U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • J Adv Med Educ Prof
  • v.4(4); 2016 Oct

Effective Teaching Methods in Higher Education: Requirements and Barriers

Nahid shirani bidabadi.

1 Psychology and Educational Sciences School, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran;

AHMMADREZA NASR ISFAHANI

Amir rouhollahi.

2 Department of English, Management and Information School, Isfahan University of Medical Science, Isfahan, Iran;

ROYA KHALILI

3 Quality Improvement in Clinical Education Research Center, Education Development Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Introduction:

Teaching is one of the main components in educational planning which is a key factor in conducting educational plans. Despite the importance of good teaching, the outcomes are far from ideal. The present qualitative study aimed to investigate effective teaching in higher education in Iran based on the experiences of best professors in the country and the best local professors of Isfahan University of Technology.

This qualitative content analysis study was conducted through purposeful sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten faculty members (3 of them from the best professors in the country and 7 from the best local professors). Content analysis was performed by MAXQDA software. The codes, categories and themes were explored through an inductive process that began from semantic units or direct quotations to general themes.

According to the results of this study, the best teaching approach is the mixed method (student-centered together with teacher-centered) plus educational planning and previous readiness. But whenever the teachers can teach using this method confront with some barriers and requirements; some of these requirements are prerequisite in professors' behavior and some of these are prerequisite in professors’ outlook. Also, there are some major barriers, some of which are associated with the professors’ operation and others are related to laws and regulations. Implications of these findings for teachers’ preparation in education are discussed.

Conclusion:

In the present study, it was illustrated that a good teaching method helps the students to question their preconceptions, and motivates them to learn, by putting them in a situation in which they come to see themselves as the authors of answers, as the agents of responsibility for change. But training through this method has some barriers and requirements. To have an effective teaching; the faculty members of the universities should be awarded of these barriers and requirements as a way to improve teaching quality. The nationally and locally recognized professors are good leaders in providing ideas, insight, and the best strategies to educators who are passionate for effective teaching in the higher education. Finally, it is supposed that there is an important role for nationally and locally recognized professors in higher education to become more involved in the regulation of teaching rules.

Introduction

Rapid changes of modern world have caused the Higher Education System to face a great variety of challenges. Therefore, training more eager, thoughtful individuals in interdisciplinary fields is required ( 1 ). Thus, research and exploration to figure out useful and effective teaching and learning methods are one of the most important necessities of educational systems ( 2 ); Professors have a determining role in training such people in the mentioned field ( 3 ). A university is a place where new ideas germinate; roots strike and grow tall and sturdy. It is a unique space, which covers the entire universe of knowledge. It is a place where creative minds converge, interact with each other and construct visions of new realities. Established notions of truth are challenged in the pursuit of knowledge. To be able to do all this, getting help from experienced teachers can be very useful and effective.

Given the education quality, attention to students’ education as a main product that is expected from education quality system is of much greater demand in comparison to the past. There has always been emphasis on equal attention to research and teaching quality and establishing a bond between these two before making any decision; however, studies show that the already given attention to research in universities does not meet the educational quality requirements.

Attention to this task in higher education is considered as a major one, so in their instruction, educators must pay attention to learners and learning approach; along with these two factors, the educators should move forward to attain new teaching approaches. In the traditional system, instruction was teacher-centered and the students’ needs and interests were not considered. This is when students’ instruction must change into a method in which their needs are considered and as a result of the mentioned method active behavior change occurs in them ( 4 ). Moreover, a large number of graduated students especially bachelor holders do not feel ready enough to work in their related fields ( 5 ). Being dissatisfied with the status quo at any academic institution and then making decision to improve it require much research and assistance from the experts and pioneers of that institute. Giving the aforementioned are necessary, especially in present community of Iran; it seems that no qualitative study has ever been carried out in this area drawing on in-depth reports of recognized university faculties; therefore, in the present study the new global student-centered methods are firstly studied and to explore the ideas of experienced university faculties, some class observations and interviews were done. Then, efficient teaching method and its barriers and requirements were investigated because the faculty ideas about teaching method could be itemized just through a qualitative study.

The study was conducted with a qualitative method using content analysis approach. The design is appropriate for this study because it allows the participants to describe their experiences focusing on factors that may improve the quality of teaching in their own words. Key participants in purposeful sampling consist of three nationally recognized professors introduced based on the criteria of Ministry of Science, Research and Technology (based on education, research, executive and cultural qualifications) and seven other locally recognized professors according to Isfahan University of Technology standards and students votes. The purposive sampling continued until the saturation was reached, i.e. no further information was obtained for the given concept. All the participants had a teaching experience of above 10 years ( Table 1 ). They were first identified and after making appointments, they were briefed about the purpose of the study and they expressed their consent for the interview to be performed. The lack of female nationally recognized professors among respondents (due to lack of them) are restrictions of this research.

The participants’ characteristics

The data were collected using semi-structured in-depth interviews. Interviews began with general topics, such as “Talk about your experiences in effective teaching” and then the participants were asked to describe their perceptions of their expertise. Probing questions were also used to deeply explore conditions, processes, and other factors that the participants recognized as significant. The interview process was largely dependent on the questions that arose in the interaction between the interviewer and interviewees.

In the process of the study, informed consent was obtained from all the participants and they were ensured of the anonymity of their responses and that the audio files will be removed after use; then, after obtaining permission from the participants, the interview was recorded and transcribed verbatim immediately. The interviews were conducted in a private and quiet place and in convenient time. Then, verification of documents and coordination for subsequent interviews were done. The interviews lasted for one hour on average and each interview was conducted in one session with the interviewer’s notes or memos and field notes. Another method of data collection in this study was an unstructured observation in the educational setting. The investigator observed the method of interactions among faculty members and students. The interviews were conducted from November 2014 to April 2015. Each participant was interviewed for one or two sessions. The mean duration of the interviews was 60 minutes. To analyze the data, we used MAXQDA software (version 10, package series) for indexing and charting. Also, we used qualitative content analysis with a conventional approach to analyze the data. The data of the study were directly collected from the experiences of the study participants. The codes, categories and themes were explored through an inductive process, in which the researchers moved from specific to general. The consequently formulated concepts or categories were representative of the participants’ experiences. In content analysis at first, semantic units should be specified, and then the related codes should be extracted and categorized based on their similarities. Finally, in the case of having a high degree of abstraction, the themes can be determined. In the conventional approach, the use of predetermined classes is avoided and classes and their names are allowed to directly come out of the data. To do so, we read the manuscripts and listened to the recorded data for several times until an overall sense was attained. Then, the manuscript was read word by word and the codes were extracted. At the same time, the interviews were continued with other participants and coding of the texts was continued and sub-codes were categorized within the general topics. Then, the codes were classified in categories based on their similarities ( 6 ). Finally, by providing a comprehensive description about the topics, participants, data collection and analysis procedures and limitations of the study, we intend to create transferability so that other researchers clearly follow the research process taken by the researchers.

To improve the accuracy and the rigor of the findings, Lincoln and Cuba’s criteria, including credibility, dependability, conformability, and transferability, were used ( 7 ). To ensure the accuracy of the data, peer review, the researchers’ acceptability, and the long and continuing evaluation through in-depth, prolonged, and repeated interviews and the colleague’s comments must be used ( 8 ). In addition, the findings were repeatedly assessed and checked by supervisors (expert checking) ( 9 ). In this research, the researcher tried to increase the credibility of the data by keeping prolonged engagement in the process of data collection. Then, the accuracy of data analysis was confirmed by one specialist in the field of qualitative research and original codes were checked by some participants to compare the findings with the participants’ experiences. To increase the dependability and conformability of data, maximum variation was observed in the sampling. In addition, to increase the power of data transferability, adequate description of the data was provided in the study for critical review of the findings by other researchers.

Ethical considerations

The aim of the research and interview method was explained to the participants and in the process of the study, informed consent was obtained from all the participants and they were ensured of the anonymity of their responses and that audio files were removed after use. Informed consent for interview and its recording was obtained.

The mean age of faculty members in this study was 54.8 years and all of them were married. According to the results of the study, the best teaching approach was the mixed method one (student-centered with teacher-centered) plus educational planning and previous readiness. Meaning units expressed by professors were divided into 19 codes, 4 categories and 2 themes. In the present study, regarding the Effective Teaching Method in Higher Education, Requirements and Barriers, the experiences and perceptions of general practitioners were explored. As presented in Table 2 , according to data analysis, two themes containing several major categories and codes were extracted. Each code and category is described in more details below.

Examples of extracting codes, categories and themes from raw data

New teaching methods and barriers to the use of these methods

Teachers participating in this study believed that teaching and learning in higher education is a shared process, with responsibilities on both student and teacher to contribute to their success. Within this shared process, higher education must engage the students in questioning their preconceived ideas and their models of how the world works, so that they can reach a higher level of understanding. But students are not always equipped with this challenge, nor are all of them driven by a desire to understand and apply knowledge, but all too often aspire merely to survive the course, or to learn only procedurally in order to get the highest possible marks before rapidly moving on to the next subject. The best teaching helps the students to question their preconceptions, and motivates them to learn, by putting them in a situation in which their existing model does not work and in which they come to see themselves as authors of answers, as agents of responsibility for change. That means, the students need to be faced with problems which they think are important. Also, they believed that most of the developed countries are attempting to use new teaching methods, such as student-centered active methods, problem-based and project-based approaches in education. For example, the faculty number 3 said:

“In a project called EPS (European Project Semester), students come together and work on interdisciplinary issues in international teams. It is a very interesting technique to arouse interest, motivate students, and enhance their skills (Faculty member No. 3).”

The faculty number 8 noted another project-based teaching method that is used nowadays especially to promote education in software engineering and informatics is FLOSS (Free/Liber Open Source Software). In recent years, this project was used to empower the students. They will be allowed to accept the roles in a project and, therefore, deeply engage in the process of software development.

In Iran, many studies have been conducted about new teaching methods. For example, studies by Momeni Danaie ( 10 ), Noroozi ( 11 ), and Zarshenas ( 12 ), have shown various required methods of teaching. They have also concluded that pure lecture, regardless of any feedback ensuring the students learning, have lost their effectiveness. The problem-oriented approach in addition to improving communication skills among students not only increased development of critical thinking but also promoted study skills and an interest in their learning ( 12 ).

In this study, the professors noted that there are some barriers to effective teaching that are mentioned below:

As to the use of new methods of training such as problem-based methods or project-based approach, faculty members No. 4 and 9 remarked that "The need for student-centered teaching is obvious but for some reasons, such as the requirement in the teaching curriculum and the large volume of materials and resources, using these methods is not feasible completely" (Faculty member No. 9).

"If at least in the form of teacher evaluation, some questions were allocated to the use of project-based and problem-based approaches, teachers would try to use them further" (Faculty member No. 2).

The faculty members No. 6 and 7 believed that the lack of motivation in students and the lack of access to educational assistants are considered the reasons for neglecting these methods.

"I think one of the ways that can make student-centered education possible is employing educational assistants (Faculty member No. 6).”

"If each professor could attend crowded classes with two or three assistants, they could divide the class into some groups and assign more practical teamwork while they were carefully supervised (Faculty member No. 7).”

Requirements related to faculty outlook in an effective teaching

Having a successful and effective teaching that creates long-term learning on the part of the students will require certain feelings and attitudes of the teachers. These attitudes and emotions strongly influence their behavior and teaching. In this section, the attitudes of successful teachers are discussed.

Coordination with the overall organizational strategies will allow the educational system to move toward special opportunities for innovation based on the guidelines ( 13 ). The participants, 4, 3, 5 and 8 know that teaching effectively makes sense if the efforts of the professors are aligned with the goals of university.

"If faculty members know themselves as an inseparable part of the university, and proud of their employment in the university and try to promote the aim of training educated people with a high level of scientific expertise of university, it will become their goal, too. Thus, they will try as much as possible to attain this goal" (Faculty member No.9).

When a person begins to learn, according to the value of hope theory, he must feel this is an important learning and believe that he will succeed. Since the feeling of being successful will encourage individuals to learn, you should know that teachers have an important role in this sense ( 14 ). The interviewees’ number 1, 2, 3 and 10 considered factors like interest in youth, trust in ability and respect, as motivating factors for students.

Masters 7 and 8 signified that a master had a holistic and systematic view, determined the position of the teaching subject in a field or in the entire course, know general application of issues and determines them for students, and try to teach interdisciplinary topics. Interviewee No. 5 believed that: "Masters should be aware of the fact that these students are the future of the country and in addition to knowledge, they should provide them with the right attitude and vision" (Faculty member No.5).

