Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology
Research to Policy for Guiding Educational Reform
Download 9.82 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- Contributions of Educational Psychology to Effective Reform 593
- Contributions of Educational Psychology to Effective Reform 595
- Building New Learning Communities and Cultures
592 Research to Policy for Guiding Educational Reform Understanding Components of Effective Teachers, Teaching, and Teacher Development The past decade of research has seen an increased focus on teaching, teachers, and teacher education. Part of this in- creased attention is due to a growing understanding of the na- ture of learning and the role of teachers as lifelong and expert learners. Hoy (2000) argues for the need to place learning at the center of teaching, which means that teachers must have both deep content knowledge and a deep understanding of learning, motivation, and development. She also describes shifts in teacher education toward more integrative study that contextualizes content and pedagogical knowledge in social environments and inquiry-based curricula. Collaboration between and among students and teachers at all levels of schooling is another trend, along with encouraging reflection and field-based experiences. The concern is raised that edu- cational psychology may get lost or marginalized in these trends, challenging us to think through how to situate and in- tegrate our knowledge base and make processes of learning, motivation, and development more visible and accessible to teacher education students. A specific look at the impact of teacher education on teachers of secondary mathematics is described by Borko et al. (2000). They argue that for teacher education to make a difference, both university experiences and field placements need to share comparable visions of reformed practice and teacher learning as situated in reformed practice. Such prac- tice has methods situated (i.e., taught in the context of ) in the content area (e.g., mathematics) and uses learning tasks that encourage multiple representations, solution strategies, and actively involve students in the learning process (e.g., having them make conjectures, provide justifications and explana- tions, and draw conclusions). Similarly, Zech, Cause-Vega, Bray, Secules, and Goldman (2000) describe a professional development model, content-based collaborative inquiry (CBCI), that engages educators in inquiring and constructing their own knowledge with a focus on their own and their stu- dents’ understanding and learning processes. Sustaining communities of inquiry to support lifelong teacher learning and educational reform is discussed as a way to shift practic- ing teachers’ orientations toward knowledge and knowing. By helping teachers focus on students’ understanding in con- tent domains, teachers’ critical reflection and assessment of their content knowledge and practice occurs. Collaborative inquiry helps uncover assumptions and build communities of practice based on trusting relationships. Van den Berg and Ros (1999) remind us that teachers have individual questions, needs, and opinions about innovations and reform initiatives that must be attended to in any reform process. Using a concerns-based approach, different types of concerns were revealed at different stages of the innovation process and pointed to the need to attune innovation policies to these factors. Three clusters of concerns were identified: self-worries (e.g., amount of work involved in the innova- tion), task worries (e.g., classes too big to accommodate the innovation), and other worries (e.g., getting older colleagues to implement the innovation). The teachers’ concerns varied as a function of stage of the innovation (adoption, implemen- tation, institutionalization), with self-worries more apparent in the adoption stage, task worries emphasized more in the implementation stage, and more other worries present in the institutionalization stage. The authors conclude with a plea to include opinions of teachers as well as orientation toward uncertainty in reform efforts and to provide explicit opportunities for reflection and dialogue in ongoing work- shops and seminars. The importance of collective teacher efficacy for student achievement is explored by Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy (2000).
teachers in a school that the efforts of the faculty as a whole will positively affect students. A measure was developed and validated, and it was shown to have a positive relationship with student achievement in both reading and mathematics. It was also shown to differentiate achievement differences between schools; higher levels of collective teacher efficacy were related to gains in reading and mathematics achieve- ment. When teachers share a sense of efficacy, they act more purposefully to enhance student learning and are supported organizationally to reflect on efforts that are likely to meet the unique needs of students. Another critical variable is the degree to which teachers believe that instructional choice promotes learning and moti- vation. In spite of a large literature documenting the positive effects of choice—particularly on affective areas such as in- terest, ownership, creativity, and personal autonomy—many teachers continue to limit student choice. Flowerday and Schraw (2000) interviewed 36 practicing teachers to examine what, when, where, and to whom teachers offer choice. Among the findings were that teachers with high self-efficacy are more likely to provide instructional choices, as are teach- ers who themselves feel intellectually and psychologically autonomous and who are more experienced in particular sub- ject areas. Most or all teachers agreed that choice should be used (a) in all grades, with older students needing more choices; (b) in a variety of settings, on different tasks, and for academic and social activities; and (c) in ways that offer sim- ple choices first, help students practice making good choices, use team choices for younger students, provide information that clarifies the choice, and offer choices within a task.
