OBSERVATIONS OF TEACHER EXPERTISE BEHAVIOR BASED ON A CHECKLIST DEVELOPED FROM STUDENT PERCEPTIONS

1. OBSERVATIONS OF TEACHER EXPERTISE BEHAVIOR BASED ON A CHECKLIST DEVELOPED FROM STUDENT PERCEPTIONS EdCamp Philly unConference David D. Timony, Ph.D. May 22, 2010

2. Statement of the problem Expertise theory is not an applicable approach to exploration in the classroom. This is primarily due to the fact that the focus of expert performance is misplaced.

3. Purpose The purpose of this research is to examine student perceptions regarding teacher expertise in the classroom.

4. Significance of this study The utilization of student perception of teacher expertise is an area of research that has not been approached in this manner. By examining the behaviors that students perceive as functions and indicators of teacher expertise, it is my aim to explore the relationships among student perception, student/teacher outcomes, and inter-collegial perception.

5. Expertise theory background • 1899 Bryan & Harter • Telegraphers • Automaticity • More current trends are an outgrowth of Information processing theory • 1965 de Groot chess masters • 1998 Ericsson scientific study of expert performance and expert acquisition

6. Key components of Expertise development • Deliberate practice • Mentoring/coaching • Domain specificity • Principled knowledge

7. Glaser & Chi (1988) Experts • Excel in domain • Perceive meaningful patterns • Perform with speed & accuracy • Possess better short/long term memory • Perceive problems in deep, principled way • Analyze problems qualitatively • Self-monitor effectively in problem solving

8. Ericsson, Charness, & Tesch-Romer (1993) Experts • Perform 10+ years of practice • Utilize maximal adaptation within constraints of problems

9. An expert… To whom?

10. An untapped resource • Student as Expert? or • Student as consumer of Expertise? A new inquiry How capable are students of identifying expertise in the classroom?

11. Competence Defining the rules and roles in instructional contexts (Shelton, Lane, & Waldhart, 1999) • Student perceptions of college teachers • College teachers’ conveyance of competence • Positive perceptions benefit teacher and student

12. Study One An inquiry began in the interest of exploring the perceptions of high school students regarding their experiences and reactions to teachers whom they perceived to be experts or novices.

13. Research questions • Is there a difference between high school students and adults who participate in the Student Perception Descriptor survey? • Are students as perceptive as teachers and administrators in identifying behaviors of novice and expert teachers? • Do students adjust their effort based on their perception of teacher expertise?

14. Discussion group Participants 15 high school students African American Low SES Urban boarding school

15. Procedure Student Perception Descriptor Survey • 100-item survey • Based on frequency and clarity of statements • 49 items predicted as expert descriptors • 48 items predicted as novice descriptors • 3 dichotomous items included • Many student generated descriptors are reflective of the descriptors found in competence literature

16. Survey Participants 27 high school students 13 faculty members 5-25 years in current positions range of content areas 10 university students

17. Results The mean responses of the high school students range from 1.44 to 4.37 (2.93) compared to high school teachers whose responses range from 2.23 to 3.85 (1.62)

18. Results An ANOVA revealed 9 variables w/significant differences at the .01 level and 11 variables with significant differences at the .05 level. On eight of the nine items in the .01 range, the high school students rated the items as predicted when the survey was created. In all but two cases, the high school teachers rated the survey items in the 3 range.

19. 1=HS; 2=HS faculty; 3=college

20. Admins and teachers riding the fence? • not reliant on textbook • students give extra effort • well educated • demonstrates self control • students feel like they are learning

21. Summary Research question #1: Is there a difference between high school students and adults who participate in the Student Perception Descriptor survey? There were significant differences between students and adults on 20 items.

22. Summary Research question #2: Are students as perceptive as teachers and administrators in identifying behaviors of novice and expert teachers? Overall, the administrators and high school teachers were more likely to choose ‘either’ than the college students or the high school students

23. Summary Research question #3: Do students adjust their effort based on their perception of teacher expertise? Students in the discussion group reported that the decreased their effort if they perceived teachers to be novices.

24. The major study

25. The major study • Classroom observations of 25 teachers • Regular class periods of 42-60 minutes in length • Two non-traditional schools • Public charter school • Semi-private boarding school • Matching content areas • Social sciences 3/4 • Language arts 4/3 • Mathematics 3/3 • Science 3/2

26. Measures • Teacher Behavior Checklist • Original instrument • Developed from Study One data • Existing means: questionnaires • Summarized in Palmer et al. (2005) • Training • Certification • Affiliations • Tenure • Principal indication and ranking

27. Research questions: What type and frequency of behaviors from the Teacher Behavior Checklist are demonstrated in the high school classroom? What is the relationship among teachers indicated as experts according to existing means, nominated as experts by their supervisors, and those indicated as experts according to behaviors observed in class using the Teacher Behavior Checklist?

28. Question 1 Most observed behaviors

29. Question 1 Frequency and variety

30. Question 1 Expert scoring • Expert score • Total expert behaviors observed / total opportunities • Novice score • Total novice behaviors observed / total opportunities • Expertise composite • Expert score / Novice score

31. Question 2 Intercorrelations Uses examples Explains the subject clearly and effectively Controls class through teaching Controls the pace of learning Maintains little control over the class Can be taken advantage of Pushes students to excel Students excel Controls the pace of learning Maintains little control over the class --- Students excel Students give extra effort Immature Inconsistent with expectations

32. Question 2 Teacher types Correlations with four existing measures: Principal rank Experience Cooperating teacher Mentoring teacher

33. Question 2 Principal rank Correlated items primarily focus on the operation of the classroom rather than content or outcomes. Helpful not Immature Professional towards all students doesn’t want to Fit in with students Maintains control over the classroom

34. Question 2 Experienced teachers Correlated items focus on content knowledge and the delivery of teaching. Impresses students with knowledge Knows a subject thoroughly Easy to understand Explains the subject clearly and effectively Incorporates new concepts well Controls the pace of learning Moves at a challenging pace Uses examples

35. Question 2 Cooperating teacher Correlated items focus on relationships with students Aims to please students Confident Controls the pace of learning Friendly Gives students proper respect Knows the range of student abilities Not quick to send students to the office Treats all students the same

36. Question 2 Mentoring teacher Correlated items were a mix of content, delivery, classroom management, and student relationship items. Explains the subject clearly and effectively Incorporates new concepts well Knows the range of students’ ability Uses examples Brings authority to the workplace Controls the class through teaching Controls the pace of learning Gives students proper respect Sees things from the students’ points of view

37. Question 2 Behavioral schemes A greater number of expert behaviors were demonstrated by teachers who were: more experienced cooperating teachers mentors tenured

38. Question 2 Behavioral schemes A greater number of expert behaviors were demonstrated by teachers who were also indicated as experts by: Cleary & Groer (1994) Moallem (1998) Swanson, O’Connor, & Cooney (1990)

39. Question 2 Expert scoring Higher Expert scores were calculated for teachers who were: more experienced cooperating teachers cooperating teachers many times mentors tenured

40. Conclusion • Student reported expert and novice behaviors were accurate and measurable. • This study provides support for the utility of high school student perception in the evaluation of teacher expertise. • Support for the hypothesis that teachers with more expertise use a narrower behavioral scheme is supported by the data in this study.

41. Conclusion • This study opens many doors and asks many more questions while beginning to address an important gap in the literature. I am eager to continue seeking these answers.