Participants No. 2, 4 and 8 considered the faculty members’ passion to teach a lesson as responsible and believed that: "If the a teacher is interested in his field, he/she devotes more time to study the scriptures of his field and regularly updates his information; this awareness in his teaching and its influence on students is also very effective" (Faculty member No. 8).

Requirements related to the behavior and performance of faculty members in effective teaching

Teachers have to focus on mental differences, interest, and sense of belonging, emotional stability, practical experience and scientific level of students in training. Class curriculum planning includes preparation, effective transition of content, and the use of learning and evaluating teaching ( 15 ).

Given the current study subjects’ ideas, the following functional requirements for successful teaching in higher education can be proposed.

According to Choi and Pucker, the most important role of teachers is planning and controlling the educational process for students to be able to achieve a comprehensive learning ( 16 ).

"The fact that many teachers don’t have a predetermined plan on how to teach, and just collect what they should teach in a meeting is one reason for the lack of creativity in teaching" Faculty member No.4).

Klug and colleagues in an article entitled “teaching and learning in education” raise some questions and want the faculty members to ask themselves these questions regularly.

1- How to increase the students' motivation.

2- How to help students feel confident in solving problems.

3- How to teach students to plan their learning activities.

4- How to help them to carry out self-assessment at the end of each lesson.

5- How to encourage the students to motivate them for future work.

6- How I can give feedback to the students and inform them about their individual learning ( 14 ).

Every five faculty members who were interviewed cited the need to explain the lessons in plain language, give feedback to students, and explain the causes and reasons of issues.

"I always pay attention to my role as a model with regular self-assessment; I'm trying to teach this main issue to my students" (Faculty member No. 9).

Improving the quality of learning through the promotion of education, using pre-organizers and conceptual map, emphasizing the student-centered learning and developing the skills needed for employment are the strategies outlined in lifelong learning, particularly in higher education ( 17 ).

"I always give a five to ten-minute summary of the last topic to students at first; if possible, I build up the new lesson upon the previous one" (Faculty member No. 4).

The belief that creative talent is universal and it will be strengthened with appropriate programs is a piece of evidence to prove that innovative features of the programs should be attended to continually ( 18 ). Certainly, in addition to the enumerated powers, appropriate fields should be provided to design new ideas with confidence and purposeful orientation. Otherwise, in the absence of favorable conditions and lack of proper motivations, it will be difficult to apply new ideas ( 19 ). Teacher’s No. 3, 5 and 7 emphasized encouraging the students for creativity: "I always encourage the students to be creative when I teach a topic; for example, after teaching, I express some vague hints and undiscovered issues and ask them what the second move is to improve that process" (Faculty member No.3).

Senior instructors try to engage in self-management and consultation, tracking their usage of classroom management skills and developing action plans to modify their practices based on data. Through consultation, instructors work with their colleagues to collect and implement data to gauge the students’ strengths and weaknesses, and then use protocols to turn the weaknesses into strengths. The most effective teachers monitor progress and assess how their changed practices have impacted the students’ outcomes ( 20 ).

"It is important that what is taught be relevant to the students' career; however, in the future with the same information they have learned in university, they want to work in the industry of their country" (Faculty member No.1).

Skills in documenting the results of the process of teaching-learning cannot only facilitate management in terms of studying the records, but also provides easier access to up to date information ( 21 ). Faculty members No. 7 and 3 stressed the need for documenting learning experiences by faculty.

"I have a notebook in my office that I usually refer to after each class. Then, I write down every successful strategy that was highly regarded by students that day" (Faculty member No.3).

Developing a satisfactory interaction with students

To connect with students and impact their lives personally and professionally, teachers must be student-centered and demonstrate respect for their background, ideologies, beliefs, and learning styles. The best instructors use differentiated instruction, display cultural sensitivity, accentuate open communication, offer positive feedback on the students’ academic performance ( 20 ), and foster student growth by allowing them to resubmit assignments prior to assigning a grade ( 22 ).

"I pay attention to every single student in my class and every time when I see a student in class is not focused on a few consecutive sessions, I ask about his lack of focus and I help him solve his problem" (Faculty member No. 5).

The limitation in this research was little access to other nationally recognized university faculty members; also their tight schedule was among other limitations in this study that kept us several times from interviewing such faculties. To overcome such a problem, they were briefed about the importance of this study and then some appointments were set with them.

This study revealed the effective teaching methods, requirements and barriers in Iranian Higher Education. Teachers participating in this study believed that teaching and learning in higher education is a shared process, with responsibilities on both student and teacher to contribute to their success. Within this shared process, higher education must engage the students in questioning their preconceived ideas and their models of how the world works, so that they can reach a higher level of understanding. They believed that to grow successful people to deal with the challenges in evolving the society, most developed countries are attempting to use new teaching methods in higher education. All these methods are student-centered and are the result of pivotal projects. Research conducted by Momeni Danaei and colleagues also showed that using a combination of various teaching methods together will lead to more effective learning while implementing just one teaching model cannot effectively promote learning ( 10 ). However, based on the faculty member’s experiences, effective teaching methods in higher education have some requirements and barriers.

In this study, barriers according to codes were divided two major categories: professor-related barriers and regulation-related ones; for these reasons, the complete use of these methods is not possible. However, teachers who are aware of the necessity of engaging the student for a better understanding of their content try to use this method as a combination that is class speech presentation and involving students in teaching and learning. This result is consistent with the research findings of Momeni Danaei and colleagues ( 10 ), Zarshenas et al. ( 12 ) and Noroozi ( 11 ).

Using student-centered methods in higher education needs some requirements that according to faculty members who were interviewed, and according to the codes, such requirements for effective teaching can be divided into two categories: First, things to exist in the outlook of faculties about the students and faculties' responsibility towards them, to guide them towards effective teaching methods, the most important of which are adaptation to the organizational strategies, interest in the students and trust in their abilities, systemic approach in higher education, and interest in their discipline.

Second, the necessary requirements should exist in the faculties’ behavior to make their teaching methods more effective. This category emerged from some codes, including having lesson plan; using appropriate educational strategies and metacognition training and self-assessment of students during teaching; using concept and pre-organizer maps in training, knowledge; and explaining how to resolve problems in professional career through teaching discussion, documenting of experience and having satisfactory interaction with the students. This result is consistent with the findings of Klug et al., Byun et al., and Khanyfr et al. ( 14 , 17 , 18 ).

In addition and according to the results, we can conclude that a major challenge for universities, especially at a time of resource constraints, is to organize teaching so as to maximize learning effectiveness. As mentioned earlier, a major barrier to change is the fact that most faculty members are not trained for their teaching role and are largely ignorant of the research literature on effective pedagogy. These findings are in agreement with the research of Knapper, indicating that the best ideas for effective teaching include: Teaching methods that focus on the students’ activity and task performance rather than just acquisition of facts; Opportunities for meaningful personal interaction between the students and teachers; Opportunities for collaborative team learning; More authentic methods of assessment that stress task performance in naturalistic situations, preferably including elements of peer and self-assessment; Making learning processes more explicit, and encouraging the students to reflect on the way they learn; Learning tasks that encourage integration of information and skills from different fields ( 23 ).

In the present study, it was illustrated that a good teaching method helps the students to question their preconceptions, and motivates them to learn, by putting them in a situation in which they come to see themselves as the authors of answers and the agents of responsibility for change. But whenever the teachers can teach by this method, they are faced with some barriers and requirements. Some of these requirements are prerequisite of the professors' behavior and some of these are prerequisite of the professors’ outlook. Also, there are some major barriers some of which are associated with the professors’ behavior and others are related to laws and regulations. Therefore, to have an effective teaching, the faculty members of universities should be aware of these barriers and requirements as a way to improve the teaching quality.

Effective teaching also requires structural changes that can only be brought about by academic leaders. These changes include hiring practices reward structures that recognize the importance of teaching expertise, quality assurance approaches that measure learning processes, outcomes in a much more sophisticated way than routine methods, and changing the way of attaining university accreditation.

The nationally and locally recognized professors are good leaders in providing ideas, insight, and the best strategies to educators who are passionate for effective teaching in the higher education. Finally, it is supposed that there is an important role for nationally and locally recognized professors in higher education to become more involved in the regulation of teaching rules. This will help other university teachers to be familiar with effective teaching and learning procedures. Therefore, curriculum planners and faculty members can improve their teaching methods.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank all research participants of Isfahan University of Technology (faculties) who contributed to this study and spent their time to share their experiences through interviews.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published: 06 February 2017

Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes

  • Mugenyi Justice Kintu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4500-1168 1 , 2 ,
  • Chang Zhu 2 &
  • Edmond Kagambe 1  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  14 , Article number:  7 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

740k Accesses

209 Citations

37 Altmetric

Metrics details

This paper investigates the effectiveness of a blended learning environment through analyzing the relationship between student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. It is aimed at determining the significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness taking student characteristics/background and design features as independent variables and learning outcomes as dependent variables. A survey was administered to 238 respondents to gather data on student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. The final semester evaluation results were used as a measure for performance as an outcome. We applied the online self regulatory learning questionnaire for data on learner self regulation, the intrinsic motivation inventory for data on intrinsic motivation and other self-developed instruments for measuring the other constructs. Multiple regression analysis results showed that blended learning design features (technology quality, online tools and face-to-face support) and student characteristics (attitudes and self-regulation) predicted student satisfaction as an outcome. The results indicate that some of the student characteristics/backgrounds and design features are significant predictors for student learning outcomes in blended learning.

Introduction

The teaching and learning environment is embracing a number of innovations and some of these involve the use of technology through blended learning. This innovative pedagogical approach has been embraced rapidly though it goes through a process. The introduction of blended learning (combination of face-to-face and online teaching and learning) initiatives is part of these innovations but its uptake, especially in the developing world faces challenges for it to be an effective innovation in teaching and learning. Blended learning effectiveness has quite a number of underlying factors that pose challenges. One big challenge is about how users can successfully use the technology and ensuring participants’ commitment given the individual learner characteristics and encounters with technology (Hofmann, 2014 ). Hofmann adds that users getting into difficulties with technology may result into abandoning the learning and eventual failure of technological applications. In a report by Oxford Group ( 2013 ), some learners (16%) had negative attitudes to blended learning while 26% were concerned that learners would not complete study in blended learning. Learners are important partners in any learning process and therefore, their backgrounds and characteristics affect their ability to effectively carry on with learning and being in blended learning, the design tools to be used may impinge on the effectiveness in their learning.

This study tackles blended learning effectiveness which has been investigated in previous studies considering grades, course completion, retention and graduation rates but no studies regarding effectiveness in view of learner characteristics/background, design features and outcomes have been done in the Ugandan university context. No studies have also been done on how the characteristics of learners and design features are predictors of outcomes in the context of a planning evaluation research (Guskey, 2000 ) to establish the effectiveness of blended learning. Guskey ( 2000 ) noted that planning evaluation fits in well since it occurs before the implementation of any innovation as well as allowing planners to determine the needs, considering participant characteristics, analyzing contextual matters and gathering baseline information. This study is done in the context of a plan to undertake innovative pedagogy involving use of a learning management system (moodle) for the first time in teaching and learning in a Ugandan university. The learner characteristics/backgrounds being investigated for blended learning effectiveness include self-regulation, computer competence, workload management, social and family support, attitude to blended learning, gender and age. We investigate the blended learning design features of learner interactions, face-to-face support, learning management system tools and technology quality while the outcomes considered include satisfaction, performance, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction. Establishing the significant predictors of outcomes in blended learning will help to inform planners of such learning environments in order to put in place necessary groundwork preparations for designing blended learning as an innovative pedagogical approach.

Kenney and Newcombe ( 2011 ) did their comparison to establish effectiveness in view of grades and found that blended learning had higher average score than the non-blended learning environment. Garrison and Kanuka ( 2004 ) examined the transformative potential of blended learning and reported an increase in course completion rates, improved retention and increased student satisfaction. Comparisons between blended learning environments have been done to establish the disparity between academic achievement, grade dispersions and gender performance differences and no significant differences were found between the groups (Demirkol & Kazu, 2014 ).

However, blended learning effectiveness may be dependent on many other factors and among them student characteristics, design features and learning outcomes. Research shows that the failure of learners to continue their online education in some cases has been due to family support or increased workload leading to learner dropout (Park & Choi, 2009 ) as well as little time for study. Additionally, it is dependent on learner interactions with instructors since failure to continue with online learning is attributed to this. In Greer, Hudson & Paugh’s study as cited in Park and Choi ( 2009 ), family and peer support for learners is important for success in online and face-to-face learning. Support is needed for learners from all areas in web-based courses and this may be from family, friends, co-workers as well as peers in class. Greer, Hudson and Paugh further noted that peer encouragement assisted new learners in computer use and applications. The authors also show that learners need time budgeting, appropriate technology tools and support from friends and family in web-based courses. Peer support is required by learners who have no or little knowledge of technology, especially computers, to help them overcome fears. Park and Choi, ( 2009 ) showed that organizational support significantly predicts learners’ stay and success in online courses because employers at times are willing to reduce learners’ workload during study as well as supervisors showing that they are interested in job-related learning for employees to advance and improve their skills.