Contributions of Educational Psychology to Effective Reform 593 New learner-centered professional development models for teachers focus on examining beliefs, empowerment, teacher responsibility for their own growth, teachers as lead- ers, and development of higher-order thinking and personal reflection skills (e.g., Darling-Hammond, 1996; Fullan, 1995; McCombs & Whisler, 1997). A key to teachers’ abili- ties to accept and implement these learner-centered models is support in the form of self-assessment tools for becoming more aware of their beliefs, practices, and the impact of these practices on students. Information from teachers’ self- assessments can then be used by teachers to identify—in a nonthreatening and nonjudgmental context—the changes in practice that are needed to better serve the learning needs of all students. In this way, teachers can begin to take responsi- bility for developing their own professional development plans. A number of researchers are creating instruments to help teachers at all levels of the educational system (K–16) look at their own and their students’ perceptions of their learning experiences. To date, however, these tools are available in innovative teacher preparation programs and are not used in higher education in general largely because of reluctance among many college administrators to change current evalu- ation procedures that are based on direct instruction rather than holistic and constructivist models of teacher classroom practices. Changes in evaluation procedures are occurring in teacher education, and current approaches support teacher growth with learning opportunities that (a) encourage reflection, crit- ical thinking, and dialogue and (b) allow teachers to examine educational theories and practices in light of their beliefs and experiences. For teachers to change their beliefs to be compatible with more learner-centered and constructivist practices, however, they need to be engaged in reflective processes that help them become clearer about the gap between what they are accomplishing and what needs to be accomplished. Reflection is defined by Loughran (1996) as a recapturing of experience in which the person thinks about an idea, mulls it over, and evaluates it. Thus, Loughran argues that reflection helps develop the habits, skills, and attitudes necessary for teachers’ self-directed growth. The work of my colleagues and me in developing a set of self-assessment and reflection tools for K–16 teachers (ALCP), in the form of surveys for teachers, students, and administrators, combines aspects of these approaches (McCombs & Lauer, 1997; McCombs, Lauer, & Pierce, 1998; McCombs & Whisler, 1997). However, the focus, is on identifying teacher beliefs and discrepancies between teacher and student perspectives of practices that can enhance stu- dent motivation and achievement—as a tool to assist teachers in reflecting on and changing practices as well as identifying personalized staff development needs. Our research (McCombs & Lauer, 1997; McCombs et al., 1998; McCombs & Whisler, 1997) looked at the impact of teacher beliefs on their perceptions of their classroom prac- tices as well as how teacher perceptions of practice differ from student perceptions of these practices. In a large-scale study of teachers and students, we confirmed our hypothesis about the importance—for student motivation, learning, and achievement—of those beliefs and practices that are consis- tent with the research on learners and learning. We also found that teachers who are more learner-centered are both more successful in engaging all students in an effective learn- ing process and are themselves more effective learners and happier with their jobs. Furthermore, teachers report that the process of self-assessment and reflection—particularly about discrepancies between their own and their individual stu- dents’ experiences of classroom practices—helps them iden- tify areas in which they might change their practices to be more effective in reaching more students. This is an impor- tant finding that relates to the how of transformation—that is, by helping teachers and others engage in a process of self- assessment and reflection, particularly about the impact of their beliefs and practices on individual students and their learning and motivation, a respectful and nonjudgmental im- petus to change is provided. Combining the opportunity for teacher self-assessment of and reflection on their beliefs and practices (and the impact of these practices on individual stu- dents) with skill training and conversations and dialogue about how to create learner-centered K–16 schools and class- rooms can help make the transformation complete. Our research also revealed that teachers were not ab- solutely learner-centered or completely non-learner-centered. Different learner-centered teachers had different but overlap- ping beliefs. At the same time, however, specific beliefs or teaching practices could be classified as learner-centered (likely to enhance motivation, learning, and success) or non- learner-centered (likely to hinder motivation, learning, and success). Learner-centered teachers are defined as those whose beliefs and practices were classified more as learner- centered than as non learner-centered. For example, believing all students learn is quite different from believing that some students cannot learn, the former being learner-centered and the latter being non-learner-centered. Learner-centered teachers see each student as unique and capable of learning, have a perspective that focuses on the learner’s knowing that the teacher’s beliefs promote learning, understand basic principles defining learners and learning, and honor and accept the student’s point of view (McCombs, 2000a; McCombs & Lauer, 1997). As a result, the student’s natural 594 Research to Policy for Guiding Educational Reform inclinations—to learn, master the environment, and grow in positive ways—are enhanced.
