The Teacher Professional Development

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Studies have shown that teacher beliefs have a direct relationship with their instructional practices. In fact, "an individual teacher’s practice has been found to be generally firmly rooted in beliefs about learning and reflects a personal theory of what is believed to be effective" (Frank, 2004). According to Al-Arfajr (2001), research on teachers’ beliefs and practices emerged during the 1970s. Whilst research studies on teachers prior to this period focused on the implementation of lesson plans, classroom activities, class evaluations and time management as well. Alongside, McDonald and Elias (1976) supported the view teachers laid emphasis on student questioning, student comprehension and praise. While Clark and Peterson (1986) debated that teachers focused on teachers’ knowledge. By the late 1970’s, research on the association between teachers’ beliefs and reading instruction escalated.

According to McMahan, Richmond, & Reeves-Kazelskis (1998), teachers generally believe that literacy is important for young children. Specifically, skills including knowledge of the letters of the alphabet, recognition of site words and the ability to identify elements of a story are essential to the child’s literacy development.

Best practices in literacy instruction have been identified as effective teaching strategies, which support student access (Gambrell, Morrow, & Pressley, 2007; Zemelman, Daniels, & Hyde, 1998). Teachers’ beliefs also impact decisions regarding literacy instruction and student outcomes (Rupley & Logan, 1984).

Teachers who subscribe to the reading readiness theory tend to encourage the drilling of basic literacy skills as such letter identification, letter sounds and the rules of grammar and punctuation. Since these teachers believe that learning depends on how the environment is structured, classrooms are very structured with learning occurring as students are seated behind their desks and instruction is delivered in a systematic way (Beck and Juel, 1995). Conversely, school teachers who support the literacy theory structure their classrooms so that skills are not taught in isolation, but during literary events that are dramatized through play.

McMahan, Richmond, and Reeves-Kaselskis also noted that a wide variation exists between what teachers believe is important and what teachers believe they should specifically target in their classroom. This notion is supported by Ure and Raban (2001). They found that while the teachers in their study felt that school environments should be rich in print in order to develop their students’ oral and written language skills, some teachers focused on teaching writing for a purpose (e.g., writing the child’s name) while other teachers believed the significance of writing as a social practice (2001).

Research has shown that teacher beliefs shape classroom practices that relate to emergent literacy skills (Fang, 1996; Vartuli, 1999). Moreover, Hsieh (2005) posits that "the ways in which teachers deliver instruction impact children’s learning outcomes". Studies have shown that the type and quality of literacy skills that children learn are strong indicators of academic achievement in later years (Cunningham, 2006; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). Thus, it is important that students receive quality education focusing on developing adequate skills that will help to develop strong academic skills in later grades.

Bronfrenbrenner (1995) put forward that that teachers’ beliefs to instruction impact students learning both directly and indirectly. As a matter of fact, effective learning instruction plays a vital role on student reading academic success (Gambrell, Morrow, & Pressley, 2007; Routman, 2003). The International Reading Association (2002) on the other hand argue that the implementation of best practices is strongly supported by experts in the field of reading and education.

Approach to methodology

Our view on this research is strongly influenced by the nature of truth being investigated in the context of the project. Guided by the belief that there can be multiple realities and there are different ways of representing and finding truths (Popper … , Ernest 1994 ), we have adopted a mixed approach. Firstly we hold an interpretive stance, within a qualitative approach(Cohen et al, 2007, Silverman 2010) on the project and we seek to describe, share and represent the realities of the contexts using multiple tools to represent our findings and obtain meaningful insights(Crotty, 1998). We are however also concerned with the quantitative dimension as it also strongly informs another dimension of the research and influences our reading of the research in terms of ‘influence’ and monitoring of learners’ progress. It was our intention to merge these two to obtain a more comprehensive reading of the influence of the project.

The mixed approach was used in a bid to uncover both the influence and approach of the project that is whether there has been a shift from traditional approach to innovative ones on the teaching and learning process, as well as investigate the progress of the learners in a longitudinal manner spanning over 4 years from the period ending 2008-2012.

In view of answering the above research questions, the team has used a qualitative approach (Denzin and Lincoln….) as well as a quantitative approach. These two approaches were used in a view of presenting initial findings of the projects that could be comprehensive over the years for which the project was analysed. The qualitative approach was used for interrogating and identifying whether there was a change in the approach and beliefs of the teachers who were involved in the project and if so to what extent.