The study by Kintu and Zhu ( 2016 ) investigated the possibility of blended learning in a Ugandan University and examined whether student characteristics (such as self-regulation, attitudes towards blended learning, computer competence) and student background (such as family support, social support and management of workload) were significant factors in learner outcomes (such as motivation, satisfaction, knowledge construction and performance). The characteristics and background factors were studied along with blended learning design features such as technology quality, learner interactions, and Moodle with its tools and resources. The findings from that study indicated that learner attitudes towards blended learning were significant factors to learner satisfaction and motivation while workload management was a significant factor to learner satisfaction and knowledge construction. Among the blended learning design features, only learner interaction was a significant factor to learner satisfaction and knowledge construction.

The focus of the present study is on examining the effectiveness of blended learning taking into consideration learner characteristics/background, blended learning design elements and learning outcomes and how the former are significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness.

Studies like that of Morris and Lim ( 2009 ) have investigated learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes in blended learning. They however do not deal with such variables in the contexts of blended learning design as an aspect of innovative pedagogy involving the use of technology in education. Apart from the learner variables such as gender, age, experience, study time as tackled before, this study considers social and background aspects of the learners such as family and social support, self-regulation, attitudes towards blended learning and management of workload to find out their relationship to blended learning effectiveness. Identifying the various types of learner variables with regard to their relationship to blended learning effectiveness is important in this study as we embark on innovative pedagogy with technology in teaching and learning.

Literature review

This review presents research about blended learning effectiveness from the perspective of learner characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes. It also gives the factors that are considered to be significant for blended learning effectiveness. The selected elements are as a result of the researcher’s experiences at a Ugandan university where student learning faces challenges with regard to learner characteristics and blended learning features in adopting the use of technology in teaching and learning. We have made use of Loukis, Georgiou, and Pazalo ( 2007 ) value flow model for evaluating an e-learning and blended learning service specifically considering the effectiveness evaluation layer. This evaluates the extent of an e-learning system usage and the educational effectiveness. In addition, studies by Leidner, Jarvenpaa, Dillon and Gunawardena as cited in Selim ( 2007 ) have noted three main factors that affect e-learning and blended learning effectiveness as instructor characteristics, technology and student characteristics. Heinich, Molenda, Russell, and Smaldino ( 2001 ) showed the need for examining learner characteristics for effective instructional technology use and showed that user characteristics do impact on behavioral intention to use technology. Research has dealt with learner characteristics that contribute to learner performance outcomes. They have dealt with emotional intelligence, resilience, personality type and success in an online learning context (Berenson, Boyles, & Weaver, 2008 ). Dealing with the characteristics identified in this study will give another dimension, especially for blended learning in learning environment designs and add to specific debate on learning using technology. Lin and Vassar, ( 2009 ) indicated that learner success is dependent on ability to cope with technical difficulty as well as technical skills in computer operations and internet navigation. This justifies our approach in dealing with the design features of blended learning in this study.

Learner characteristics/background and blended learning effectiveness

Studies indicate that student characteristics such as gender play significant roles in academic achievement (Oxford Group, 2013 ), but no study examines performance of male and female as an important factor in blended learning effectiveness. It has again been noted that the success of e- and blended learning is highly dependent on experience in internet and computer applications (Picciano & Seaman, 2007 ). Rigorous discovery of such competences can finally lead to a confirmation of high possibilities of establishing blended learning. Research agrees that the success of e-learning and blended learning can largely depend on students as well as teachers gaining confidence and capability to participate in blended learning (Hadad, 2007 ). Shraim and Khlaif ( 2010 ) note in their research that 75% of students and 72% of teachers were lacking in skills to utilize ICT based learning components due to insufficient skills and experience in computer and internet applications and this may lead to failure in e-learning and blended learning. It is therefore pertinent that since the use of blended learning applies high usage of computers, computer competence is necessary (Abubakar & Adetimirin, 2015 ) to avoid failure in applying technology in education for learning effectiveness. Rovai, ( 2003 ) noted that learners’ computer literacy and time management are crucial in distance learning contexts and concluded that such factors are meaningful in online classes. This is supported by Selim ( 2007 ) that learners need to posses time management skills and computer skills necessary for effectiveness in e- learning and blended learning. Self-regulatory skills of time management lead to better performance and learners’ ability to structure the physical learning environment leads to efficiency in e-learning and blended learning environments. Learners need to seek helpful assistance from peers and teachers through chats, email and face-to-face meetings for effectiveness (Lynch & Dembo, 2004 ). Factors such as learners’ hours of employment and family responsibilities are known to impede learners’ process of learning, blended learning inclusive (Cohen, Stage, Hammack, & Marcus, 2012 ). It was also noted that a common factor in failure and learner drop-out is the time conflict which is compounded by issues of family , employment status as well as management support (Packham, Jones, Miller, & Thomas, 2004 ). A study by Thompson ( 2004 ) shows that work, family, insufficient time and study load made learners withdraw from online courses.

Learner attitudes to blended learning can result in its effectiveness and these shape behavioral intentions which usually lead to persistence in a learning environment, blended inclusive. Selim, ( 2007 ) noted that the learners’ attitude towards e-learning and blended learning are success factors for these learning environments. Learner performance by age and gender in e-learning and blended learning has been found to indicate no significant differences between male and female learners and different age groups (i.e. young, middle-aged and old above 45 years) (Coldwell, Craig, Paterson, & Mustard, 2008 ). This implies that the potential for blended learning to be effective exists and is unhampered by gender or age differences.

Blended learning design features

The design features under study here include interactions, technology with its quality, face-to-face support and learning management system tools and resources.

Research shows that absence of learner interaction causes failure and eventual drop-out in online courses (Willging & Johnson, 2009 ) and the lack of learner connectedness was noted as an internal factor leading to learner drop-out in online courses (Zielinski, 2000 ). It was also noted that learners may not continue in e- and blended learning if they are unable to make friends thereby being disconnected and developing feelings of isolation during their blended learning experiences (Willging & Johnson, 2009). Learners’ Interactions with teachers and peers can make blended learning effective as its absence makes learners withdraw (Astleitner, 2000 ). Loukis, Georgious and Pazalo (2007) noted that learners’ measuring of a system’s quality, reliability and ease of use leads to learning efficiency and can be so in blended learning. Learner success in blended learning may substantially be affected by system functionality (Pituch & Lee, 2006 ) and may lead to failure of such learning initiatives (Shrain, 2012 ). It is therefore important to examine technology quality for ensuring learning effectiveness in blended learning. Tselios, Daskalakis, and Papadopoulou ( 2011 ) investigated learner perceptions after a learning management system use and found out that the actual system use determines the usefulness among users. It is again noted that a system with poor response time cannot be taken to be useful for e-learning and blended learning especially in cases of limited bandwidth (Anderson, 2004 ). In this study, we investigate the use of Moodle and its tools as a function of potential effectiveness of blended learning.

The quality of learning management system content for learners can be a predictor of good performance in e-and blended learning environments and can lead to learner satisfaction. On the whole, poor quality technology yields no satisfaction by users and therefore the quality of technology significantly affects satisfaction (Piccoli, Ahmad, & Ives, 2001 ). Continued navigation through a learning management system increases use and is an indicator of success in blended learning (Delone & McLean, 2003 ). The efficient use of learning management system and its tools improves learning outcomes in e-learning and blended learning environments.

It is noted that learner satisfaction with a learning management system can be an antecedent factor for blended learning effectiveness. Goyal and Tambe ( 2015 ) noted that learners showed an appreciation to Moodle’s contribution in their learning. They showed positivity with it as it improved their understanding of course material (Ahmad & Al-Khanjari, 2011 ). The study by Goyal and Tambe ( 2015 ) used descriptive statistics to indicate improved learning by use of uploaded syllabus and session plans on Moodle. Improved learning is also noted through sharing study material, submitting assignments and using the calendar. Learners in the study found Moodle to be an effective educational tool.

In blended learning set ups, face-to-face experiences form part of the blend and learner positive attitudes to such sessions could mean blended learning effectiveness. A study by Marriot, Marriot, and Selwyn ( 2004 ) showed learners expressing their preference for face-to-face due to its facilitation of social interaction and communication skills acquired from classroom environment. Their preference for the online session was only in as far as it complemented the traditional face-to-face learning. Learners in a study by Osgerby ( 2013 ) had positive perceptions of blended learning but preferred face-to-face with its step-by-stem instruction. Beard, Harper and Riley ( 2004 ) shows that some learners are successful while in a personal interaction with teachers and peers thus prefer face-to-face in the blend. Beard however dealt with a comparison between online and on-campus learning while our study combines both, singling out the face-to-face part of the blend. The advantage found by Beard is all the same relevant here because learners in blended learning express attitude to both online and face-to-face for an effective blend. Researchers indicate that teacher presence in face-to-face sessions lessens psychological distance between them and the learners and leads to greater learning. This is because there are verbal aspects like giving praise, soliciting for viewpoints, humor, etc and non-verbal expressions like eye contact, facial expressions, gestures, etc which make teachers to be closer to learners psychologically (Kelley & Gorham, 2009 ).

Learner outcomes

The outcomes under scrutiny in this study include performance, motivation, satisfaction and knowledge construction. Motivation is seen here as an outcome because, much as cognitive factors such as course grades are used in measuring learning outcomes, affective factors like intrinsic motivation may also be used to indicate outcomes of learning (Kuo, Walker, Belland, & Schroder, 2013 ). Research shows that high motivation among online learners leads to persistence in their courses (Menager-Beeley, 2004 ). Sankaran and Bui ( 2001 ) indicated that less motivated learners performed poorly in knowledge tests while those with high learning motivation demonstrate high performance in academics (Green, Nelson, Martin, & Marsh, 2006 ). Lim and Kim, ( 2003 ) indicated that learner interest as a motivation factor promotes learner involvement in learning and this could lead to learning effectiveness in blended learning.

Learner satisfaction was noted as a strong factor for effectiveness of blended and online courses (Wilging & Johnson, 2009) and dissatisfaction may result from learners’ incompetence in the use of the learning management system as an effective learning tool since, as Islam ( 2014 ) puts it, users may be dissatisfied with an information system due to ease of use. A lack of prompt feedback for learners from course instructors was found to cause dissatisfaction in an online graduate course. In addition, dissatisfaction resulted from technical difficulties as well as ambiguous course instruction Hara and Kling ( 2001 ). These factors, once addressed, can lead to learner satisfaction in e-learning and blended learning and eventual effectiveness. A study by Blocker and Tucker ( 2001 ) also showed that learners had difficulties with technology and inadequate group participation by peers leading to dissatisfaction within these design features. Student-teacher interactions are known to bring satisfaction within online courses. Study results by Swan ( 2001 ) indicated that student-teacher interaction strongly related with student satisfaction and high learner-learner interaction resulted in higher levels of course satisfaction. Descriptive results by Naaj, Nachouki, and Ankit ( 2012 ) showed that learners were satisfied with technology which was a video-conferencing component of blended learning with a mean of 3.7. The same study indicated student satisfaction with instructors at a mean of 3.8. Askar and Altun, ( 2008 ) found that learners were satisfied with face-to-face sessions of the blend with t-tests and ANOVA results indicating female scores as higher than for males in the satisfaction with face-to-face environment of the blended learning.

Studies comparing blended learning with traditional face-to-face have indicated that learners perform equally well in blended learning and their performance is unaffected by the delivery method (Kwak, Menezes, & Sherwood, 2013 ). In another study, learning experience and performance are known to improve when traditional course delivery is integrated with online learning (Stacey & Gerbic, 2007 ). Such improvement as noted may be an indicator of blended learning effectiveness. Our study however, delves into improved performance but seeks to establish the potential of blended learning effectiveness by considering grades obtained in a blended learning experiment. Score 50 and above is considered a pass in this study’s setting and learners scoring this and above will be considered to have passed. This will make our conclusions about the potential of blended learning effectiveness.

Regarding knowledge construction, it has been noted that effective learning occurs where learners are actively involved (Nurmela, Palonen, Lehtinen & Hakkarainen, 2003 , cited in Zhu, 2012 ) and this may be an indicator of learning environment effectiveness. Effective blended learning would require that learners are able to initiate, discover and accomplish the processes of knowledge construction as antecedents of blended learning effectiveness. A study by Rahman, Yasin and Jusoff ( 2011 ) indicated that learners were able to use some steps to construct meaning through an online discussion process through assignments given. In the process of giving and receiving among themselves, the authors noted that learners learned by writing what they understood. From our perspective, this can be considered to be accomplishment in the knowledge construction process. Their study further shows that learners construct meaning individually from assignments and this stage is referred to as pre-construction which for our study, is an aspect of discovery in the knowledge construction process.

