviour produces a reaction either positive or negative. Positive reinforcement is important if the behaviour is to be maintained and promoted. (Woolfolk, 1993, pp. 221-222).
Following his initial work Bandura identified a further key element which had up to that time been missing, that of self belief. He postulated that these belief structures exerted a measure of control or influence over an individual's actions and feelings similar to the adage of 'the power of positive thinking'. He associated this with the 'distinctly human' ability of self-referent or self-reflective thinking which enabled the individual to analyse and alter their cognitive processes and resultant behaviour. Therefore, behaviour is linked to three key aspects, that of knowledge and skills, outcome expectations (a prediction of the likely consequence of a particular behaviour or action), and self efficacy beliefs. He specified that the latter is a strong 'predictor of behaviour' due to its mediational role, however, it is an extremely complex relationship (Pajares & Kranzler, 1995).
Joyce and Showers (Joyce & Weil, 1986, p. 478), through their research in developing skills and strategies in teacher education, identified the following five steps as major components which have been found to be effective in a teaching/learning program
These trials proved highly successful, establishing without a doubt that coaching did indeed make a significant difference. In a follow-up of the initial study, which was conducted six months after coaching ceased, including a nine week summer vacation period, the long term effects of coaching were confirmed (Baker & Showers, 1984). Seventy percent of the coached teachers had transferred their inservice teaching/learning preparation to their classroom practice compared with none of the uncoached teachers. Using a whole school approach to school and teacher development (involving peer coaching teams), Showers now achieves approximately ninety percent transfer of teaching/learning processes and measures this impact in terms of significantly improved student learning outcomes (Joyce & Showers, 1995). As the professional preparation program this study was examining, does not have the facility to provide on-going support in the form of coaching or any influence on the environment graduates are placed within, the best that could have been expected, from the these previous studies on transfer, was around ten percent.
If the trainee uses the newly acquired skill in a 'real' setting exactly as it was learned in the workshop environment, with no modifications, the learning is referred to as 'horizontal transfer' (Joyce & Weil, 1996, p. 381). This is the case when a model lesson, developed in the preservice or workshop situation, is used with no changes in the classroom, or where the workplace environment does not require much adaptation of the strategy for it to work. In teaching, however, this is rarely the case as each class is comprised of students with individual needs and abilities. Teachers are often required to teach differing subjects across various age groups and, occurring more and more, are required to be multiskilled, thereby teaching two or three different subject areas during the one semester. These differing scenarios require the teacher to develop a capacity to adapt or modify the models to suit the unique situation in which he/she is teaching. If the teacher is able to successfully modify the strategy to suit these various factors then a higher level of 'vertical transfer' has been achieved. This higher level of transfer will only occur if the teacher perseveres with the new skill even though encountering the occasional failure and through the initial 'uncomfortable' stage (Joyce & Weil, 1996, pp. 385-390).
Eventually, the teacher persisting in implementing the model acquires 'executive control' over the model. This means he/she is able to apply the new strategy in the classroom displaying an understanding through analysis of individual students' needs, particular content material, objectives to be achieved and the aspects of management required to perform the model appropriately and effectively (Joyce & Showers, 1995, p. 133). The teacher also experiences an increased comfort level with the new strategy, whereby it feels as comfortable as their 'old' methods of teaching (Joyce & Showers, 1982, pp. 5-6).
The vast majority of the research regarding the implementation of Models of Teaching has been conducted with experienced teachers in inservice situations, however, novice teachers face even greater challenges in implementing new strategies. Although they are not having to 'unlearn' previous possibly obstructive teaching habits they have a whole plethora of concerns with which to contend. Some examples of concerns they may face include developing effective classroom management skills, becoming familiar with curriculum, acclimatising to a new workplace environment and possibly living alone in isolated areas divorced from support systems. Since teaching style may be developed early in a teacher's career (Moffett, St. John & Isken, 1987) new graduates must attempt and persevere in implementing the models while adjusting to their new work environment. If they wait until they have adjusted or acclimatised, the research indicates that they will not implement or transfer these complex strategies.
