The inquiring teacher Clarifying the concept of teaching

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