Predictors of blended learning effectiveness

Researchers have dealt with success factors for online learning or those for traditional face-to-face learning but little is known about factors that predict blended learning effectiveness in view of learner characteristics and blended learning design features. This part of our study seeks to establish the learner characteristics/backgrounds and design features that predict blended learning effectiveness with regard to satisfaction, outcomes, motivation and knowledge construction. Song, Singleton, Hill, and Koh ( 2004 ) examined online learning effectiveness factors and found out that time management (a self-regulatory factor) was crucial for successful online learning. Eom, Wen, and Ashill ( 2006 ) using a survey found out that interaction, among other factors, was significant for learner satisfaction. Technical problems with regard to instructional design were a challenge to online learners thus not indicating effectiveness (Song et al., 2004 ), though the authors also indicated that descriptive statistics to a tune of 75% and time management (62%) impact on success of online learning. Arbaugh ( 2000 ) and Swan ( 2001 ) indicated that high levels of learner-instructor interaction are associated with high levels of user satisfaction and learning outcomes. A study by Naaj et al. ( 2012 ) indicated that technology and learner interactions, among other factors, influenced learner satisfaction in blended learning.

Objective and research questions of the current study

The objective of the current study is to investigate the effectiveness of blended learning in view of student satisfaction, knowledge construction, performance and intrinsic motivation and how they are related to student characteristics and blended learning design features in a blended learning environment.

Research questions

What are the student characteristics and blended learning design features for an effective blended learning environment?

Which factors (among the learner characteristics and blended learning design features) predict student satisfaction, learning outcomes, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction?

Conceptual model of the present study

The reviewed literature clearly shows learner characteristics/background and blended learning design features play a part in blended learning effectiveness and some of them are significant predictors of effectiveness. The conceptual model for our study is depicted as follows (Fig.  1 ):

Conceptual model of the current study

Research design

This research applies a quantitative design where descriptive statistics are used for the student characteristics and design features data, t-tests for the age and gender variables to determine if they are significant in blended learning effectiveness and regression for predictors of blended learning effectiveness.

This study is based on an experiment in which learners participated during their study using face-to-face sessions and an on-line session of a blended learning design. A learning management system (Moodle) was used and learner characteristics/background and blended learning design features were measured in relation to learning effectiveness. It is therefore a planning evaluation research design as noted by Guskey ( 2000 ) since the outcomes are aimed at blended learning implementation at MMU. The plan under which the various variables were tested involved face-to-face study at the beginning of a 17 week semester which was followed by online teaching and learning in the second half of the semester. The last part of the semester was for another face-to-face to review work done during the online sessions and final semester examinations. A questionnaire with items on student characteristics, design features and learning outcomes was distributed among students from three schools and one directorate of postgraduate studies.

Participants

Cluster sampling was used to select a total of 238 learners to participate in this study. Out of the whole university population of students, three schools and one directorate were used. From these, one course unit was selected from each school and all the learners following the course unit were surveyed. In the school of Education ( n  = 70) and Business and Management Studies ( n  = 133), sophomore students were involved due to the fact that they have been introduced to ICT basics during their first year of study. Students of the third year were used from the department of technology in the School of Applied Sciences and Technology ( n  = 18) since most of the year two courses had a lot of practical aspects that could not be used for the online learning part. From the Postgraduate Directorate ( n  = 17), first and second year students were selected because learners attend a face-to-face session before they are given paper modules to study away from campus.

The study population comprised of 139 male students representing 58.4% and 99 females representing 41.6% with an average age of 24 years.

Instruments

The end of semester results were used to measure learner performance. The online self-regulated learning questionnaire (Barnard, Lan, To, Paton, & Lai, 2009 ) and the intrinsic motivation inventory (Deci & Ryan, 1982 ) were applied to measure the constructs on self regulation in the student characteristics and motivation in the learning outcome constructs. Other self-developed instruments were used for the other remaining variables of attitudes, computer competence, workload management, social and family support, satisfaction, knowledge construction, technology quality, interactions, learning management system tools and resources and face-to-face support.

Instrument reliability

Cronbach’s alpha was used to test reliability and the table below gives the results. All the scales and sub-scales had acceptable internal consistency reliabilities as shown in Table  1 below:

Data analysis

First, descriptive statistics was conducted. Shapiro-Wilk test was done to test normality of the data for it to qualify for parametric tests. The test results for normality of our data before the t- test resulted into significant levels (Male = .003, female = .000) thereby violating the normality assumption. We therefore used the skewness and curtosis results which were between −1.0 and +1.0 and assumed distribution to be sufficiently normal to qualify the data for a parametric test, (Pallant, 2010 ). An independent samples t -test was done to find out the differences in male and female performance to explain the gender characteristics in blended learning effectiveness. A one-way ANOVA between subjects was conducted to establish the differences in performance between age groups. Finally, multiple regression analysis was done between student variables and design elements with learning outcomes to determine the significant predictors for blended learning effectiveness.

Student characteristics, blended learning design features and learning outcomes ( RQ1 )

A t- test was carried out to establish the performance of male and female learners in the blended learning set up. This was aimed at finding out if male and female learners do perform equally well in blended learning given their different roles and responsibilities in society. It was found that male learners performed slightly better ( M  = 62.5) than their female counterparts ( M  = 61.1). An independent t -test revealed that the difference between the performances was not statistically significant ( t  = 1.569, df = 228, p  = 0.05, one tailed). The magnitude of the differences in the means is small with effect size ( d  = 0.18). A one way between subjects ANOVA was conducted on the performance of different age groups to establish the performance of learners of young and middle aged age groups (20–30, young & and 31–39, middle aged). This revealed a significant difference in performance (F(1,236 = 8.498, p < . 001).

Average percentages of the items making up the self regulated learning scale are used to report the findings about all the sub-scales in the learner characteristics/background scale. Results show that learner self-regulation was good enough at 72.3% in all the sub-scales of goal setting, environment structuring, task strategies, time management, help-seeking and self-evaluation among learners. The least in the scoring was task strategies at 67.7% and the highest was learner environment structuring at 76.3%. Learner attitude towards blended learning environment is at 76% in the sub-scales of learner autonomy, quality of instructional materials, course structure, course interface and interactions. The least scored here is attitude to course structure at 66% and their attitudes were high on learner autonomy and course interface both at 82%. Results on the learners’ computer competences are summarized in percentages in the table below (Table  2 ):

It can be seen that learners are skilled in word processing at 91%, email at 63.5%, spreadsheets at 68%, web browsers at 70.2% and html tools at 45.4%. They are therefore good enough in word processing and web browsing. Their computer confidence levels are reported at 75.3% and specifically feel very confident when it comes to working with a computer (85.7%). Levels of family and social support for learners during blended learning experiences are at 60.5 and 75% respectively. There is however a low score on learners being assisted by family members in situations of computer setbacks (33.2%) as 53.4% of the learners reported no assistance in this regard. A higher percentage (85.3%) is reported on learners getting support from family regarding provision of essentials for learning such as tuition. A big percentage of learners spend two hours on study while at home (35.3%) followed by one hour (28.2%) while only 9.7% spend more than three hours on study at home. Peers showed great care during the blended learning experience (81%) and their experiences were appreciated by the society (66%). Workload management by learners vis-à-vis studying is good at 60%. Learners reported that their workmates stand in for them at workplaces to enable them do their study in blended learning while 61% are encouraged by their bosses to go and improve their skills through further education and training. On the time spent on other activities not related to study, majority of the learners spend three hours (35%) while 19% spend 6 hours. Sixty percent of the learners have to answer to someone when they are not attending to other activities outside study compared to the 39.9% who do not and can therefore do study or those other activities.

The usability of the online system, tools and resources was below average as shown in the table below in percentages (Table  3 ):

However, learners became skilled at navigating around the learning management system (79%) and it was easy for them to locate course content, tools and resources needed such as course works, news, discussions and journal materials. They effectively used the communication tools (60%) and to work with peers by making posts (57%). They reported that online resources were well organized, user friendly and easy to access (71%) as well as well structured in a clear and understandable manner (72%). They therefore recommended the use of online resources for other course units in future (78%) because they were satisfied with them (64.3%). On the whole, the online resources were fine for the learners (67.2%) and useful as a learning resource (80%). The learners’ perceived usefulness/satisfaction with online system, tools, and resources was at 81% as the LMS tools helped them to communicate, work with peers and reflect on their learning (74%). They reported that using moodle helped them to learn new concepts, information and gaining skills (85.3%) as well as sharing what they knew or learned (76.4%). They enjoyed the course units (78%) and improved their skills with technology (89%).

Learner interactions were seen from three angles of cognitivism, collaborative learning and student-teacher interactions. Collaborative learning was average at 50% with low percentages in learners posting challenges to colleagues’ ideas online (34%) and posting ideas for colleagues to read online (37%). They however met oftentimes online (60%) and organized how they would work together in study during the face-to-face meetings (69%). The common form of communication medium frequently used by learners during the blended learning experience was by phone (34.5%) followed by whatsapp (21.8%), face book (21%), discussion board (11.8%) and email (10.9%). At the cognitive level, learners interacted with content at 72% by reading the posted content (81%), exchanging knowledge via the LMS (58.4%), participating in discussions on the forum (62%) and got course objectives and structure introduced during the face-to-face sessions (86%). Student-teacher interaction was reported at 71% through instructors individually working with them online (57.2%) and being well guided towards learning goals (81%). They did receive suggestions from instructors about resources to use in their learning (75.3%) and instructors provided learning input for them to come up with their own answers (71%).

The technology quality during the blended learning intervention was rated at 69% with availability of 72%, quality of the resources was at 68% with learners reporting that discussion boards gave right content necessary for study (71%) and the email exchanges containing relevant and much needed information (63.4%) as well as chats comprising of essential information to aid the learning (69%). Internet reliability was rated at 66% with a speed considered averagely good to facilitate online activities (63%). They however reported that there was intermittent breakdown during online study (67%) though they could complete their internet program during connection (63.4%). Learners eventually found it easy to download necessary materials for study in their blended learning experiences (71%).

Learner extent of use of the learning management system features was as shown in the table below in percentage (Table  4 ):

From the table, very rarely used features include the blog and wiki while very often used ones include the email, forum, chat and calendar.

The effectiveness of the LMS was rated at 79% by learners reporting that they found it useful (89%) and using it makes their learning activities much easier (75.2%). Moodle has helped learners to accomplish their learning tasks more quickly (74%) and that as a LMS, it is effective in teaching and learning (88%) with overall satisfaction levels at 68%. However, learners note challenges in the use of the LMS regarding its performance as having been problematic to them (57%) and only 8% of the learners reported navigation while 16% reported access as challenges.

Learner attitudes towards Face-to-face support were reported at 88% showing that the sessions were enjoyable experiences (89%) with high quality class discussions (86%) and therefore recommended that the sessions should continue in blended learning (89%). The frequency of the face-to-face sessions is shown in the table below as preferred by learners (Table  5 ).

Learners preferred face-to-face sessions after every month in the semester (33.6%) and at the beginning of the blended learning session only (27.7%).

Learners reported high intrinsic motivation levels with interest and enjoyment of tasks at 83.7%, perceived competence at 70.2%, effort/importance sub-scale at 80%, pressure/tension reported at 54%. The pressure percentage of 54% arises from learners feeling nervous (39.2%) and a lot of anxiety (53%) while 44% felt a lot of pressure during the blended learning experiences. Learners however reported the value/usefulness of blended learning at 91% with majority believing that studying online and face-to-face had value for them (93.3%) and were therefore willing to take part in blended learning (91.2%). They showed that it is beneficial for them (94%) and that it was an important way of studying (84.3%).

Learner satisfaction was reported at 81% especially with instructors (85%) high percentage reported on encouraging learner participation during the course of study 93%, course content (83%) with the highest being satisfaction with the good relationship between the objectives of the course units and the content (90%), technology (71%) with a high percentage on the fact that the platform was adequate for the online part of the learning (76%), interactions (75%) with participation in class at 79%, and face-to-face sessions (91%) with learner satisfaction high on face-to-face sessions being good enough for interaction and giving an overview of the courses when objectives were introduced at 92%.

