Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

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).

Collective teacher efficacy is defined as the perceptions of

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.

Capitalizing on Advances in Teaching

and Learning Technologies

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.

Building New Learning Communities and Cultures

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

obligation to participate in activities and contribute to group

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