Examining Pre-Service Teacher’s Dispositions from a New Developmental Perspective

1. Examining Pre-Service Teacher’s Dispositions from a New Developmental Perspective Trini Lewis Hiromi Masunagatlewis2@csulb.edu hmasunag@csulb.edu Associate Professor Associate ProfessorTeacher Education Advanced Studies in Department Education & Counseling California State University Long Beach College of Education

2. The slides can also be downloaded at: www.csulb.edu/~tlewis2/ConferencePresentations.htm

3. Agenda(Interactive Dialogue Session 75 mins.) • Welcoming & Introduction (10 mins.) • Presentation (Trini & Hiromi 30 mins) • Interactive Activity (small groups discuss what variability in dispositions might look like on their campus 20 mins.) • Wrap-up/Sharing 15 mins.

4. The Current Situation in Practice • Wide-spread agreement exists among teacher educators about the pedagogical skills and content knowledge pre-service teacher candidates need to become highly qualified teacher educators. • Great variation exists regarding professional dispositions (i.e., moral character, professional attitudes). • Questions also remain about whether or not dispositions can be taught and learned. • A lack of consensus persists with defining and evaluating dispositions.

5. The Current Situation in Research • There is an absence of research literature in this area, but recent works indicate a trend towards improvement and research studies are emerging. • Richardson (1996) notes that attitudes were considerably important in teacher education programs between the early 1950’s and early 1970’s, but were not well researched in the literature. • Current work focuses on: • Specific content areas such as physical education, science, math education. • Diversity and disability • Guiding principals for evaluation

6. Gaps in the Literature • Few studies examine the developmental aspects affecting pre-service teacher’s dispositions, and when they do, the examination focuses on stages of development from a static perspective. • Research in the area of cognitive science from the last 20 years indicates that development is not linear nor is it manifested in stages. Rather, the way our mind works and how we learn is continuous and performance on tasks is quite variable especially in adult development (Willingham, 2008).

7. Purpose of Our Study & Questions • Our study sought to understand the development of pre-service teachers dispositions from a perspective that looked. The aim was also to gain insight about the variability in our candidates’ progress as professional educators. A survey tool was utilized to to collect data about our our pre-service teachers dispositions. • What types of dispositions can be assessed in a survey instrument? • What are the dispositions of cohort of teacher candidates before and after their student teaching practicum? • Are some dispositions more challenging to develop than others, and if so, under what conditions? • What are the implications for pre-service teachers and their university supervisors for improving the mentoring process?

8. Mixed Methods Approach (Obtained IRB approval to use existing data) Participants • 269 pre-service teacher candidates • Subset of 4 challenged/at risk students Quantitative • Pre and post survey instrument Qualitative • Letters of recommendation • Autobiographical statements • GPAs/transcripts • Formative and summative student teaching evaluations

9. Data Analysis Quantitative Data Analysis • Factor Analysis • Paired samples t-test • Cohen’s D Qualitative Data Analysis • Matrices

10. Results • What types of dispositions can be and were assessed in a survey instrument? • Measured 4 dispositions reflected in the California TPEs 12 and 13 • Self-efficacy • Reflection • Professional standards and ethics • Collaboration

13. Factor Analysis Results (Pre-Survey)

14. Factor Analysis (Post-Survey)

15. Factor Analysis Using 15 Pre-survey and 15 Post-survey Items

16. Dispositions Before and After Student Teaching • Paired t-test results indicated that mean scores on pre-survey items were significantly higher than for post-survey items for: • item 1 on collaboration • item 8 on reflection • item 9 on professional standards and ethics • item 13 on professional standards and ethics • These results were at first perplexing, in that we anticipated the scores on the post-survey items would be higher than on the pre-survey items due to the teacher candidates’ successful experiences during the student teaching practicum.

17. How Could that Be! • Although there was no correlating evidence, based on our knowledge about our teacher preparation program, we postulated that the candidate’s higher mean scores for the pre-survey items might have resulted for two reasons: • the dispositions were developed prior to the student teaching practicum 2. our teacher education course work and related assignments were important factors in shaping the four target professional dispositions of our teacher candidates prior to their student teaching practicum—course work had a positive effect. 3. Students inflated their scores??

18. Post-survey Results • Furthermore, the results indicated higher mean scores on the post-survey for: • items 2 and 14 on self-efficacy • item 3 on collaboration • items 7 and 12 on reflection.

19. Results • 13 of the survey items on pre- and post surveys had high mean scores (3.0 or higher on the 1-4 scale). • The results suggested that our pre-service candidates were positioned to successfully enter employment as professional educators. • But that wasn’t enough of an interpretation!