Learners’ knowledge construction was reported at 78% with initiation and discovery scales scoring 84% with 88% specifically for discovering the learning points in the course units. The accomplishment scale in knowledge construction scored 71% and specifically the fact that learners were able to work together with group members to accomplish learning tasks throughout the study of the course units (79%). Learners developed reports from activities (67%), submitted solutions to discussion questions (68%) and did critique peer arguments (69%). Generally, learners performed well in blended learning in the final examination with an average pass of 62% and standard deviation of 7.5.

Significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness ( RQ 2)

A standard multiple regression analysis was done taking learner characteristics/background and design features as predictor variables and learning outcomes as criterion variables. The data was first tested to check if it met the linear regression test assumptions and results showed the correlations between the independent variables and each of the dependent variables (highest 0.62 and lowest 0.22) as not being too high, which indicated that multicollinearity was not a problem in our model. From the coefficients table, the VIF values ranged from 1.0 to 2.4, well below the cut off value of 10 and indicating no possibility of multicollinearity. The normal probability plot was seen to lie as a reasonably straight diagonal from bottom left to top right indicating normality of our data. Linearity was found suitable from the scatter plot of the standardized residuals and was rectangular in distribution. Outliers were no cause for concern in our data since we had only 1% of all cases falling outside 3.0 thus proving the data as a normally distributed sample. Our R -square values was at 0.525 meaning that the independent variables explained about 53% of the variance in overall satisfaction, motivation and knowledge construction of the learners. All the models explaining the three dependent variables of learner satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and knowledge construction were significant at the 0.000 probability level (Table  6 ).

From the table above, design features (technology quality and online tools and resources), and learner characteristics (attitudes to blended learning, self-regulation) were significant predictors of learner satisfaction in blended learning. This means that good technology with the features involved and the learner positive attitudes with capacity to do blended learning with self drive led to their satisfaction. The design features (technology quality, interactions) and learner characteristics (self regulation and social support), were found to be significant predictors of learner knowledge construction. This implies that learners’ capacity to go on their work by themselves supported by peers and high levels of interaction using the quality technology led them to construct their own ideas in blended learning. Design features (technology quality, online tools and resources as well as learner interactions) and learner characteristics (self regulation), significantly predicted the learners’ intrinsic motivation in blended learning suggesting that good technology, tools and high interaction levels with independence in learning led to learners being highly motivated. Finally, none of the independent variables considered under this study were predictors of learning outcomes (grade).

In this study we have investigated learning outcomes as dependent variables to establish if particular learner characteristics/backgrounds and design features are related to the outcomes for blended learning effectiveness and if they predict learning outcomes in blended learning. We took students from three schools out of five and one directorate of post-graduate studies at a Ugandan University. The study suggests that the characteristics and design features examined are good drivers towards an effective blended learning environment though a few of them predicted learning outcomes in blended learning.

Student characteristics/background, blended learning design features and learning outcomes

The learner characteristics, design features investigated are potentially important for an effective blended learning environment. Performance by gender shows a balance with no statistical differences between male and female. There are statistically significant differences ( p  < .005) in the performance between age groups with means of 62% for age group 20–30 and 67% for age group 31 –39. The indicators of self regulation exist as well as positive attitudes towards blended learning. Learners do well with word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets and web browsers but still lag below average in html tools. They show computer confidence at 75.3%; which gives prospects for an effective blended learning environment in regard to their computer competence and confidence. The levels of family and social support for learners stand at 61 and 75% respectively, indicating potential for blended learning to be effective. The learners’ balance between study and work is a drive factor towards blended learning effectiveness since their management of their workload vis a vis study time is at 60 and 61% of the learners are encouraged to go for study by their bosses. Learner satisfaction with the online system and its tools shows prospect for blended learning effectiveness but there are challenges in regard to locating course content and assignments, submitting their work and staying on a task during online study. Average collaborative, cognitive learning as well as learner-teacher interactions exist as important factors. Technology quality for effective blended learning is a potential for effectiveness though features like the blog and wiki are rarely used by learners. Face-to-face support is satisfactory and it should be conducted every month. There is high intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and knowledge construction as well as good performance in examinations ( M  = 62%, SD = 7.5); which indicates potentiality for blended learning effectiveness.

Significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness

Among the design features, technology quality, online tools and face-to-face support are predictors of learner satisfaction while learner characteristics of self regulation and attitudes to blended learning are predictors of satisfaction. Technology quality and interactions are the only design features predicting learner knowledge construction, while social support, among the learner backgrounds, is a predictor of knowledge construction. Self regulation as a learner characteristic is a predictor of knowledge construction. Self regulation is the only learner characteristic predicting intrinsic motivation in blended learning while technology quality, online tools and interactions are the design features predicting intrinsic motivation. However, all the independent variables are not significant predictors of learning performance in blended learning.

The high computer competences and confidence is an antecedent factor for blended learning effectiveness as noted by Hadad ( 2007 ) and this study finds learners confident and competent enough for the effectiveness of blended learning. A lack in computer skills causes failure in e-learning and blended learning as noted by Shraim and Khlaif ( 2010 ). From our study findings, this is no threat for blended learning our case as noted by our results. Contrary to Cohen et al. ( 2012 ) findings that learners’ family responsibilities and hours of employment can impede their process of learning, it is not the case here since they are drivers to the blended learning process. Time conflict, as compounded by family, employment status and management support (Packham et al., 2004 ) were noted as causes of learner failure and drop out of online courses. Our results show, on the contrary, that these factors are drivers for blended learning effectiveness because learners have a good balance between work and study and are supported by bosses to study. In agreement with Selim ( 2007 ), learner positive attitudes towards e-and blended learning environments are success factors. In line with Coldwell et al. ( 2008 ), no statistically significant differences exist between age groups. We however note that Coldwel, et al dealt with young, middle-aged and old above 45 years whereas we dealt with young and middle aged only.

Learner interactions at all levels are good enough and contrary to Astleitner, ( 2000 ) that their absence makes learners withdraw, they are a drive factor here. In line with Loukis (2007) the LMS quality, reliability and ease of use lead to learning efficiency as technology quality, online tools are predictors of learner satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. Face-to-face sessions should continue on a monthly basis as noted here and is in agreement with Marriot et al. ( 2004 ) who noted learner preference for it for facilitating social interaction and communication skills. High learner intrinsic motivation leads to persistence in online courses as noted by Menager-Beeley, ( 2004 ) and is high enough in our study. This implies a possibility of an effectiveness blended learning environment. The causes of learner dissatisfaction noted by Islam ( 2014 ) such as incompetence in the use of the LMS are contrary to our results in our study, while the one noted by Hara and Kling, ( 2001 ) as resulting from technical difficulties and ambiguous course instruction are no threat from our findings. Student-teacher interaction showed a relation with satisfaction according to Swan ( 2001 ) but is not a predictor in our study. Initiating knowledge construction by learners for blended learning effectiveness is exhibited in our findings and agrees with Rahman, Yasin and Jusof ( 2011 ). Our study has not agreed with Eom et al. ( 2006 ) who found learner interactions as predictors of learner satisfaction but agrees with Naaj et al. ( 2012 ) regarding technology as a predictor of learner satisfaction.

Conclusion and recommendations

An effective blended learning environment is necessary in undertaking innovative pedagogical approaches through the use of technology in teaching and learning. An examination of learner characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes as factors for effectiveness can help to inform the design of effective learning environments that involve face-to-face sessions and online aspects. Most of the student characteristics and blended learning design features dealt with in this study are important factors for blended learning effectiveness. None of the independent variables were identified as significant predictors of student performance. These gaps are open for further investigation in order to understand if they can be significant predictors of blended learning effectiveness in a similar or different learning setting.

In planning to design and implement blended learning, we are mindful of the implications raised by this study which is a planning evaluation research for the design and eventual implementation of blended learning. Universities should be mindful of the interplay between the learner characteristics, design features and learning outcomes which are indicators of blended learning effectiveness. From this research, learners manifest high potential to take on blended learning more especially in regard to learner self-regulation exhibited. Blended learning is meant to increase learners’ levels of knowledge construction in order to create analytical skills in them. Learner ability to assess and critically evaluate knowledge sources is hereby established in our findings. This can go a long way in producing skilled learners who can be innovative graduates enough to satisfy employment demands through creativity and innovativeness. Technology being less of a shock to students gives potential for blended learning design. Universities and other institutions of learning should continue to emphasize blended learning approaches through installation of learning management systems along with strong internet to enable effective learning through technology especially in the developing world.

Abubakar, D. & Adetimirin. (2015). Influence of computer literacy on post-graduates’ use of e-resources in Nigerian University Libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice. From http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/ . Retrieved 18 Aug 2015.

Ahmad, N., & Al-Khanjari, Z. (2011). Effect of Moodle on learning: An Oman perception. International Journal of Digital Information and Wireless Communications (IJDIWC), 1 (4), 746–752.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, T. (2004). Theory and Practice of Online Learning . Canada: AU Press, Athabasca University.

Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). How classroom environment and student engagement affect learning in internet-basedMBAcourses. Business Communication Quarterly, 63 (4), 9–18.

Article   Google Scholar  

Askar, P. & Altun, A. (2008). Learner satisfaction on blended learning. E-Leader Krakow , 2008.

Astleitner, H. (2000) Dropout and distance education. A review of motivational and emotional strategies to reduce dropout in web-based distance education. In Neuwe Medien in Unterricht, Aus-und Weiterbildung Waxmann Munster, New York.

Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y. M., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S. (2009). Measuring self regulation in online and blended learning environments’. Internet and Higher Education, 12 (1), 1–6.

Beard, L. A., Harper, C., & Riley, G. (2004). Online versus on-campus instruction: student attitudes & perceptions. TechTrends, 48 (6), 29–31.

Berenson, R., Boyles, G., & Weaver, A. (2008). Emotional intelligence as a predictor for success in online learning. International Review of Research in open & Distance Learning, 9 (2), 1–16.

Blocker, J. M., & Tucker, G. (2001). Using constructivist principles in designing and integrating online collaborative interactions. In F. Fuller & R. McBride (Eds.), Distance education. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 32–36). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 457 822.

Cohen, K. E., Stage, F. K., Hammack, F. M., & Marcus, A. (2012). Persistence of master’s students in the United States: Developing and testing of a conceptual model . USA: PhD Dissertation, New York University.

Coldwell, J., Craig, A., Paterson, T., & Mustard, J. (2008). Online students: Relationships between participation, demographics and academic performance. The Electronic Journal of e-learning, 6 (1), 19–30.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1982). Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. Available from selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/ . Accessed 2 Aug 2016.

Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The Delone and McLean model of information systems success: A Ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19 (4), 9–30.

Demirkol, M., & Kazu, I. Y. (2014). Effect of blended environment model on high school students’ academic achievement. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13 (1), 78–87.

Eom, S., Wen, H., & Ashill, N. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: an empirical investigation’. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4 (2), 215–235.

Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7 (2), 95–105.

Goyal, E., & Tambe, S. (2015). Effectiveness of Moodle-enabled blended learning in private Indian Business School teaching NICHE programs. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 5 (2), 14–22.

Green, J., Nelson, G., Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. (2006). The causal ordering of self-concept and academic motivation and its effect on academic achievement. International Education Journal, 7 (4), 534–546.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating Professional Development . Thousands Oaks: Corwin Press.

Hadad, W. (2007). ICT-in-education toolkit reference handbook . InfoDev. from http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.301.html . Retrieved 04 Aug 2015.

Hara, N. & Kling, R. (2001). Student distress in web-based distance education. Educause Quarterly. 3 (2001).

Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., & Smaldino, S. E. (2001). Instructional Media and Technologies for Learning (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Hofmann, J. (2014). Solutions to the top 10 challenges of blended learning. Top 10 challenges of blended learning. Available on cedma-europe.org .

Islam, A. K. M. N. (2014). Sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with a learning management system in post-adoption stage: A critical incident technique approach. Computers in Human Behaviour, 30 , 249–261.

Kelley, D. H. & Gorham, J. (2009) Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37 (3), 198–207.

Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2011). Adopting a blended learning approach: Challenges, encountered and lessons learned in an action research study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15 (1), 45–57.

Kintu, M. J., & Zhu, C. (2016). Student characteristics and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment intervention in a Ugandan University. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14 (3), 181–195.

Kuo, Y., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R., & Schroder, L. E. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14 (1), 16–39.

Kwak, D. W., Menezes, F. M., & Sherwood, C. (2013). Assessing the impact of blended learning on student performance. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (1), 127–136.

Lim, D. H., & Kim, H. J. (2003). Motivation and learner characteristics affecting online learning and learning application. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31 (4), 423–439.

Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learner outcomes within a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 282–293.

Lin, B., & Vassar, J. A. (2009). Determinants for success in online learning communities. International Journal of Web-based Communities, 5 (3), 340–350.