Zeichner and Liston (1990 in Zeichner, 1990), building on the work of Klierbard (1986 in Zeichner, 1990), identified four traditions or paradigms of reform in the 20th Century in United States teacher education. Further examination of this work by Zeichner and Tabachnick (1991) resulted in an extension of the paradigms by developing four varieties of reflective practice. These four varieties of reflective practice are 1) an academic tradition - emphasises content knowledge revolving around the representation and translation of subject matter knowledge in order to promote the student's understanding; 2) a social efficiency version - emphasises appropriate application of particular teaching strategies suggested through a knowledge base external to one being studied eg., understanding the research behind the theory; 3) a developmentalist version - emphasises and prioritises teaching practices sensitive to student interests, thinking and patterns of developmental growth; and 4) a social reconstructionist version - stresses reflection about the institution, social, and political context of schooling and the assessment of classroom actions for their ability to contribute to greater equality, social justice, and humane conditions in schooling and society (Zeichner, 1990).
When investigating these versions of reflective practice, Zeichner states that adopting just one alone is insufficient for 'providing a moral basis for teaching and teacher education' but rather 'good teaching' requires the attention to aspects of all four traditions (Zeichner, 1990, pp. 56-57). This view coincides with the theory and research underpinning the Models of Teaching and the philosophy promoted within the professional preparation program under investigation in this study. If key aspects of all four traditions were not accommodated when implementing any of the models then the teacher's attempt would be less than successful in achieving the educational goals to be accomplished. In addition to this, all four versions were explicitly identified and discussed when outlining the theory and modelling strategies during demonstrations. Students were required to demonstrate their ability to reflect on their performances, incorporating the four versions of reflective practice.
Joyce, Weil and Showers (1992) labelled these approaches 'models'. As outlined in Arends (1994, p. 14) 'a model as defined by Joyce and Weil ... is more than a specific method or strategy. It is an overall plan, or pattern, for helping students to learn specific kinds of knowledge, attitudes, or skills'. They have a theoretical background or philosophy and a series of steps in order to assist students to achieve a set outcome or goal (Arends, 1994, p. 14). Research with the models has shown they work, in that they provide motivation to both teacher and student, initiate interest, hold student attention, encourage higher level thought processes and create a positive atmosphere aiding social growth (Joyce, Weil & Showers, 1992; Joyce & Weil, 1996; Servatius & Young, 1985; Kent, 1985; Rogers, 1987; Garmston, 1987; Moffett, St. John & Isken, 1987; Bennett, 1987, 1997; Showers, Joyce & Bennett, 1987; Joyce, Murphy, Showers, & Murphy, 1989; Raywid, 1993; Garmston, Linder & Whitaker, 1993; Baker, Scott & Showers, 1997).
Joyce, Weil and Showers' (1992) text Models of Teaching contains approximately twenty different models designed for different outcomes. This does not mean that they would expect teachers to learn all twenty strategies. Neither would they expect a teacher to adopt just one strategy. Rather they endorse the idea that teachers need to develop a repertoire of four to six complex teaching models in order to be equipped to assist a diverse student population. By teaching a teacher how to learn and generating a 'learning how to learn' effect will facilitate the teachers' continued professional growth enabling him/her to continue to attain new complex teaching strategies and update his/her skills (Joyce & Weil, 1986, p.478; Arends, 1994).
In the tutorial session, students are required to prepare and present a ten minute model lesson each week and observe and provide constructive feedback to their peers in small groups. The two-hour follow-up workshop/tutorial session is designed to provide a supportive, psychologically safe and controlled environment where students can present their prepared microlessons. This workshop environment was based upon the ideals of humanistic teaching such as Roger's (1969 in Gage & Berliner, 1992) principle that learning was easiest and most meaningful when it occurred within a non-threatening situation and Brown's (1971 in Gage & Berliner, 1992) theory of confluent education, where there is a merging of affective and cognitive elements. Additionally, Comb's (1965 in Biehler & Snowman, 1993, p. 476) views that the role of a teacher should be that of 'facilitator, encourager, helper, assister, colleague, and friend of his students' were indicative of the workshop ethos not only in the lecturer-student relationship but also encouraged and promoted in peer-peer interaction and relationships within that environment. Students are required to video tape their presentations each week to assist them in objective reflection. At the conclusion of the ten-week period the students are encouraged to review their tapes in order to get an overview of their development. This procedure is designed to increase students' self efficacy and self-belief, as the development of skills is considerable over this period and they are able to see just how much they have improved. The early development of self efficacy may actually assist transfer of the models by encouraging the novice teacher to persist in implementing the strategies through the belief that this form of teaching can make a difference to his/her students (Martin, 1989; Guskey, 1987).
