Transcript Teaching Effectiveness

The inquiring teacher:
Clarifying the concept of
‘teaching effectiveness’
To support the First-time Principals Programme
Module 2: Elements of teaching
effectiveness
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
1
Three views of ‘teaching
effectiveness’:
•
the ‘style’ view
•
the ‘outcomes’ view
•
the ‘inquiry’ view
It will be argued that the INQUIRY framework offers the
most defensible conceptualization of teaching effectiveness.
.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
2
The style view
Teaching
actions
Student
outcomes
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
3
Effective teachers (style view)…
Personality characteristics
•
display warmth
Teaching techniques
•
provide an overview at the start of teaching
something new
Teaching approaches
•
minimise the amount of time they are teaching
the whole class from the front (direct instruction)
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
4
The style view
Teaching
actions
FLAW 1
Looks in
wrong
place
FLAW 2
Debates
about
research
findings
FLAW 3
Complex
context
Student
outcomes
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
5
Flaw 1 (style view)
Looks in the wrong place
•
What the teacher demonstrates (against a predetermined
list of qualities deemed to be “effective”) rather than what
is happening for the students.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
6
Flaw 2 (style view)
Debates about research findings
It assumes that the research generalizations are unequivocal.
But consider the debates about:
• the use of rewards,
• the role of questioning in discussion,
• the use of storytelling and narrative in history
• phonics and whole language.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
7
Flaw 3 (style view)
Complex context
The teaching – outcomes relationship is complicated by
context:
• nature of the students
• the subject being taught
• the time of day
• the nature of the teaching environment
• the availability of resources
• personal mood.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
8
The style view
It is not what the teacher does
that matters –
it is what is happening for the students.
The overriding question must always be:
In the time available, which pedagogical
pathway is likely to lead students to the
biggest pot of educational gold?
(Ackerman, 2003)
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
9
The outcomes approach
Teaching
actions
Student
outcomes
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
10
Teaching effectiveness (outcomes approach)
... is determined by what students achieve.
The effectiveness of teachers is best determined by:
•
comparing the achievement of the students they teach.
•
comparing the added value they contribute to the
achievement of the students they teach.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
11
The outcomes approach
Teaching
actions
FLAW 1
Prior
knowledge
FLAW 2
Diminishes
student
contribution
FLAW 3
Measurement
of learning
Student
outcomes
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
12
Flaw 1 (outcomes approach)
Prior knowledge is a powerful influence on
achievement.
Unfair to compare summative achievements of students
and to attribute the difference to superior or inferior
teaching.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
13
Flaw 2 (outcomes approach)
Linking achievement to teaching actions diminishes the
role of the student’s:
• personal organisation,
• interest,
• motivation,
• personal attributions of success or failure,
• beliefs about and motivations for
particular subjects and tasks.
Influence rather than change.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
14
Flaw 3 (outcomes approach)
The complexities of measurement:
• socio-economic factors
• bias to the easily measured
• external assistance
• “black” box.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
15
The outcomes approach
While the assessment of teaching
effectiveness must attend to student
outcomes and a teacher’s role in developing
these, outcomes do not determine
effectiveness.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
16
The inquiry approach
More than style and it is more than outcomes.
Continual interrogation of the relationship between these two
dimensions with the aim of enhancing student achievement.
Quality of inquiry into the relationship between teaching actions
and student learning.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
17
The inquiry approach
Question
posing
Data collection
and analysis
Evidence 1
Inquiry 1
What is happening?
Teaching
actions
Opportunity to
Learn
Working hypothesis
Inquiry 2
What are the
possibilities?
Evidence 2
Craft
knowledge
Researcher
knowledge
Student
outcomes
Pre- Inquiry
What is worth
spending time on?
The cycle of inquiry established
by the processes of Inquiry 1
and Inquiry 2 enhances the
opportunity for teachers to
learn about their own practice,
and students to increase their
engagement and success.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
18
Inquiry 1
Impact of teaching actions on student outcomes
Posing questions about:
• outcomes
• alignment
• engagement
• success.
Collection of high quality evidence:
• student achievement data
• teacher documentation
• classroom observation: student responses
• student feedback.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
19
Inquiry 2
Identifying possibilities for improvement
Sources:
•
the experiences of other teachers (craft
knowledge)
•
researcher knowledge.
Seeking:
•
strongest possible warrants
•
evidence of impact on student learning.
Outcome:
•
working hypotheses.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
20
Attitudes
1. Openness
• ordered, deliberate analysis
• ideas from all sources.
2. Fallibility
• conjectures not absolute truths
• hypotheses may fail but that it is important
to keep searching
• searching for disconfirming evidence.
© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland
21