Loukis, E., Georgiou, S. & Pazalo, K. (2007). A value flow model for the evaluation of an e-learning service. ECIS, 2007 Proceedings, paper 175.

Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5 (2), 1–16.

Marriot, N., Marriot, P., & Selwyn. (2004). Accounting undergraduates’ changing use of ICT and their views on using the internet in higher education-A Research note. Accounting Education, 13 (4), 117–130.

Menager-Beeley, R. (2004). Web-based distance learning in a community college: The influence of task values on task choice, retention and commitment. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). Dissertation Abstracts International, 64 (9-A), 3191.

Naaj, M. A., Nachouki, M., & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11 , 185–200.

Nurmela, K., Palonen, T., Lehtinen, E. & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Developing tools for analysing CSCL process. In Wasson, B. Ludvigsen, S. & Hoppe, V. (eds), Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp 333–342). Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer.

Osgerby, J. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the introduction of a blended learning environment: An exploratory case study. Accounting Education, 22 (1), 85–99.

Oxford Group, (2013). Blended learning-current use, challenges and best practices. From http://www.kineo.com/m/0/blended-learning-report-202013.pdf . Accessed on 17 Mar 2016.

Packham, G., Jones, P., Miller, C., & Thomas, B. (2004). E-learning and retention key factors influencing student withdrawal. Education and Training, 46 (6–7), 335–342.

Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Mannual (4th ed.). Maidenhead: OUP McGraw-Hill.

Park, J.-H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 207–217.

Picciano, A., & Seaman, J. (2007). K-12 online learning: A survey of U.S. school district administrators . New York, USA: Sloan-C.

Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skill training. MIS Quarterly, 25 (4), 401–426.

Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. K. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers & Education, 47 (2), 222–244.

Rahman, S. et al, (2011). Knowledge construction process in online learning. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research, 8 (2), 488–492.

Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs. Computers & Education, 6 (1), 1–16.

Sankaran, S., & Bui, T. (2001). Impact of learning strategies and motivation on performance: A study in Web-based instruction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28 (3), 191–198.

Selim, H. M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computers & Education, 49 (2), 396–413.

Shraim, K., & Khlaif, Z. N. (2010). An e-learning approach to secondary education in Palestine: opportunities and challenges. Information Technology for Development, 16 (3), 159–173.

Shrain, K. (2012). Moving towards e-learning paradigm: Readiness of higher education instructors in Palestine. International Journal on E-Learning, 11 (4), 441–463.

Song, L., Singleton, E. S., Hill, J. R., & Koh, M. H. (2004). Improving online learning: student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics’. Internet and Higher Education, 7 (1), 59–70.

Stacey, E., & Gerbic, P. (2007). Teaching for blended learning: research perspectives from on-campus and distance students. Education and Information Technologies, 12 , 165–174.

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interactivity: design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22 (2), 306–331.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Thompson, E. (2004). Distance education drop-out: What can we do? In R. Pospisil & L. Willcoxson (Eds.), Learning Through Teaching (Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, pp. 324–332). Perth, Australia: Murdoch University.

Tselios, N., Daskalakis, S., & Papadopoulou, M. (2011). Assessing the acceptance of a blended learning university course. Educational Technology & Society, 14 (2), 224–235.

Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to drop-out of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13 (3), 115–127.

Zhu, C. (2012). Student satisfaction, performance and knowledge construction in online collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (1), 127–137.

Zielinski, D. (2000). Can you keep learners online? Training, 37 (3), 64–75.

Download references

Authors’ contribution

MJK conceived the study idea, developed the conceptual framework, collected the data, analyzed it and wrote the article. CZ gave the technical advice concerning the write-up and advised on relevant corrections to be made before final submission. EK did the proof-reading of the article as well as language editing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Mountains of the Moon University, P.O. Box 837, Fort Portal, Uganda

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Edmond Kagambe

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, Brussels, 1050, Ixelles, Belgium

Mugenyi Justice Kintu & Chang Zhu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mugenyi Justice Kintu .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kintu, M.J., Zhu, C. & Kagambe, E. Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features and outcomes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 14 , 7 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4

Download citation

Received : 13 July 2016

Accepted : 23 November 2016

Published : 06 February 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0043-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Blended learning effectiveness
  • Learner characteristics
  • Design features
  • Learning outcomes and significant predictors

research paper about teaching

Research and teaching writing

  • Published: 12 July 2021
  • Volume 34 , pages 1613–1621, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

  • Steve Graham 1 , 2 &
  • Rui A. Alves 3  

10k Accesses

14 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Writing is an essential but complex skill that students must master if they are to take full advantage of educational, occupational, and civic responsibilities. Schools, and the teachers who work in them, are tasked with teaching students how to write. Knowledge about how to teach writing can be obtained from many different sources, including one’s experience teaching or being taught to write, observing others teach writing, and advise offered by writing experts. It is difficult to determine if much of the lore teachers acquire through these methods are effective, generalizable, or reliable unless they are scientifically tested. This special issue of Reading & Writing includes 11 writing intervention studies conducted primarily with students in the elementary grades. It provides important new information on evidence-based writing practices.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

There are many different ways that teachers can learn about how to teach writing. One way of acquiring such knowledge is by teaching this skill to others. As teachers apply different instructional procedures, they form judgments about the value and efficacy of these practices. In essence, they learn by doing (Graham, 2018 ).

A second way teachers learn about how to teach writing is by observing others and learning from them (Graham, 2018 ). Teachers likely remember some of the instructional methods used by those who taught them to write (e.g., teachers, mentors, parents, guardians, and peers). They may in turn adopt some of these practices when they teach their own students. This may be particularly true for instructional practices they considered effective.

Teachers can gain additional insight into teaching writing by observing and absorbing insights offered by others who have taught writing or studied how to teach it. This includes knowledge acquired from instructors teaching literacy and writing courses as well as experts offering advice on writing instruction at conferences, through workshops, podcasts, or other forms of information sharing. Teachers may also learn about teaching writing by discussing this topic with their peers or observing them as they teach writing.

A third source of knowledge that teachers can access are published materials about how to teach writing. This includes textbooks and articles on the subject, curriculum guides, commercial materials, and position statements from professional organizations to provide just a few examples. These resources can further involve digital sources such as videos demonstrating how to apply specific writing procedures, experts promoting specific teaching techniques, or web sites devoted to writing instruction.

The concern

Given all of the possible knowledge sources teachers can access or experience, there is an abundance of information, recommendations, and teaching materials on how to teach writing that is available to teachers. This blessing experiences at least one serious limitation. Too often, there is limited, circumscribed, or no evidence that the proffered advice, know-how, or wisdom works. There are many claims about what is effective, but too little proof. Unfortunately, this observation applies to much of the lore that teachers acquire about writing instruction.

Teaching lore mainly involves writing practices teachers experienced when they learned to write, instructional practices teachers develop and apply with their students, writing practices they see other teachers apply, and teaching practices promoted by experts (Graham & Harris, 2014 ). While we have no doubt that teachers and experts possess considerable knowledge and insight about how to teach writing, basing the teaching of this complex skill on such lore alone is risky.

Why is this the case? One reason is that it is difficult to determine which aspects of teaching lore are valid. For example, there are many things a teacher does while teaching writing. When their students’ writing improves, they may attribute this change to specific procedures they applied. While this evaluation may be correct, it is also possible that this judgment is incorrect or only applies to some students or to a procedure in a given context.

Teachers are not the only ones who can succumb to such selective bias. Specific teaching lore promoted by writing experts are also susceptible to misinterpretation in terms of their effectiveness. To illustrate, writing experts can overestimate the impact of favored instructional methods, forming judgments consistent with their philosophical views on writing development or instruction. For instance, proponents of the whole language approach to learning to read and write believed that writing and reading develop naturally just like oral language (Goodman, 1992 ). Consistent with these beliefs, they championed an approach to literacy instruction based on the use of informal teaching methods (e.g., reading and writing for real purposes), while at the same time deemphasizing explicitly and systematically teaching students foundational writing and reading skills and strategies (Graham & Harris, 1997 ). Instead, these skills are only taught when the need arises, mostly through short mini-lessons. Advocates for whole language frequently promoted the effectiveness of this two-pronged approach (Begeron, 1990 ), without providing much in the way of empirical evidence that it was effective, or perhaps even more importantly, that it was as effective as other alternatives such as reading and writing programs that emphasized reading and writing for real purposes, coupled with systematic and explicit skills and strategy instruction (Graham & Harris, 1994 ). Even for fundamental writing skills such as spelling, there is considerable evidence that both informal teaching and explicit instruction are effective (Graham, 2000 ; Graham & Santangelo, 2014 ), while whole language approaches are fundamentally misguided about what is written language (Liberman, 1999 ).

Whole language is not the only approach to teaching writing that has suffered from questionable claims about its effectiveness. Even the venerable Donald Graves was guilty of this to some degree with the process approach to writing that he supported and advocated (see Smagorinski, 1987 ). The evidence he offered in support of his favored approach to teaching writing relied in large part on testimonials and exemplar writing of selected students, presenting a potentially overly optimistic assessment of this approach. This is not to say that the process approach is ineffective, as there is now considerable empirical evidence supporting the opposite conclusion (Sandmel & Graham, 2011 ). Instead, this example illustrates that adopting whole cloth even highly popular and widely used teaching lore without careful consideration of its effectiveness and the evidence available to support it can be risky. The lack of evidence or the type of evidence provided can make it extremely difficult for teachers or other interested parties to determine if the testimonials or evidence used to support specific teaching lore in writing are representative or atypical.

A third issue that makes some teaching lore risky is that it may be based on the experience of a single or a very small number of teachers. As an example, this can occur for knowledge a teacher acquires as a result of his or her experience teaching writing. The teaching practice(s) may in fact be effective for the students in this teacher’s classroom, but they may not be effective when applied by another teacher or with different students. Until this proposition is tested, there is no way to determine if this teaching lore will produce reliable results when applied more broadly.

As these concerns demonstrate, the validity, generalizability, and replicability of instructional practices based on teaching lore are uncertain. This is not to devalue what teachers or experts know, but to demonstrate the limits of this knowledge.

Evidence-based writing practices

The concerns about the value of teaching lore raised above raises the question: How should the structure and details of writing instruction be determined? The solution that we recommend is to take an evidence-based practice approach to both enhance teachers’ knowledge and develop writing instruction. Starting with medicine in the 1990s, and spreading quickly to psychology, informational science, business, education, and a host of other disciplines, this movement promoted the idea that practitioners in a field should apply the best scientific evidence available to make informed and judicious decisions for their clients (Sackett et al., 1996 ). The basic assumption underlying this approach is that the findings from research can positively impact practice. The evidence-based practice movement was a reaction to practitioners basing what they did almost strictly on tradition and lore, without scientific evidence to validate it.

One reason why this represents a positive step forward in education and the teaching of writing is that instructional practices based on high quality intervention research addresses the three issues of concern we raised about teaching lore. First, high quality intervention studies address the issue of validity. They are designed specifically to isolate the effects of a specific instructional practice or set of instructional practices. They provide systematically gathered evidence on whether the instructional practices tested produced the desired impact. They further apply methodological procedures to rule out alternative explanations for observed effects. Second, high quality intervention studies address issues of generalizability by describing the participants and the context in which the practice was applied, and by using statistical procedures to determine the confidence that can be placed in specific findings. Three, they address the issue of replicability, as the replication of effects across multiple situations is the hall mark of scientific testing (Graham & Harris, 2014 ).

Another reason why the evidence-based approach represents a positive step forward in terms of teaching writing is that the evidence gathered from high quality intervention studies can provide a general set of guidelines for designing an effective writing program. Graham et al. ( 2016 ) created such a roadmap by drawing on three sources of scientific evidence: true-and quasi- experimental writing intervention studies, single-case design studies, and qualitative studies of how exceptional literacy teachers taught writing (see also Graham & Harris, 2018 ). They indicated that the scientific evidence from these three sources supports the development of writing programs that include the following. Students write frequently. They are supported by teachers and peers as they write. Essential writing skills, strategies, and knowledge are taught. Students use word processors and other twenty-first century tools to write. Writing occurs in a positive and motivating environment. Writing is used to support learning. Based on several recent meta-analyses of high quality intervention studies (Graham, et al., 2018a , b ; Graham, et al., 2018a , b ), Graham now recommends that the evidence also supports connecting writing and reading instruction (Graham, 2019 , 2020 ).

A third reason why the evidence-based approach is a positive development is that it provides teachers with a variety of techniques for teaching writing that have been shown to be effective in other teachers’ classes and in multiple situations. While this does not guarantee that a specific evidence-based practices is effective in all situations, a highly unlikely proposition for any writing practice, it does provide teachers with instructional procedures with a proven track record. This includes, but is not limited to (Graham & Harris, 2018 ; Graham et al., 2016 ):

Setting goals for writing.