Students are also required to compile a portfolio of teaching strategies. This portfolio incorporates evaluation of lessons, personal lesson plans for each of the model lessons conducted throughout the semester, peer and self evaluation sheets for each of the lessons, and a collection of lesson plans developed by their peers. This resource was designed to assist in their first year of teaching, by providing a ready made set of model lessons, thereby supporting the transfer process. The evaluations required for the portfolio are also designed to continue the students' development of sound reflective characteristics that were initiated in the first skills development unit in semester one. These reflective characteristics are based upon all four of Zeichner's versions of reflective practice.
The models approach used in the Strategies of Teaching course provides a basis for the development of a repertoire of different strategies that teachers and curriculum developers can use to help different learners reach different goals. 'This perspective assumes there is no "one right way" in teaching. "Good teaching" needs to be in terms of "good for whom" and "good for what"?' (Baker & Scott, 1995, p. 6). The unit objectives are designed so that student teachers should be able to:
With the first group of teachers interviewed, the researcher maintained manual note taking procedures. This proved to be a laborious task and necessitated frequent pauses which initially may have appeared to be a major disadvantage by slowing the flow of dialogue, but conversely, this pause served to remind respondents of other details that they had forgotten in their haste to recall the lessons. It also facilitated probing for clarification by the interviewer. A problem with note taking was that it extended the length of time taken for the interview, which concerned the busy first year out teachers. However, once they started relating their lesson activities it was easy to keep them talking and they became animated and eager to share their experiences. It is acknowledged that there had to be some loss of data by reason of manual note taking rather than tape recording the interviews. This issue was considered when deciding to expand the data collection to include in depth interviewing of all the models the respondents reported using frequently. As a result, in the second year, the data were collected by both manual note taking and tape recording through a loud speaker telephone. All the respondents readily agreed to the taping of the interview. It was explained to them that this procedure would serve to speed up the interview and that once the data were transcribed the tape would be immediately recorded over on the occasion of the next interview. This also enabled a more accurate collection of data and served to alleviate some of the concerns the researcher had regarding the amount of necessary editing which occurred throughout the interview.
With the interview method, much of the reliability also lies with the interviewer's technique. With this in mind, a thorough review of the literature on potential problems and avenues of bias in interviews was conducted (Beed & Stimson, 1985; Best, 1977; Borg, & Gall, 1989; Cohen, & Manion, 1994; Candy, 1989; Gano-Phillips, & Fincham, 1992; Howard, 1994; Jaeger, 1988; Korbell & Bell, 1985; Oppenheim, 1992). Interviewer training was also undertaken in the trial prior to the study. Additionally, to limit bias, all interviews were conducted by the same interviewer. Care was also taken in the formulation of the wording of the questions in the interview schedule to prevent leading the respondent to supply an answer they felt was desired by the interviewer (Borg, 1987; Borg, & Gall, 1989).
The format of the instrument was such that there were numerous internal reliability checks built into the questions; for example, the respondents were asked to rate the comfort levels of both themselves and their students' with the model and these ratings were checked with the comments recorded in the open ended sections of the instrument. The results from the pilot were also compared with those of the main study to compare the reliability of the answers.
Validity was perceived to be important in this project for if the data received did not answer the research questions it was immaterial if it had been reliably collected. Validity is 'concerned with whether an instrument is measuring what it is supposed to measure' (Wolf, 1993). As the respondents were reporting on their own classroom practices the aspect of validity was of major concern. The teachers involved in the study were asked to give an indication of their frequency of use of the models. They were then asked to describe a lesson where they had made use of the model and this was used as a validity check against the frequency rating they reported. In the lesson description the teachers were probed regarding subject matter suitability, year or grade level, ability level of the students, their (the teacher's) motivation in choosing that particular model and to outline exactly how the lesson had proceeded. This detailed portrayal was then cross checked with the phases in the model as the interview progressed. The phases of each model were clearly outlined on the interview schedule to act as a prompt to the interviewer. If the respondent appeared to have difficulty remembering, the interviewer would reassure them and advise them to take their time, to belay anxiety. If, at the conclusion of the lesson recital, steps in the model had been omitted the researcher would probe for further information. If these probes were unsuccessful in drawing out more information then the interviewer would proceed to the next section where the teacher was quizzed regarding comfort level with the use of the model.
