© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 1

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 2

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 3

The style view

Teaching actions

Student outcomes

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 4

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 5

The style view

Teaching actions

Student outcomes

FLAW 2 Debates

about research findings

FLAW 3 Complex context

FLAW 1 Looks in

wrong place

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 6

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 7

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 8

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 9

The style view

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)

It is not what the teacher does that matters –

it is what is happening for the students.

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 10

The outcomes approach

Teaching actions

Student outcomes

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 11

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 12

The outcomes approach

Teaching actions

Student outcomes

FLAW 2 Diminishes

student contribution

FLAW 3 Measurement

of learning

FLAW 1 Prior

knowledge

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 13

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 14

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 15

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 16

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 17

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 18

The inquiry approach

Evidence 1

Question posing Data collection

and analysis

Teaching actions

Student outcomes

Inquiry 2 What are the possibilities?

Evidence 2

Craft knowledge Researcher

knowledge

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.

Opportunity to Learn

Working hypothesis

Inquiry 1 What is happening?

Pre- InquiryWhat is worth

spending time on?

© Graeme Aitken, The University of Auckland 19

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 20

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 21

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.