Teaching general as well as genre-specific strategies for planning, revising, editing, and regulating the writing process. Engaging students in prewriting practices for gathering, organizing, and evaluation possible writing contents and plans.

Teaching sentence construction skills with sentence-combining procedures.

Providing students with feedback about their writing and their progress learning new writing skills.

Teaching handwriting, spelling, and typing.

Increasing how much students write; analyzing and emulating model texts.

Teaching vocabulary for writing.

Creating routines for students to help each other as they write.

Putting into place procedures for enhancing motivation.

Teaching paragraph writing skills.

Employing technology such as word processing that makes it easier to write.

It is also important to realize that an evidence-based approach to writing does not mean that teachers should abandon the hard-earned knowledge they have acquired through their experiences as teachers or learners. The evidence-based movement emphasizes that teachers contextualize knowledge about teaching writing acquired through research with their own knowledge about their students, the context in which they work, and what they know about writing and teaching it (Graham et al., 2016 ). When applying instructional practices acquired through research as well as teaching lore, we recommend that teachers weigh the benefits, limitations, and possible harm that might ensue as a consequence of applying any teaching procedure. Once a decision is made to apply a specific practice, it is advisable to monitor its effectiveness and make adjustments as needed.

Finally, while the scientific testing of writing practices has provided considerable insight into how writing can be taught effectively, it is not broad, deep, or rich enough to tell us all we need to know about teaching writing. It is highly unlikely that this will ever be the case. We operate on the principle that there is no single best method for teaching writing to all students, nor is it likely that science will provide us with formulas to prescribe exactly how writing should be taught to each student individually. Writing, learning, children, and the contexts in which they operate are just too complex to make this a likely consequence of the evidence-based movement. As a result, we believe that the best writing instruction will be provided by teachers who apply evidence-based practices in conjunction with the best knowledge they have acquired as teachers and learners, using each of these forms of knowledge in an intelligent, judicious, and critical manner.

Over time, we anticipate that evidence-based practices will play an ever increasing role in the process described above. This is inevitable as our knowledge about evidence-based writing practices expands. This brings us to the purpose of this special issue of Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal . This special issue presents 11 writing intervention studies focusing almost exclusively with students in the elementary grades. These studies were conducted in Europe and the United States, and they replicate and extend prior research conducted with young developing writers.

The special issue

Perhaps the most tested writing instructional practice of all time, and the one yielding the largest effects sizes (Graham et al., 2013 ), is the Self-regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model developed by Karen Harris (see Harris et al., 2008 for a description of this approach). Several studies in the current special issue tested specific iterations of the use of the SRSD model as a means for teaching writing to elementary grade students. Collins and her colleagues examined the effectiveness of teaching third grade students in the United States task specific strategies for planning and drafting expository essays using information from social studies text using this model. This instruction enhanced the quality of students’ texts and resulted in improvement on a norm-referenced measure of writing where students identified their favorite game and provided reasons why this was the case.

In a second SRSD study conducted with second and third grade children in Spain, Salas and her colleagues examined if teaching planning and drafting strategies for writing an opinion essay was equally effective with children from more and less disadvantaged backgrounds. SRSD was equally effective in improving the opinion writing of children from both backgrounds, but carryover effects to reading comprehension (a skill not taught in this study) only occurred for students from less disadvantaged backgrounds.

A third study by Rosario and his colleagues involved a secondary analysis of data from an investigation in Portugal where third grade students were taught to write narratives using SRSD procedures and a story writing tool they developed. Their reanalysis focused on students experiencing difficulties learning to write showing that they differed in their approach and perceptions of teacher feedback. The majority of these children were able to use the feedback provided by their teacher and viewed it as helpful.

A fourth investigation by Hebert and his colleagues taught fourth grade students in the United States to write informational text using five text structures (description, compare/contrast, sequence of events, problem–solution, and cause effect). While the authors did not indicate they used SRSD to teach these strategies, the teaching methods mirrored this approach. In any event, the instruction provided to these children enhanced how well they wrote all five of these different kinds of text. These effects, however, did not generalize to better reading performance.

Lopez and her colleagues in Spain examined three approaches to improving sixth grade students’ writing. Students in all three conditions were taught how to set communicative goals for their writing. Students in one treatment condition were taught a strategy for revising. Students in a second treatment condition observed a reader trying to comprehend a text and suggesting ways it might be improved. Control students continued with the goal setting procedures. Students in both treatment conditions improved their writing and revising skills more than control students, but there were no differences between these two treatments.

In another Spanish study conducted by Rodriguez-Malaga and colleagues, the impact of two different treatments on the writing of fourth grade students was examined. One treatment group learned how to set product goals for their writing, whereas the other writing treatment group learned how to set product goals and strategies for planning compare/contrast texts. Only the students in the product goal and planning strategy treatment evidenced improved writing when compared to control students.

Philippakos and Voggt examined the effectiveness of on-line practice-based professional development (PBPD) for teaching genre-based writing strategies. Eighty-four second grade teachers were randomly assigned to PBPD or a no-treatment control condition. Treatment teachers taught the genre-based writing strategies with high fidelity and rated PBPD positively. Even more importantly, their students writing evidenced greater improvement than the writing of students in control teachers’ classes.

Walter and her colleagues in England examined the effectiveness of two writing interventions, sentence combining and spelling instruction, with 7 to 10 year old children experiencing difficulties learning to write. As expected, sentence combining instruction improved sentence construction skills, but even more importantly, these researchers found that the degree of improvements in sentence writing was related to students’ initial sentence, spelling, and reading skills.

In another study focused on improving students’ sentence construction skills, Arfé and her colleagues in Italy examined the effectiveness of an oral language intervention to improve the sentence construction skills of fifth and tenth grade students. This oral treatment did enhance the sentence writing skills of the younger fifth grade students. This study provides needed evidence that interventions aimed at improving oral language skills transfer to writing.

Chung and his colleagues in the United States examined if sixth grade students’ writing can be improved through self-assessment, planning and goal setting, and self-reflection when they revised a timed, on-demand essay. These students as well as students in the control condition were also taught how to revise such an essay. Treatment students evidenced greater writing gains, and were more confident about their revising capabilities than control students.

Lastly, Graham and his colleagues in the United States examined if the revising behavior of fourth grade students experiencing difficulties with writing can be enhanced through the use of revising goals that focused attention on making substantive when revising stories (e.g., change the setting of the story). Applying such goals across four stories had a positive effect on the revising behavior of these students when these goals were not in effect, resulting in more text-level revisions, more revisions that changed the meaning of text, and more revisions rated as improving text.

The 11 intervention studies in this special issue of Reading & Writing are particularly noteworthy for several reasons. One, some of these studies ( n  = 4) concentrated on improving students’ skills in writing informational and expository text. This is an area that has not received enough attention in existing writing literature. Two, enhancing students’ revising was the goal of multiple studies ( n  = 4). Again, too little attention has been given to this topic with either younger or older students. Three, it was especially gratifying to see that a pair of studies examined how to enhance sentence writing skills. This has been a neglected area of writing research since the 1980s. Four, multiple studies focused on improving the writing of students who experienced difficulties learning to write ( n  = 3). This is an area where we need much more research if we are to maximize these students’ writing success. Finally, more than half of the studies in this special issue ( n  = 6) were conducted in Europe, with the other half conducted in the United States. It is important to examine if specific writing treatments are effective in different social, cultural, political, institutional, and historical context (Graham, 2018 ), as was done with the four studies that applied SRSD to teach students strategies for writing.

We hope you enjoy the studies presented here. We further hope they serve as a catalyst to improve your own research if you are a writing scholar or your teaching if you are a practitioner.

Begeron, B. (1990). What does the term whole language mean? constructing a definition from the literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22 , 301–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862969009547716

Article   Google Scholar  

Goodman, K. (1992). I didn’t found whole language. The Reading Teacher, 46 , 188–199.

Google Scholar  

Graham, S. (2000). Should the natural learning approach replace traditional spelling instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 , 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.235

Graham, S. (2018). The writer(s)-within-community model of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53 , 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406

Graham, S. (2019). Changing how writing is taught. Review of Research in Education, 43 , 277–303. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821125

Graham, S. (2020). The sciences of reading and writing must become more fully integrated. Reading Research Quarterly, 55 (S1), S35–S44.

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1997). It can be taught, but it does not develop naturally: myths and realities in writing instruction. School Psychology Review, 26 , 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1997.12085875

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2014). Conducting high quality writing intervention research: twelve recommendations. Journal of Writing Research, 6 (2), 89–123. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2014.06.02.1

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). Evidence-based writing practices: A meta-analysis of existing meta-analyses. In R. Fidalgo, K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Eds.), Design Principles for teaching effective writing: Theoretical and empirical grounded principles (pp. 13–37). Brill Editions.

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Chambers, A. (2016). Evidence-based practice and writing instruction. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research (2: 211–226). NY; Guilford.

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & McKeown, D. (2013). The writing of students with LD and a meta-analysis of SRSD writing intervention studies: Redux. In L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Learning Disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 405–438). Guilford Press.

Graham, S., & Harris, . (1994). The effects of whole language on writing: a review of literature. Educational Psychologist, 29 , 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2904_2

Graham, S., Liu, K., Aitken, A., Ng, C., Bartlett, B., Harris, K. R., & Holzapel, J. (2018a). Effectiveness of literacy programs balancing reading and writing instruction: a meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 53 , 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.194

Graham, S., Liu, K., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., Barkel, A., Kavanaugh, C., & Talukdar, J. (2018b). Reading for writing: a meta-analysis of the impact of reading and reading instruction on writing. Review of Educational Research, 88 , 243–284. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317746927

Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? a meta-analytic review. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27 , 1703–1743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L., & Friedlander, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Liberman, A. M. (1999). The reading researcher and the reading teacher need the right theory of speech. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3 (2), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0302_1

Sackett, D., Rosenberg, W., Gray, J., Haynes, R., & Richardson, W. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312 , 71–72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71

Sandmel, K., & Graham, S. (2011). The process writing approach: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 104 , 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2010.488703

Smagorinski, P. (1987). Graves revisited: a look at the methods and conclusions of the New Hampshire study. Written Communication, 4 , 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088387004004001

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA

Steve Graham

Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia

University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Rui A. Alves

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui A. Alves .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Graham, S., Alves, R.A. Research and teaching writing. Read Writ 34 , 1613–1621 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10188-9

Download citation

Accepted : 29 June 2021

Published : 12 July 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10188-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Writing intervention
  • Evidence-based
  • Elementary grades
  • Writing instruction
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

  • We're Hiring!
  • Help Center

paper cover thumbnail

effective teaching strategies: A research paper

Profile image of anita alcantara

Education is a vital tool for us to strive for economic development. We educate o0urselve because of our dreams and goals in life. Doctors, engineers and nurses many other professions are possible because of educators. Educators transmit information to learners they are responsible for the teaching learning-process.