If the respondents had stated that they frequently used a particular model but were unable to remember a specific lesson where they had implemented it, encouragement was given to generalise in the hope that as they continued they would remember a specific lesson. If not, this was noted as possibly questionable data, especially if they were unable to provide specifics to the other questions. Usually, if the respondents were not sure of the model they would state that they were having difficulties remembering it. Most stated forthrightly that they either did or did not use that particular model. Some stated they used a model but could not remember the name and would continue on describing the steps of a particular model perfectly which was noted on the interview schedule. The instrument was designed to make guessing very difficult. In the case where the respondent stated they used a model frequently he/she was asked to provide a detailed account of a specific lesson using that particular strategy, supplying most or all of the steps from memory of what they had done on that occasion. Few of the respondents, who stated they utilised the models, were unable to comply with the requirements set out in the interview schedule to verify their statements.
Determining if transfer had occurred for the new graduates, and to what extent it had occurred were key issues in this study. In order to investigate their transfer it was necessary to incorporate the following fundamental criteria for transfer into the interview schedule. Establishing that the following behaviours were occurring or starting to occur and what the teachers' perceptions were to the models would act as an indicator of transfer. The criteria used to determine transfer were:
Figure 1: Number of model/s tranferred per respondent in 1995 sample.
Both samples (1995 and 1996) were found to be comparable in the category of 'number of respondents who transferred three or more models'. Ten respondents (approximately 30%) from both years were in this category. All of these teachers displayed high levels of self efficacy and a positive attitude in general. There were slightly less in the first sample, who transferred two models, with six teachers (19%) compared with eight (24%) in the 1996 sample. The number of respondents who transferred one model was comparable across both cohorts with seven respondents (22%) in the 1995 group and four (21%) in the 1996 sample. The complement of the sample represented those who had made no attempt to implement the Models of Teaching, those who had been unsuccessful in the implementation process and/or those who were implementing but not frequently enough to satisfy the criteria for transfer.
Figure 2: Number of model/s tranferred per respondent in 1996 sample.
Reasons for non-use were reported as concerns with lack of time, lack of understanding of the models, lack of motivation to attempt them, and concerns with management issues. This group of teachers displayed low levels of self efficacy. Those teachers who had attempted to implement the models but were not utilising them frequently enough to satisfy the criteria for transfer usually displayed a positive attitude to the models but were still becoming established in their teaching. Many of these teachers expressed they would continue with their implementation process while developing their classroom management and time management skills. Many stated they liked using the models and would continue because they had experienced the advantages to their students but preparation time was a problem.
| No. of respondents | No. of models transferred | Gender | ||
| Females (n=19) | Males (n=13) | |||
| 10 | 3 | 7 | 3 | |
| 6 | 2 | 5 | 1 | |
| 7 | 1 | 3 | 3 | |
| 23 | 49 | 15 | 7 | |
In the 1995 sample, there were twenty three graduates who successfully transferred, collectively, forty nine strategies (verified data). Of the twenty three graduates fifteen were female and seven were male.
| No. of respondents | No. of models transferred | Gender | ||
| Females (n=24) | Males (n=10) | |||
| 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | |
| 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | |
| 5 | 3 | 4 | 1 | |
| 8 | 2 | 6 | 2 | |
| 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| 22 | 58 | 17 | 5 | |
In the 1996 sample, there were twenty two graduates who successfully transferred fifty eight strategies in total. Of the twenty two graduates seventeen were female and five were male.
Table 3 and 4 display the demographic distribution of females and males in both the 1995 and 1996 samples. It also outlines the percentage of females who successfully transferred against females who were unsuccessful and, likewise, males who were successful in implementing the complex macroskills with their unsuccessful counterparts.
| 1995 Respondents | |||
| Gender | Total number of respondents | Respondents transferring models | Percentage transferring |
| Female | 19 | 15 | 79% |
| Male | 13 | 7 | 54% |
In 1995 seventy nine percent of female teachers were successful in transferring complex models with fifty four percent of male teachers being successful.
| 1995 Respondents | |||
| Gender | Total number of respondents | Respondents transferring models | Percentage transferring |
| Female | 24 | 17 | 71% |
| Male | 10 | 5 | 50% |
In 1996 seventy one percent of females successfully transferred models into their regular classroom practices in comparison to fifty percent of their male counterparts. The two sample groups (1995 and 1996) demonstrated similar trends of females being more successful in implementing complex teaching strategies than their male counterparts.
