Why did the professional development program not appear to result in more substantial and consistent change in her teaching practice? Why did Teacher A seemingly make more progress along the continuum of traditional-to-reform? (p. 29)
While I agree that using Tate's framework offers "attention to factors associated with equity", I would have liked Rousseau and Powell to dig deeper into the individual characteristics of these teachers. Again, I agree that attributing Teacher B's narrow implementation of reform mathematics to "personal traits or lack of effort" is inappropriate. But, I think a discussion of each teacher's self-efficacy would have added depth to our understanding of what happened at the classroom level of implementation. My request comes from two specific quotes found on page 27:
"..Teacher A appeared to feel less pressure to focus on test preparation. He expressed confidence that his students would pass the test, even without explicit efforts on his part to prepare them"
"Teacher B repeatedly expressed not only her concern that her students pass the test but also her view that teacher for understanding and preparing students to be successful on the test were, to a large extent, conflicting goals"
Bandura (1997) describes self-efficacy as ‘beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the course of action required to produce given attainments”. Teachers with a strong sense of individual efficacy believe that they can and will make a difference in student learning. They believe that all students can and will learn (Goddard, Hoy & Woolfolk Hoy, 2000).
Teacher A appears to have strong self-efficacy, despite not having a math degree, rich tasks, or teaching mathematics for the second year. This made me wonder: What was he like as a learner of mathematics? What is his vision of successful implementation of reform mathematics?
Teacher B appears to have lower self-efficacy because she did not believe that teaching for understanding would have prepared her students for the state test. Surely, her participation in the professional development would have exposed her to that data that indicates that "reform students do as well on skills as students on an understanding of concepts and problem solving" (Schoenfeld, 2002)?
ReferencesTherefore, I had the same questions for her. Gabriele & Joram (2007) suggests that one reason why the transition from traditional to reform-based mathematics teaching may be particularly difficult for teachers is that typical sources of evidence that teachers use to judge their teaching success, which in turn support their sense of teacher self-efficacy, are no longer operative. Success is defined differently when teaching reform-based mathematics, therefore self-efficacy is threatened. Was this the case for Teacher B?
While I agree that understanding the "barriers to change experienced by teachers in different contexts is to better support the implementation of reform", I think we also need to understanding what experiences and beliefs teachers bring to these contexts.
While I agree that understanding the "barriers to change experienced by teachers in different contexts is to better support the implementation of reform", I think we also need to understanding what experiences and beliefs teachers bring to these contexts.
Bandura, A. (1997) Self –Efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman
Gabriele, A. J., Joram, E. (2007) Teachers' Reflections on Their Reform-Based Teaching in
Mathematics: Implications for the Development of Teacher Self-Efficacy. Action in Teacher Education,
29 (3), 60-74.
Goddard, R., Hoy, W.K., Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000) Collective Teacher Efficacy: It’s meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507.
Schoenfeld, A. (2002) Making Mathematics Work for All Children: Issues of Standards, Testing, and Equity. Educational Researcher, 31(1), p. 13-25
You raise an interesting point, Devika. Throughout my B.Ed. program the one factor that was most influential in whether students did well in school or not was the knowledge that teachers possessed in the subject they taught; i.e. if you are teaching math, your students will be that much more successful as mathematicians if you yourself are knowledgeable in math. Although Teacher B had the mathematics background that Teacher A did not, perhaps more linked to teacher identity and success as a teacher is the self-efficacy piece...so since Teacher A had more self-confidence, the way he taught seemed knowledgeable, too?
ReplyDelete"Success is defined differently when teaching reform-based mathematics, therefore self-efficacy is threatened."
Although I agree with you that individual teachers' beliefs in themselves and their teaching abilities plays a role in how successful they are at implementing reform mathematics, I think perhaps the sense of self-efficacy can be an issue, again, of system proportions. If Teacher B is teaching in an area that focuses solely on the test scores and gives her limited resources and time to implement new methods of teaching, should we expect her to be confident or believe in what she is teaching? In particular, if she receives professional development on how to implement reform mathematics in her classroom but sees that she cannot for lack of resources and time, she may have felt even more defeated...I know I would.
I have a different perspective, because the way that I think about schooling/teaching/learning comes from a sociocultural, rather than a cognitive, perspective. To clarify:
ReplyDelete- cognitive perspectives focus on individuals, and while they sometimes take context into account, they are most concerned with what is 'in the head'
- sociocultural perspectives focus on people-in-context and argue that anything that seems 'inside the head' is inextricable from context.
Given this perspective, I would argue that there is no such thing as 'self-efficacy' that a teacher carries around with them. Instead, self-efficacy is a combination of person and context. So, a person's self-efficacy would not prevent them from implementing reform. Changing the context usually works better than changing the individual person.
Wow, I used the word 'perspective' about 7 times!
ReplyDelete