20. What Else Might the Post-Survey Results Mean? • We further postulated that the student teaching practicum was an influential event that enhanced the development of our teacher candidate’s dispositions on self-efficacy. • For example, during the student teaching experience, candidates were provided frequent and valuable opportunities for monitoring their performance by establishing new goals to meet the challenges they encountered in their daily teaching experiences. In some areas, such as self-efficacy, the student teaching practicum had a positive effect on the development of the majority of our pre-service teachers’ dispositions.

21. What About the Students Who Didn’t Succeed?

22. Challenged vs. Unchallenged • 4 students were identified with lower mean scores than their sample peers (n=265). • The qualitative data also indicated that they did not pass their first student teaching assignment. We refer to this small sub-set as the challenged group • Differences existed among the students who were unchallenged and challenged. • For example the mean scores on the post-survey items 7, 12, 13, 14, and 15 were lower for the challenged group in comparison with the unchallenged students.

23. Why Was it Important to Further Examine the Data Pertaining to the Unchallenged Students and to Examine Qualitative Data? • Although the sub-set was small, we knew there were other challenged candidates (who couldn’t be included in our study due to incomplete data sets). • There would be challenged candidates in future cohorts. • Survey analysis was limited for explaining why the challenged students were at risk for not completing the program. • Needed to look at qualitative data.

24. What was Difficult for the Challenged Students? Perplexing Data! • Information in the credential file, letters, GPAs, etc. indicated the absence of any problems for working in schools • However….evidence from the formative teaching evaluations contrasted boldly. University supervisors indicated issues related to: • Self-efficacy • Reflection • Collaboration • Adhering to professional standards and ethics.

25. Examples of the Issues • Excessive tardiness or absences • Problems with following through with suggestions from the master teacher and/or university supervisor for improving classroom performance. • Classroom problems due to teacher or children not liking the student teacher.

26. What Happened to the Challenged Candidates? • Repeated the practicum and passed with a satisfactory rating, suggesting that with additional and improved mentoring and practice the at risk candidate can succeed!

27. Discussion • The results from the factor analysis in our exploratory study suggested that our survey instrument assessed four dispositions related to self-efficacy, reflection, professional standards and ethics, and reflection. • A surprising, yet intriguing finding was the variation in the development of the teacher candidates’ dispositions. Particular dispositions before or after the student teaching practicum exhibited shifts toward good progress, while others indicated areas in need of improvement.

28. Discussion • The importance of the findings indicates that the development of our teacher candidates’ dispositions was not a linear process with a beginning and an endpoint, but a dynamic one characterized by unstable traits (Diez, 2006) which master teachers and practicum supervisors might positively affect in their roles as mentors.

29. Discussion • Given the satisfactory performance of the candidates in their second student teaching assignment, the possibility exists that the dispositions and particularly the disposition of reflective inquiry the candidates were expected to develop required additional time, practice, and mentoring. • Variation in the development of dispositions might be the pattern which needs to be identified and monitored before, and not only during or after student teaching when it might be too late to intervene. • NCATE advocates the use of only observable data and this approach might preclude important information that is not always observable.

30. Discussion • A Word of Caution • Some researchers/authors caution against quantifying and enumerating dispositions. • McKnight (2004) warns that it can lead to hype-professionalization and preclude more intimate assessment methods. • Diez (2006) also claims that problems can emerge related to • standardization • reductionism • disconnectedness • superficiality • a culture of compliance (compliance is the only aim)

31. Significance & Directions for Future Research • Our survey tool shows promise for promoting an assessment process noted by Diez (2006) as assessment-as-learning. Our survey was useful for examining the variable nuances affecting the dynamic development of pre-service candidates’ professional dispositions and for enhancing existing and traditional methods related to observable data. • One size might not fit all in assessing dispositions and teacher educators who seek to examine the dynamic character of dispositions will need to develop a reliable instrument that is appropriate for their institutional needs and is in alignment with their state standards. • A survey tool should be one assessment technique among a variety of others and not the only one. Research is needed to examine how survey instruments can enhance other methods for assessing dispositions.

32. Closing Comments • As Darling-Hammond (2000) claims, the preparation of teachers should include inquiry that is sensitive and systematic to variation. Teacher candidates should “…become sensitive to variation and more aware of what works for what purposes in what situations. Access to contingent knowledge allows them to become more thoughtful decision makers” (p.170).

33. Interactive Activity (20 minutes) & Sharing (15minutes)

34. Discuss What are the Variables Affecting Your Pre-service Candidates’ Dispositions? • Three Important Examples for Consideration Found in our Study. • Previous Experiences prior to Enrolling in the teacher education program. • Successful experiences working with children. • Coursework • Assignments/projects assessing dispositions. • Practicum • Lesson planning and delivery of instruction • Collaboration with master teacher, other school personnel, university supervisor.)