Interestingly the rate of transfer on an individual basis was relatively even across both year groups even though the demographics of the two samples were different. It was pleasing to find that twenty three teachers (72% of the total sample) in the 1995 group and twenty two (65% of the total sample) in the 1996 sample, transferred at least one complex teaching model into regular classroom use, figures which were significantly higher than expected from similar teaching/learning courses (Joyce & Weil, 1986; Showers & Joyce, 1996). Although Showers and Joyce recommend teachers build a repertoire of five to six different strategies, in order to better accommodate the various learning styles and needs of students, many of these teachers stated that having experienced success with one model they intended to continue to implement other models. This trend of higher than standard transfer rates, was maintained in a sub-group of ten graduates in both years (approximately a third of the total number of respondents in both samples) who successfully implemented at least three complex models, with some transferring as many as five strategies into their regular repertoire of teaching practices.
It was also interesting, although not entirely unexpected, that self efficacy also appeared to be linked with successful transfer. Teachers who implemented one model appeared to be less sure of themselves and their perception of their own teaching and their students were less positive than those who had successfully mastered more than two models. Those who had implemented three or more models demonstrated sound reflection techniques, encompassing Zeichner's four versions of reflection, and perceived the Models of Teaching to constitute effective teaching endorsing the many previous studies with the Models of Teaching (Joyce, Weil & Showers, 1992; Joyce & Weil, 1996; Servatius & Young, 1985; Kent, 1985; Rogers, 1987; Garmston, 1987; Moffett, St. John & Isken, 1987; Bennett, 1987, 1997; Joyce, Murphy, Showers, & Murphy, 1989; Raywid, 1993; Garmston, Linder & Whitaker, 1993). They also appeared to experience less stress related to their own teaching than their less successful peers. Curiously many of these teachers were able to identify that they felt less stressed with regard to their own teaching and felt they were more effective in the classroom but were stressed with aspects of teaching outside of their control, such as, settling into the school culture and/or new town and satisfying the criteria for performance appraisal that is compulsory for new teachers.
It was interesting that teachers who had implemented more than two models experienced feeling awkward initially and reported that their students were hesitant and unsure, however, after using the model frequently both the teacher and the students became used to the different format and the students participated more and enjoyed it more than traditional exposition formats. This finding endorses Joyce and Showers (1995) findings of transfer moving from horizontal to vertical and, eventually, to executive control with a resultant change in comfort levels and expertise. A general statement, from teachers who had transferred a complex model, was that they would continue to implement more models now that they had experienced success and their students were benefiting from the models they had attempted previously. This endorsed Bandura's views that success with the models provides motivation and reinforces the behaviour, in this case the further implementation of models. These findings endorsed Joyce and Showers research that models have an effect on student participation and achievement.
It was thought initially that subject contamination may have been a confounding factor, suggesting that subject areas in which Models of Teaching were not routinely utilised may have been dominated by males. Upon investigation this was not found to be the case. There were only three 'non-transfer' males in these curriculum areas in the first sample. In the 1996 sample, the percentage of males successfully implementing dropped to fifty percent from fifty four percent the previous year, yet the percentage of males in 'suspect' subject areas, that is, subject areas in which teachers did not routinely implement models, dropped. If curriculum area was a significant factor affecting transfer rates, the number of males implementing strategies should have risen in the second year rather than dropped. Likewise, the female teachers were evenly distributed across curriculum areas with many in 'suspect' content areas (ie., subject areas in which teachers did not routinely implement Models of Teaching, for example, Art and Computing) and this did not appear to affect their implementation rates. Although there were more females overall transferring the strategies in this current study the proportion of teachers at a high level transfer stage (implementing three or more complex strategies and often demonstrating executive control over the strategy) appeared to be comparable in both males and females in both year groups (ie., around 20% of males and just over 33% of females transferred three or more models).