Qualitative Approach

In this study in which the qualitative method is utilized involves in-depth interviews as well as direct classroom observation (Cresswell, 2003). Lincoln and Guba (2000) claim that qualitative research can serve to illuminate findings gained in educational research, thereby making the qualitative method of much value in educational research. The qualitative methodology used in this study incorporated the sequential triangulation strategy. The sequential method was chosen since this study included "two distinct data collection phases, one following the other" (Cresswell, 2003 p. 216). In this study, the initial observation was followed by final interviews. These were integrated in the interpretation phase. Cresswell (2003) states that the triangulation strategy is best used when a researcher "uses two different methods in an attempt to confirm, cross validate or corroborate findings within a single study" (p. 217).

This aspect of qualitative research was used for the study to discover the answers to the question of to what extent the primary teachers’ attitudes and beliefs influence classroom practices that are linked to literacy skills. These were obtained through classroom observations followed by in-depth interviews for further clarification.

We also conducted a desk analysis of works of students and sample assessments conducted at schools and also base our findings on the fortnightly meetings and sharing with the facilitators.

The questionnaires were administered to primary school teachers who attended the capacity building workshops over the years. These were administered each year to participants and focused on literacy practices prior to the series of workshops and in school intervention and after these in a way to investigate whether or not there was any change in their own practices. The interviews (Cohen et al, 2007, Patton, 1980: Tuckman,1972 ) on the other hand were used to obtain a deeper insight into their beliefs and understand the teachers’ approach towards the teaching and learning of literacy. Teachers having actively participated for a minimum of two years were considered on a random selection for the interview to ensure validity of study. These interviews were systematically conducted in the year on a continuous basis of three years. Briefing sessions and clear instructions were given to the participants prior to the interviews. Both open ended and semi-structured questions were used in the interactions enabling us to understand whether or not there was any improvement in their own practices as well as the students’ literacy skills and also ensure validity of accuracy of results. The interviews were recorded and transcribed during data analysis. Finally, classroom observations spanned throughout the duration of the project till date in the school itself over the fornightly visits in the schools in specific classes and the school in general. We noted and shared our observations in the course of alternate and regular meetings that were shared in the capacity building workshops as well as the brainstorming sessions prior to each visit in the schools. These meetings and brainstorming sessions also brought in observations and feedbacks from personnel from the ministry, the facilitators involved as well as the observations from the headmasters in different schools. For the desk analysis we used the examplars of works of students and these altogether enriched our understanding and reading of the influence of the approaches espoused in the context of the project(Prior, 2003).

These however would not be sufficient to obtain an indication of the learners’ progress and in a bid to obtain more concrete data that would be ‘visible’ and tangible, we adopted a quantitative approach as detailed below.

Quantitative Approach

The quantitative approach was used to obtain information on the student’s scores gathered over a period of three years (2010 to 2012). This is in line with the aim of the research, which is to investigate into the progress of the learners as a consequence of engaging the learners in the novel approaches in literacy. In this approach, a test was administered to pupils of Standard II, III, IV, V and VI. 12 ZEP schools were involved in this sampling and 1200 students were targeted 12 schools. It is also worth noting that the same tests were administered yearly so as to ensure validity and accuracy of results.

The test consisted of …. (brief about the test)

The major objectives of the test were to: (we need to summarise those objectives)

The scores of the learners were thus captured over three consecutive tests conducted with the same class. The data collected were recorded in the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 13.0 for Windows in order to perform data analysis procedures.

Ethical considerations

We were very conscious of the ethical considerations and safeguarding of the confidentiality of the profile of people and students involved in the project and in the context of the research (Birch et al, 2002). Our consideratations and intention were spelt out clearly to both facilitators and teachers involved in the project and the research agenda as well as the capacity building and school intervention agenda were clear from the outset. Prior to the data collection such as the interviews we made sure we obtained permission from the school administration and the participants who were the teachers working in the ZEP schools. In collecting sample works of students for the purpose of desk analysis and further demonstration, their names would not be revealed or identified. Similar concerns for keeping information for the questionnaires were maintained. As for the quantitative approach, we had to seek permission from the Ministry in a bid to represent data from specific schools and read them in a similar manner in the research. Our later interventions such as production of clips and educational videos were also guided by the similar ethical considerations and after obtaining the green light from stakeholders

QualitativeMethods (2008-12)

Qualitative (2009-12)

Quantitative (2010, 2011,2012)

Methods

Questionnaires administered to participants over the years 2009,2010, 2011

Researching impact on students:

Desks analysis , worksheets

Students worksheets and assessments , year 2009,2010, 2011

Testing over a period of three years

Nature of tests: writing of a short text. Pupils had to write independently a short text

Test 1 (2010): write a letter inviting friends to your birthday party (informed in advance)