In a review of emerging Web-based learning environments, McNabb and McCombs (2001) point out that recent efforts to infuse electronic networking into school buildings via the Internet promise to promote connections among teachers and students in classrooms and those in the community at large. At the same time, uses of electronic networks for educational purposes cause large disturbances to the closed-ended nature of twentieth-century classroom practices (Heflich, 2001; Jones, 2001; McNabb, 2001). What becomes apparent are misalignments among curricular goals and resources, instruc- tional practices, assessments, and accountability policies governing learning activities. The current shortage of quali- fied teachers available to the nation’s children on an equitable basis provides an additional challenge and opportunity for systemically transforming the nature of schooling to better meet the needs of twenty-first-century learners. Haywood (personal communication, University of Edinburgh and Open University, June 15, 2001) argues that to overcome built-in inertia in traditional systems and the people they serve (students, teachers, administrators) re- quires new forms of learning, assessment, and community. New forms of communication that emerge in electronic- learning cultures may lead to new and better forms of social- ization. Some of the bigger challenges in distance learning have been in how to help people handle change and in sup- porting new educational processes while working within the dominant traditional systems. The implementation issues range from determining the number of computers needed to how computers are used and how much they are used. Current research at the Open University and other European institutions supporting some form of Web-based learning is now focusing on identifying the range of individ- ual and group learning outcomes that must be assessed in both formative and summative ways. Other issues include finding new ways of communicating (Barnes, University of Bristol, personal communication, June 19, 2001) and identi- fying new social learning outcomes that result. Current chal- lenges include communicating across several mediums in electronic-learning environments, looking at change over time, and finding ways to reward risk-taking at the personal and institutional levels as traditional K–20 systems make steps to change current learning and assessment paradigms. Taking up the challenge of building learner-centered and technology-based classrooms, Orrill (2001) describes how teachers can be supported toward this goal with professional development that includes reflection, proximal goals, colle- gial support groups, one-on-one feedback, and support materials for teachers. The framework was based on the assumption that change is individual but must be supported over time in the social context of schools. Data were col- lected on 10 middle school teachers using simulations in pro- ject-based learning over a 4-month period. Refinements to the professional development framework included helping teachers to develop reflective skills prior to using proximal goals to focus reflection activities. Outside resources, one- on-one feedback, and collegial group meetings are then used to enhance the interplay between reflection and proximal goals. Guidance is essential as part of the development of reflection such that teachers see the importance of focusing on learner-centered goals that can be enacted immediately in refining the simulation activities. Significant in using emerging technologies are personal- ization strategies. Just as Lin (2001) found higher levels of social development and achievement when metacognitive ac- tivities included self-as-learner knowledge, Moreno and Mayer (2000) report that personalized multimedia messages can increase student engagement in active learning. In a se- ries of five experiments with college students, personalized rather than neutral messages resulted in better retention and problem-solving transfer. The importance of self-reference to student engagement and motivation has a long-standing re- search base, but it appears to be especially important in tech- nology-based learning, particularly because it also influences higher learning outcomes. The issue of scaling up technology-embedded and project- based innovations in systemic reform is addressed by Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, Marx, and Soloway (2000). Studying urban middle schools, a framework is used to gauge the fit of these innovations with existing school capabilities, policy and management structures, and the organizational culture. The authors argue that the research community needs to create an agenda that can document how innovations work in different contexts and how to select reforms that match outcomes that are valued in their community and that are compatible with state and national agendas. Collaboration with teachers and administrators not only can help them adapt the innovation to make it achievable, but such collabo- ration also can promote an understanding of what will be require for sustainable systemic innovations that challenge traditional methods. Of significance in this work with technology-based teach- ing and learning systems is the growing agreement that what we know about learning, motivation, development, and ef- fective schooling practices will transfer to the design of these
Contributions of Educational Psychology to Effective Reform 595 new systems (McNabb & McCombs, 2001). What we have learned that is particularly applicable includes findings sum- marized earlier in this chapter and in many of the other chap- ters in this volume: Comprehensive dimensions of successful schools and learning environments must be concerned with (a) promoting a sense of belonging and agency, (b) engaging families in children’s learning and education, (c) using a quality and integrated curriculum, (d) providing ongoing pro- fessional development in both content and child development areas (including pedagogy), (e) having high student expecta- tions, and (f) providing opportunities for success for all students.