These findings were unexpected, and unfortunately, there was insufficient information with which to draw definite conclusions regarding why females were more successful in acquiring a repertoire of teaching strategies. This result appears to raise more questions than it answers, such as, are females more receptive to new strategies? Do females adjust to new environments at a faster rate than their male counterparts enabling them to take on new learning earlier? Do males hold stronger views as to what constitutes effective teaching rendering them less willing to take on new learning that does not fit in with their schema? Are there more pressures on males within particular environments than on their female counterparts? These questions illustrate how multidimensional this issue is and how many extraneous factors may influence transfer. It may also include student teachers personality type and growth level. It can be seen that it would be difficult to make any categorical statements regarding this issue, however, it would be an interesting area to pursue in a future study.
It would appear from the transfer rates obtained in this study, in addition to findings obtained in a previous study with selected models (Baker & Scott, 1995; Baker, Scott & Showers, 1997), that the Strat egies of Teaching unit may be more effective than other courses of a similar nature which profess similar objectives. It is proposed that the format of the course and instructional design of the workshops may have been responsible for the high rate of transfer being reported. In addition to the observation of models being performed by lecturers, tutors, peers and themselves (on video), the students performed themselves and received support from all involved in the unit. This practice served to promote self efficacy as well as skill with the strategy. The humanistic workshop environment appeared to have provided students with incentive and motivation to attempt, and continue practising, their skills with the strategies as outlined by Bandura (Woolfolk, 1993) as a key aspect in the adoption of new learning. Overtly teaching reflective techniques (eg., reflection of self and peers in microteaching workshops, on the models and the formulation of environments required for the models to be effective, in assignment preparation and on teaching practice within the school sphere) appeared to have the effect of increasing self efficacy, confidence and motivation endorsing Martin's (1989) findings that the more teachers observed and participated in satisfactory microteaching the more their self image improved in terms of being an effective teacher.
All educators involved in teaching in any course would like to believe that their teaching was having a significant effect on their students and the knowledge and skills covered would be utilised in an employment situation, however, according to the research on effective training this may not be assumed. It was therefore reassuring to see that the majority of these graduates demonstrated a clear theoretical understanding of the models and had reportedly established a constructive classroom environment built upon sound humanistic ideals. They displayed clear, focussed reflective techniques in being able to identify areas within their own teaching and within the school or classroom environment which required modification in order to bring about improvement and the willingness to continue to learn and develop as professionals. It is hoped that the information and constructive suggestions from the respondents in this study, that have been channelled back into the skills development units, will result in an even more effective course structure and, ultimately, higher transfer rates.
Baker, R.G., & Scott, S. (1995). The transfer of teaching skills into classroom practice: A follow-up study of newly graduated teachers. Curtin University Printing Services, Bentley, April.
Baker, R. G., Scott. S., & Showers, B. (1997). Attacking the articulation problem in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 22(2), 1-6.
Baker, R.G., & Shortland-Jones, B. (1996). Professional skills development. An interactive multimedia package (CD-ROM) for primary, secondary and tertiary teaching.
Baker, R.G., & Showers, B. (1984). The effects of a coaching strategy on teacher transfer of training to classroom practice: A six month follow-up study. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April.
Baker, R.G., & Showers, B. (1985). Transfer of training to classroom practice: The effects of a follow-up coaching strategy. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Hobart, November.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Beed, T.W. & Stimson, R.J., (Eds.). (1985). Survey interviewing: Theory and techniques. Sydney, Australia: George Allen and Unwin.
Bennett, B. (1987). The effectiveness of staff development training practices: A meta-analysis. PhD Thesis, University of Oregon.
Bennett, B. (1997). Integrating teaching models for secondary teachers. The LPD Video Journal of Education, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Best, J.W. (1977). Research in education, (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Biehler, R.F., & Snowman, J. (1993). Psychology applied to teaching. (7th ed.). Boston, U.S.A: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Borg, W.R. (1987). Applying educational research: A practical guide for teachers, (2nd ed.). New York, U.S.A: Longman Inc.
Borg, W.E & Gall, M.D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction. (5th ed.) New York: Longman.
Candy, P.C. (1989). Alternative paradigms in educational research. Australian Educational Researcher, 16(3), 1-11.
Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education, (4th ed.). New Yorkshire, Great Britain: Biddles Ltd.