Test 2 (2011): My first day at school (informed)

Test 3 (2012): letter – birthday party (not informed

Facilitators’ feedback and monitoring

Workshop evaluation questionnaires 2009, -2012

Fortnightly meetings

Individual interviews conducted at MIE and in schools

Observations and field notes

Stories of teachers and narratives (Samuel, Payneeandy 2012)Findings

From traditional practices to innovative approaches

Teacher’s Beliefs

Linking teacher beliefs to classroom practices that support literacy skills

Results from this research indicated that a discrepancy indeed existed between what school teachers stated as their beliefs about literacy and their classroom practices at the initial stage, that is, prior to joining the research project. Furthermore, results indicated that a plausible reason for this incongruity was a lack of or inadequate understanding of literacy skills/practices translated into the classroom. Ironically, while teachers are expected to teach literacy skills, literacy development is often not a focus of teacher preparation requirements. In fact, many teachers come to the classroom expected to know how to teach reading but without knowledge of children’s abilities that lead to emergent literacy or how to incorporate strategies that improve literacy into their curriculum.

Based on the objectives of the project d the main research, one of our main investigation was to …whether there was a change in the mindset of the teachers or not. The findings revealed in the table below illustrate that the perspectives of teachers prior to their engagement in the project and in the course of the project significantly differs. Teachers experiences in the project reveal that they begin to challenge their mindset and adopt a more positive outlook on the teaching and learning of literacy in primary classrooms. This is evidenced both by their feedback after the workshops they attended, their participation and readiness to collaborate with facilitators as well as our observations during classroom visits on a continual basis.

"At start I tried to implement strategies acquired at MIE, but…I had to develop my own approach ….with the literacy work, they are motivated to attend school …but do not have support from parents "

..After 4 years…involved in this MIE project I have developed lots of strategies which tackle literacy problems eg are : (Distinction between) word, sentence, and text level

… now I can tackle more specifially the problems children face in reading and writing

I would like to learn about strategies how to deal with those who do not know ABCD, … and do not recognise colours yet after 6 months"

More importantly however, in the course of the project, the facilitators also observed a change in their own beliefs. We observed and recorded the viewpoints of teachers who acknowledge that literacy instruction in ZEP schools is not dissimilar to literacy instruction per se and therefore not dissimilar to literacy instruction in any primary instruction . And that literacy instruction implies a closer understanding of literacy skills needed by learners. The teachers slowly adopted a better mindset and readiness to teach in a so called difficult contextladen with stigma of being an underachieveing school or a with history of failures rather than success stories. Gradually the teacher began to see more than the ‘deficit context’ the reistance factors such as parents, the school culture or the profile of the students. The focus began to change from what it used to be earlier to an approach that accepted a readiness to collaborate, venture in new skills . Their assumptions once challenged, began to give way to real practices. This is how the facilitators’ support became more meaningful and once both the teachers and the facilitators started working together, we could observe more tangible results.

This is how soon the primary school teachers replicated and began to reflect on their approaches and strategies for literacy instruction. As illustrated in Table… below, we observe that rather than being teacher centred and remaining aloof, teachers begin to make genuine efforts to bring student centredness and adopt an approach closer to appropriate literacy instruction. As such they begin to make use of varied strategies such as role play, pay closer attention to high frequency works, begin to use more words from their environment, phonics and eclectic approach to the learning of literacy. In addition they also begin to construct teaching aids such as sand tray, cookie jars, jumbled letters and big books among others. Teachers themselves acknowledged that earlier they were using deductive approaches that centred on the completion of the text book, direct teaching as well whole class teaching without reflecting on how learners language and understanding of how acquisition of literacy skills take place for learners.

Prior to engagement in Project

In the course of the Project

More teacher centred

Explains all the time

Start the class using text books

Improvising a lot from time to time during lessons ,

Direct translation

Spoon feeding

Refering to textbooks only

More use of blackboard

Make use of a variety of strategies such as

group work, , role play, brainstorming, mimes, story-telling

Use strategies at word level:

high frequency words,

Use of teaching aids such as

flashcards, jumbled letters…big book

Use, words in the environment,

Writing of sentences,

Writing of texts – shared writing

Print-rich classroom

Teacher professional development

The support system adopted of the course of the project was threefold; firstly we adopted the workshop sessions to bring together the teachers from different schools. These often took place with teachers of the same classes and were mainly divided in standard 1-3 versus 4-6 in the later phases of the project. Secondly the school based intervention of the facilitators in the form of field based training consolidated the philosophy of the project and gave more meaningful examplars and support to the teachers. Finally

To discuss with team: What this research covers and what it does not