In most institutions of elementary, secondary, and higher education and progressively within professional development programs, teachers, administrators, policy makers, and those in content-area disciplines are isolated from each other. It is difficult to find examples of cross-department collaborations in course design, multidisciplinary learning opportunities, or organizational structures and physical facilities that allow in- teractions and dialogue among a range of educational stake- holders. Schools are isolated from emerging content in professional disciplines. Change is often mandated from above or from outside the system. Critical connections are not being made, and it is not difficult to foresee that change is then difficult and often resisted because of personal fears or insecurities. Those fears and insecurities disappear when peo- ple participate together in creating how their work gets done. In developing effective learning communities and cul- tures, it is important to see the role of educational psychol- ogy’s knowledge base and the principles derived from this knowledge base in a systemic context. It is important to understand that education is one of many complex living systems that functions to support particular human needs (cf. Wheatley, 1999). Even though such systems are by their nature unpredictable, they can be understood in terms of prin- ciples that define human needs, cognitive and motivational processes, interpersonal and social factors, and development and individual differences. A framework based on research- validated principles can then inform not only curriculum, in- struction, assessment, and related professional development but also organizational changes needed to create learner- centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered, and community-centered practices that lead to more healthy com- munities and cultures for learning. Effective schools function as a healthy living system— an interconnected human network that supports teachers, students, and their relationships within communities of expert practice. In placing emphasis on the learner-centered developments of both students and teachers (as expert learn- ers) within the context of emerging technologies, educational psychology’s knowledge based can be applied to building a fully functioning living system. This system supports a com- munity network of members who are connected and respon- sive to each other. Community members interact in ways that precipitate learning and social development on all levels of the system. With the recent infusion and development of new and innovative technologies, researchers and scientists have imagined and implemented a wide range of methods for mak- ing this goal attainable. Studies about the impact of the Internet on society and communities show that people in general are using the Internet at home, at the library, and at work for a variety of purposes including informal learning (Bollier, 2000; English- Lueck, 1998; Nie & Erbing, 2000; Shields & Behrman, 2000). Children are finding connections to basic and ad- vanced knowledge available in and generated through the community; some of this knowledge can conflict with that in textbooks. Youth’s career exploration and teachers’ profes- sional development is best served in the community arena. Geographic cultures are converging electronically with other cultures via networks that allow easy movement in and out of many cultures. McNabb (2001) points out that histori- cally research shows that positive cultural experiences based on mediated interactions with others are a vital part of chil- dren’s personal and interpersonal development that fosters one’s overall ability to learn (Boyer, 1995; Dewey, 1990; Feuerstein & Feuerstein, 1991; Vygotsky, 1978). Wilson (2001) explains that culture refers to the set of ar- tifacts and meanings (norms, expectations, tools, stories, lan- guage and activities, etc.) attached to a fairly stable group of people associating with each other; thus, as humans, each of us is (in a sense) multicultural and multilingual as we adapt to different cultural norms required by different groups and al- legiances, a phenomenon that can proliferate on the Internet. It is community that helps bring coherence to our multicul- tural experiences. Wilson identifies belonging, trust, expecta- tion, and obligation as defining characteristics of community. A sense of belonging within the community pertains to com- mon purposes and values; trust pertains to acting for the good of the whole. Community carries an expectation among its members that the group provides value—particularly with respect to each other’s learning goals and with that a sense of
goals.
In addition, evidence shows that electronically networked cultures and communities are causing shifts related to con- trol of these new cultures for learning. In the twentieth-century
|
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling