Assessing Foreign Language Pre-Service Teacher Dispositions in Situated Practice

1. Assessing Foreign Language Pre-Service Teacher Dispositions in Situated Practice Kristin Hoyt, Ph.D.Kennesaw State University The Seventh Symposium on Educator Dispositions Cincinnati, Ohio November 18, 2010

2. Background & context of study Presentation of study Findings & implications Discussion Questions & feedback Presentation Overview NNSED - Hoyt

3. Context • The institutional context: • Who is KSU? • Kennesaw State University • What is the PTEU model? • Professional Teacher Education Unit • What is our FL Education program like? NNSED - Hoyt

4. Background • Background (What prompted the study?) • Personal interest in reflective practice (Genetics or environment?) • Revisited program curriculum & program delivery (à la NCATE / SPA criteria) • Conducted small study re. candidates’ philosophy of teaching statements • Puzzled by nature of assignments / assessments that inspire critical, reflective thinking in candidates to cultivate dispositional development NNSED - Hoyt

5. A teaching and learning framework (Oja & Reiman, 2007) Practice-based theory (Oja & Reiman, 2007) Situated practice (Johnson & Reiman, 2007; Rieman & Peace, 2002) Developmental theory (Breese & Nawrocki-Chabin, 2007; Edick, Danielson & Edwards, 2007; Oja & Reiman, 2007) Constructivist principles (Oja & Reiman, 2007) Theoretical Connections to this Study NNSED - Hoyt

6. Study Design • Inductive, qualitative approach used in case study as a means to explore and interpret dispositional development in pre-service FL teachers • Effective teacher dispositions, operationally defined & characterized in five domains that represent key situational contexts of clinical practice • Content analysis of guided, written assignments that elicit critical reflection related to five dispositional domains, as experienced during clinical practice • Triangulation with questionnaire responses from university supervisors and evaluation reports by collaborating teachers NNSED - Hoyt

7. Instrument: FLED-TDI • Foreign Language Education-Teacher Dispositions Instrument: Assessment rubric used to identify incidences in which pre-service teachers make references in their written reflections to five domains of dispositional development • exchange with colleagues • decision-making • reflective practice • interaction with P-12 students • pedagogical reasoning skills NNSED - Hoyt

8. Working Definition of Dispositions • attitudes or habits of mind that mirror some degree of conscious, voluntary control, apart from coercion, are oriented toward the broad goals of well-prepared teachers, and result in behaviors and practices of effective teachers (Diez, 2007; Edick, et al., 2007; Katz, 1993; Reiman & Johnson, 2003) NNSED - Hoyt

9. Three Guiding Premises • Encountering challenges and grappling with decisions during real-time experience are central in advancing the development of dispositions. • Pre-service teachers’ first significant, relative conscious “undertaking of dispositional development” is realized primarily during their school site-based field experiences - a critical time and place to foster attitudinal change. • To cultivate dispositional development during this critical window of time, pre-service teachers need to have specific opportunities … NNSED - Hoyt

10. Three Guiding Premises (cont.) To cultivate dispositional development during this critical window of time, pre-service teachers need to have specific opportunities … • to advance pre-dispositional growth through specific & focused reflective assignments during their sequence of university coursework (which should be grounded in a framework of dispositional development); • to demonstrate adequate progress in pre-dispositional growth; and • to respond in personalized and meaningful ways to the varied dynamics of their clinical experience with specific & focused reflective assignments. NNSED - Hoyt

11. Guiding Questions • What do pre-service FL teachers’ guided written reflections say about how they face their clinical field experience and the kind of meaning it has for them? • How might assessment of incidences, in which pre-service FL teachers make dispositional references in their written reflections, inform the evaluation of dispositional development? NNSED - Hoyt

12. Participants • Began with six pre-service FL teacher candidates enrolled in (entirely field-based) pre-student teaching course: FLED TOSS (Teaching of Specific Subjects). • Three candidates articulated to student teaching course the following semester. • Limited data analysis to those three candidates for TOSS & Student Teaching. NNSED - Hoyt

13. Data Sources • Pre-service teacher candidates: • Site Reflections / Journal Reflections • Written reflection on videotaped teaching event • Outcome narrative statements • University supervisors: • Mid-term & final Likert scale questionnaires • Collaborating teachers: • Written evaluations NNSED - Hoyt

14. Data Analysis • Using FLED-TDI, identified & coded references to five domains in three reflective writing assignments • One assessor for 3 TOSS reflective writing sources; another assessor for 3 Student Teaching reflective writing sources • Simple tally-count and means for Supervisor Likert ratings in each domain • Second assessor also identified references to five domains in Collaborating Teacher evaluations NNSED - Hoyt

15. Results:Three Reflective Writing Assignments NNSED - Hoyt

16. Results:Five Domains in Written Reflections NNSED - Hoyt

17. Results:Supervisor Ratings NNSED - Hoyt

18. Results:Collaborating Teacher Evaluations NNSED - Hoyt

19. General Findings • Reflective writing assignments generate references to five domains of disposition. • All five dispositional domains are evidenced in data from pre-service teacher candidates, university supervisors, and collaborating teachers. • FLED-TDI assessment instrument ‘holds-up” in initial implementation • Accessible to outside assessor and produced positive results NNSED - Hoyt

20. Specific Findings • Site & Journal Reflections yield the most references to five domains. • When considering combined TOSS & ST incidences in written assignments, Reflective Practice is the most-addressed domain – nearly double the references to other four domains. • Pedagogical Reasoning Skills yields the highest overall rating from Supervisors in both TOSS & ST. • Collaborating Teacher evaluations of both TOSS & ST yield equal references for Exchange with Colleagues & Interaction with P-12 Learners. These two domains elicited twice as many references as other three domains. NNSED - Hoyt

21. Possible Interpretations • Site & Journal Reflections yield the most references to five domains. • These assignments inspire and invoke greater critical reflection. • When considering combined TOSS & ST incidences. Reflective Practice is the most-addressed domain – nearly double the references to other four domains. • This domain is more comprehensive; extends into other four domains. NNSED - Hoyt

22. Possible Interpretations(cont.) • Pedagogical Reasoning Skills yields the highest overall rating from Supervisors in both TOSS & ST. • Viewed / understood by Supervisors as most linked to instructional delivery / implementation in the classroom setting. • Collaborating Teacher evaluations of both TOSS & Student Teaching yield equal references for Exchange with Colleagues & Interaction with P-12 Learners. Both of these domains yielded twice as many references as the other three domains. • This is ‘front & foremost’ to the world of the classroom teacher. NNSED - Hoyt

23. General Implications • Continue / repeat study with revisions • Share results with program faculty • Elicit their input / feedback as component of program evaluation • Share results with PTEU faculty, via newly-formed “Dispositions Task Force” NNSED - Hoyt

24. Specific Implications • Revise reflective writing assignments that yielded lower dispositional response • Expand data sources to strengthen findings with evidence ‘from the field’ • Design program-specific (observation) evaluation form for Collaborating Teachers • Develop CT Orientation & train Supervisors • Modify Supervisor evaluation instruments (beyond Likert Questionnaire) with focus on five domains NNSED - Hoyt

25. Limitations • Variability in participants • Are they representative of the typical cohort of pre-service FL teachers? (small n) • Variability in field experience teaching contexts • Collaborating teachers and P-12 learners • Variability in data analysis • Need for additional ‘qualified’ raters to establish interrater reliability. NNSED - Hoyt

26. Limitations (cont.) • Limited data sources • Need other data sources to strengthen triangulation • Design of some assignments ‘non-inspirational’ • Variability in data sources • Participant ‘engagement’ in assignment completion varied over time and across assignments • Collaborating teachers’ use / lack of use of various different forms & amount of narrative feedback NNSED - Hoyt

27. Discussion I invite your comments, questions, feedback. Thank you! NNSED - Hoyt

28. References Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1998). Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 191-206. Breese, L., & Nawrocki-Chabin, R. (2007). Social-cognitive perspective in dispositional development (pp. 31-52). In M. Diez & J. Raths, J. (eds.), Dispositions in teacher education. Charlotte, NC: IAP-Information Age Publishing. Edick, N., Danielson, L., & Edwards, S. (2007). Dispositions: Defining, aligning and assessing. Academic Leadership, 4(4). Accessed online at: http://www.academicleadership.org/emprical_research/Dispositions_Defining_Aligning_and_Assessing.shtml. NNSED - Hoyt

29. References(cont.) Gore, J., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Action research and reflective teaching in preservice teacher education: A case study from the United States. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(2), 119-136. Hoyt, K., & Bernardy, A. (2008). Fostering dispositions in teacher candidates through a written teaching philosophy. Orlando, FL: Session presentation at the ACTFL Annual Meeting. Johnson, L. E. & Reiman, A. J. (2007). Beginning teacher disposition: Examining the moral/ethical domain. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 676-687. Johnson, L. E. (2008). Teacher candidate disposition: Moral judgment or regurgitation? Journal of Moral Education, 37(4), 429-222. NNSED - Hoyt

30. References (cont.) Katz, L. G., & Raths J. D. (1985). Dispositions as goals for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1(4), 301-307. Oja, S. N. & Reiman, A. J. (2007). A constructive-developmental perspective (pp. 91-116). In M. Diez & J. Raths, J. (eds.), Dispositions in teacher education. Charlotte, NC: IAP-Information Age Publishing. Reiman, A. J. & DeAngelis Peace, A. (2002). Promoting teachers’ moral reasoning and collaborative inquiry performance: A developmental role-taking and guided inquiry study. Journal of Moral Education, 31(1), 51-66. Wasicsko, Mark M., Callahan, C. J., & Wirtz, P. (2004). Integrating dispositions into the conceptual framework: Four a priori questions. KCA Journal, 23(1), pp. 1-6. NNSED - Hoyt

31. Contact Information Kristin Hoyt, Ph.D. Kennesaw State University Department of Foreign Languages 1000 Chastain Road, Box 1804 Kennesaw, GA khoyt3@kennesaw.edu NNSED - Hoyt