Gage, N.L., & Berliner, D.C. (1992). Educational Psychology. (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Gano-Phillips, S., & Fincham, F.D. (1992). Assessing marriage via telephone interviews and written questionnaires: A methodological note. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, August, 630-635.
Garmston, R.J. (1987). How administrators support peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 44(5), 18-26.
Garmston, R.J., Linder, C., & Whitaker, J. (1993). Reflections on cognitive coaching. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 57-61.
Guskey, T.R. (1987). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of mastery learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, April
Howard, G.S. (1994). Why do people say nasty things about self-reports? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 385-392.
Jaeger, R.M. (1988). Survey research methods in education: What is survey research? In R.M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 303-339). American Education Research Association.
Joyce, B., Murphy, C., Showers, B., & Murphy, J. (1989). School renewal as cultural change. Educational Leadership, 47(3), 70-78.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 4-16.
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development. New York: Longman.
Joyce, B., & Weil. M. (1986). Models of Teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Showers, B. (1992). Models of Teaching (4th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Joyce, B., & Weil. M. (1996). Models of Teaching (5th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Kent, K.M. (1985). A successful program of teachers assisting teachers. Educational Leadership, 43(3), 30-33.
Korbell, P.J., & Bell, I.R. (1985). Fieldwork methodology: A survey of research buyers' concerns and doubts. In T.W. Beed & Stimson R.J (Eds.), Survey Interviewing: Theory and Techniques. (pp. 158-170). Sydney, Australia, Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd.
Martin, O.L. (1989). Does teacher efficacy begin with teacher education: Implications from student teacher candidates. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Little Rock, AR, November.
Moffett, K.L., St. John, J., & Isken, J.A. (1987). Training and coaching beginning teachers: An antidote to reality shock. Educational Leadership, 44(5), 34-36.
Oppenheim, A.N, (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London, Pinter.
Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Competence and confidence in Mathematics: The role of self efficacy, self concept, and general mental ability in mathematical problem solving. Florida Educational Research Council Research Bulletin, 26. Sanibel, FL, Florida Educational Research Council.
Raywid, M.A. (1993). Finding time for collaboration. Educational Leadership, 51(1), 30-35.
Rogers, S. (1987). If I can see myself, I can change. Educational Leadership, 45(2), 64-67.
Servatius, J.D., & Young, S.E. (1985). Implementing the coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 42(7), 50-53.
Showers, B. (1995). Designing site-based school improvement programs. A paper presented to Primary Principals, Education Dept of Western Australia. Nedlands, April.
Showers, B., Joyce, B., & Bennett, B. (1987). Synthesis of research on staff development: A framework for future study and a state-of-the-art analysis. Educational Leadership, 45(3), 77-87.
Showers, B., & Joyce, B. (1996). The evolution of peer coaching. Educational Leadership, 53(6), 12-16.
Turney, C., Eltis, K.J., Hatton, N., Owens, L.C., Towler, J., Wright, R., Cairns, L.G., & Williams, G. (1987). Sydney micro skills: Rediscovered Series I handbook. Sydney, University of Sydney Press.
Turney, C., Eltis, K.J., Hatton, N., Owens, L.C., Towler, J., Wright, R., Cairns, L.G., & Williams, G. (1987). Sydney micro skills: Rediscovered Series II handbook. Sydney, University of Sydney Press.
Wallen, N.E. (1974). Educational research: A guide to the process. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Wolf, R.M. (1993). Data quality and norms in international studies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 26 (1), 35-40.
Woolfolk, A.E. (1993). Educational Psychology. (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Zeichner, K.M. (1990). Educational and social commitments in reflective teacher education programs. Proceedings of the National Forum of the Association of Independent Liberal Arts Colleges for Teacher Education, Milwaukee, WI, November.
Zeichner, K.M. (1991). Action research and reflective teaching in preservice teacher education: A case study from the United States. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(2), 119-136.
Zeichner, K.M. (1993). Traditions of practice in US preservice teacher education programs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(1), 1-13.
| Please cite as: Scott, S. and Baker, R. G. (1998). Determining the effectiveness of a teacher professional preparation course by examining the transfer of complex models of teaching by newly graduated teachers. Proceedings Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Forum 1998. http://www.waier.org.au/forums/1998/scott.html |