Related Papers

NAZREEN RAHMAN

research paper about teaching

Azizah Rajab

Mark Vincent

Harmawati Umma

Feyza Doyran

Adesoye Sunday

Tanzeela Urooj

Dr. Nakul Baniya

shera luzano

This study was conducted in all the higher education institutions in Kalinga for school year 2009-2010 with 1,147 students and 109 teacher respondents. It aimed to determine the teaching performance of faculty members along: Teacher's Personality, Management; Specifically, it also aimed to: find the extent of factors affecting the teaching performance of the faculty members; and look into the teaching strategies adopted by the faculty members to improve their teaching performance. The survey questionnaire was the major gathering instrument to collect the data gathered and were treated using the Analysis of variance on the extent of perceptions of the teaching performance along the variables identified. However, the t-test was used in the analysis of the perception between the third and fourth year students, while the weighted mean was used for the responses on the problems identified by the respondents. Statistically, the findings of this study revealed that the level of performance of the faculty as perceived by the students was " very satisfactory " and that there was no significant difference on the extent of perception by students on the level performance of faculty members along : Teacher's personality ,syllabi preparation ,content ,teaching methods, classroom management ,and learning management. However, on the factors affecting the teaching performance like: the school-related factors, teacher-related factors, and community –related factors, it was perceived that the faculty members were moderately affected. The study also revealed that the teachers adopted strategies of teaching were: question and answer as their teaching strategy; the lecture method; teacher led whole class discussion strategy; demonstration; used free flowing whole class discussion; watching a video/film; dictation; as their strategy, notice/board style displays; use of the overhead projector/LCD in teaching; and use of white/blackboard chalk. Among the strategies, the question and answer

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Autonomous Intelligence

michel cotsaftis

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Revista dos Trabalhos de Iniciação Científica da UNICAMP

Amanda Dos santos

Universitas Portal

Journal of Polymer Engineering

Vineta Srebrenkoska

Ciência &amp; Saúde Coletiva

Luciane Cruz

Joandomenec Ros

Cancer Treatment and Research Communications

Dirk Van Gestel

Soil Systems

Brian W Murphy

HUNAFA: Jurnal Studia Islamika

Revista de Filosofía (La Plata)

Guiyo Goicochea

Cairo Studies in English

Ingy Farouk Emara

American Journal of Industrial Medicine

Henk Van Der Molen

Molecular Biotechnology

Sangram Keshari Lenka

Fahreza Ladiku

Revue d'économie financière

MAXIMILIEN M N NAYARADOU

Physical Review Letters

IEEE Access

Joshua Tanner

Detlef Diesing

SPECTA Journal of Technology

Arris Maulana

  •   We're Hiring!
  •   Help Center
  • Find new research papers in:
  • Health Sciences
  • Earth Sciences
  • Cognitive Science
  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Academia ©2024

Teaching Practice Research Paper

Academic Writing Service

This sample education research paper on teaching practice features: 6000 words (approx. 20 pages) and a bibliography with 32 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Feel free to contact our writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Research on teaching practice and how teachers think about their practice has existed for decades. One pervasive reason for our interest in teachers’ thoughts is that thoughts are intertwined with practice, so if we want to better understand practice, we need to also understand the thoughts that guide practice. Thinking is not the same as acting, but teachers’ thoughts interact with their actions every day in both large and small ways, influencing their ability to grow and improve their practice over time and influencing their responses to new policies, new curricula, and new ideas about practice as they arise.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Teacher thinking is certainly relevant to teacher learning. No one can learn if they are not intellectually engaged with the topic being studied, and many investigators now believe that teachers can learn a great deal more from their own experiences in the classroom if they take time to reflect upon those experiences (Grimmet & Erickson, 1988; Schbn, 1983). Indeed, reflection has become widely valued and is now encouraged in teacher education classes and included in assessments such as those used by the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards. These programs and assessments require teachers or prospective teachers to reflect publicly, through journal entries or essays, about particular teaching experiences. The belief is that making these thoughts visible fosters more learning.

Teacher thinking is also relevant to the ability to implement new curricula, assessments, or other policies. Even when teachers are following heavily scripted programs and curricula, they make numerous ongoing adjustments to their lessons based on their own judgments and thoughts about how their lessons are working and what students are learning. Teachers do not, then, implement curricula or other instructional devices exactly as they have been prescribed.

At the same time, efforts to influence teachers’ thinking have been relatively unsuccessful. Beginning with the scientific movement in education in the early 1900s and extending through the mastery learning movement in the 1960s, education experts have offered prescriptions to teachers about how to plan and design instruction. These prescriptions tend to emphasize a rational approach to planning that begins with curriculum content, moves to goals and objectives, and continues linearly to resources, materials, instructional strategies, learning activities, and so forth. Many of these prescriptions are based on either no evidence or very thin evidence. Teacher education programs continue to prescribe specific approaches to planning, believing that some are better than others, even though we now have evidence that experienced teachers rarely use these strategies in their own planning. Findings such as these add another reason to care about how teachers think about their practice.

Much of our interest in teacher thinking flows from a perception that teachers are not thinking about their practice in the way their critics think they should. Critics want to see different practices, and they assume the reason they don’t is because teachers either are not thinking hard enough or are not thinking correctly. So along with articles about how teachers do think about their practice, we find studies of how they should think about their practice and some discussions about why there is a disparity between their thoughts and their critics’ thoughts about practice.

Below I describe three specific lines of research on teacher thinking, each taking a slightly different approach to the issue. First, there is a body of largely descriptive research that focuses on how teachers approach specific thought processes such as planning, evaluating, or making in-the-moment decisions. For the most part, these studies do not address questions about the quality of reasoning or ‘Tightness” of teachers’ thoughts, but instead simply describe these thoughts and thought processes. These studies are reviewed in the section entitled “Teachers’ Thought Processes.” The second group of studies seeks to under-stand how the job of teaching itself influences teachers’ thinking. The general focus of these studies is how teachers are affected by their chosen occupation, how they adapt to it, and how their thoughts are influenced by it. The section called “How Practice Shapes Thought” reviews some of this literature. Researchers in the third group of studies are more interested in the possibility of change. These researchers seek to understand both how teachers’ thoughts arise in response to the work itself and how these thoughts affect the quality of teaching practice. For these authors, the question of interest is not merely how do teachers think, nor merely how do circumstances influence thinking, but how does teacher thinking affect the quality of teaching practice. These authors tend to focus on how teachers design practices that can accommodate the realities of classroom life. This line of work is examined in the third section entitled “How Thought Shapes Practices.”

None of these sections presents an exhaustive rendering of the literature, but instead describes a few major contributions that give a flavor for the field as a whole.

Teachers’ Thought Processes

The first line of research seeks to learn more about how teachers engage in planning and strategic decision making. This work emerged in the 1960s, peaked in the 1970s, and is very well summarized in a handful of substantial literature reviews written in the 1980s (Clark, 1983; Clark & Peterson, 1986; Shavelson, 1983; Shavelson & Stern, 1981). This research-paper concentrates largely on these other reviews.

Interest in teacher thought processes arose, at least in part, as an antidote to another body of research, frequently called process-product research, that aimed to define effective teaching in terms of discrete skills that could be identified and taught in teacher education programs. The 1960s was a period of great interest in precise descriptions of teaching and in finding relationships between specific teaching acts and student learning. Much of this work assumed that knowledge of these teaching acts could eventually be directly taught to teachers (examples of articles suggesting such an assumption include Rosenshine & Furst, 1971, and Sandefur, 1970). As emphasis on teaching skills increased, a counter-movement surfaced arguing that teaching could not be reduced to skills alone. Researchers who pursued questions about teachers’ thought processes argued that teaching necessarily required judgment and thought. Their studies aimed to reveal that thought occurred and to reveal the nature of the thought processes and of the thoughts themselves.

The research methods employed in these studies are remarkably diverse, ranging from naturalistic observations and interviews to laboratory projects in which teachers are asked to think aloud as they work, view films and describe what they saw or thought, examine artifacts of classroom lessons or student work and to critique them, sort cards and engage with other devices. Shavelson, Webb, and Burstein (1986) provided an excellent review of the various methods that have been used in this body of research and a good critique of their strengths and weaknesses. Regardless of method, the goal is nearly always to reveal the contents of thoughts that are otherwise hidden from view.

This work is typically reviewed according to the type of thinking involved; that is, there is a body of literature on teacher planning, another on in-the-moment or interactive thinking, another on post hoc evaluations of events, and so forth. Researchers have found that teachers’ plans focus on the sequence of events that will occur more than on the content that will be taught or what students should learn as a result of the lesson (Clark & Yinger, 1987). This approach is quite different from the kind of rational planning that is sometimes advocated. Rather than beginning with a learning goal, teachers tend to begin with an activity and then envision how that activity might unfold. They think about where students will be located and what they will be able to see, what materials will be available and how they will be distributed, and how the conversation will be organized. Lesson plans look more like scripts for a play than a deduction from goals and objectives. These scripts and images of lessons have a great deal of influence over teachers’ actual teaching, and teachers rarely deviate from their scripts even when they see explicit evidence that the script is not working as they had envisioned it (Clark & Lampert, 1986; Shavelson, 1983).

With respect to interactive decision making, we have two seemingly contradictory findings. On one hand, we find that teachers rely heavily on routines in their practice. Routines can increase predictability, help students know what to expect and what to do, and reduce the number of things teachers need to attend to and the number of interactive decisions they need to make (Hargreaves, 1979). Yet despite teachers’ heavy reliance on predictable routines, they still need to make numerous in-the-moment decisions. Clark and Peterson (1986) found five studies that examined the number of interactive decisions teachers made and all five concluded that teachers made more than one decision per minute. These decisions occur even after teachers have devised plans that lay out the script and orchestration of the lesson and even when they are building lessons on a structure of established operating systems and routines.

These ad hoc decisions are made in response to specific events such as an unexpected student question or comment, a complication during a transition in a lesson, missing or faulty materials, or when teachers see evidence that the lesson is not going as planned. When making specific decisions, teachers rarely consider alternative courses of action, and when they do, they don’t consider very many alternatives. Once teachers are engaged in their lessons, roughly 40%-50% of all teachers’ thoughts during instruction have to do with students—what they are learning or what they are doing. Goals and content comprised only 5% or less of all thoughts, and instructional procedures comprised 20%-30% of their thoughts.

Concurrent with their routines and interactive decisions, teachers are also continuously monitoring the entire class. Even while listening to one student’s response to a question, a teacher may be simultaneously noticing that another student has become distracted by a fly and that two others are beginning to whisper. Kounin (1970) used the term withitness to refer to teachers’ ability to be continuously aware of what all students are doing. Even very small deviations from the plan are likely to trigger corrective responses from teachers.

Some researchers have also looked for general principles that guide teachers’ actions. For example, teachers frequently use a principle of compensation when making decisions (Clark & Peterson, 1986). Using this principle, teachers give extra attention to students who are shy or students who are less able. There is also evidence that teachers subscribe to a principle of suppressing their own emotions. A great deal of their effort goes into controlling themselves and their own emotions, so that they can maintain a particular persona and a particular classroom climate.

Most of this research has been essentially descriptive. That is, studies frequently demonstrate that thought occurred but rarely evaluate the quality of that thought. In fact, Berliner (1990) criticized the lack of attention to thoughts or thought processes that had some known value. He suggested that the work needed a criterion of effectiveness that would allow researchers to ascertain the value of different thoughts and thought processes. Without a criterion of effectiveness, no recommendations can follow for how to improve teaching. But I suspect that researchers at this time had no interest in improving teaching practice but instead were interested in affirming its complexity and value. Many of the practices they found could have been critiqued on normative grounds, even without a criterion of effectiveness, but they were not. For instance, teachers’ tendency to build plans around events and activities rather than around learning goals could have been construed as evidence of flawed planning, but no such normative judgment was made. Similarly, teachers’ inability to deviate from their plans when lessons aren’t working could have been construed as evidence that teachers lack flexibility or the ability to think in situ, but again no such evaluative judgments were made. Instead, researchers’ interpretations of this body of work showed us that teachers are thoughtful professionals, not merely skilled laborers, and that teaching is work that requires professional judgment, not merely training in skills.

In the 1990s, research on teacher thinking shifted focus toward articulating the knowledge that teachers need to carry out their work. Again, the shift was motivated by a rejection of the notion that teaching could be defined entirely as a set of behavioral skills and a concomitant desire to highlight the intellectual demands of teaching. The need to pay more attention to the content of teaching and to the contents of teachers’ knowledge was raised by Shulman (1986a, 1986b, 1987) and was followed by a number of efforts to identify categories and types of knowledge that would or could be useful in teaching (e.g., edited volumes by Reynolds, 1990, and Kennedy, 1991). Much of this work was speculative, however, and evidence for the relevance of particular bodies of knowledge tended to be limited to case studies of individual teachers. Some particularly influential studies that examined the role of knowledge in practice were Carpenter, Fennema, Peterson, Chiang, and Loef (1989); Leinhardt (1987); Ma (1999); and Stein, Baxter, and Leinhardt (1990).

The first effort to move beyond description toward a theory of teacher thinking did not occur until the late 1990s when Schoenfeld (1998) began what may be the most ambitious research program regarding how teachers’ thoughts and knowledge shape their practice. Schoenfeld’s goal is to go beyond description and develop models of teacher reasoning that articulate the beliefs, goals, knowledge, images, and so forth that teachers carry with them and that can account for specific interactive decisions that they make. A central feature of his model is that particular thought sequences, beliefs, ideas, and so forth, are brought into play by “triggering events” that provoke the teacher’s need to draw on these elements and to generate a new idea. Shoenfeld’s work is also unique because the teachers whose thought processes he models are not ordinary teachers but instead are extraordinary teachers, people whose practices look more like the kind reformers and visionaries wish to see more often.

This body of work has given us a great deal of knowledge about both the content and character of teachers’ thoughts. It is distinctive in its largely descriptive orientation and its moral stance toward teachers. Virtually all authors publishing in this area subscribe to the position that teaching is not a line of work that can be reduced to a set of skills or that can be prescribed from afar; instead, it should be viewed as professional work that requires thought, judgment, and knowledge. It is this normative stance, more than a theoretical stance, that has given this work its distinctive appearance, and it is perhaps also the reason the work has not yielded any patterns of causal relationship between teachers’ thoughts and their actions.

How Practice Shapes Thought

The first line of research has revealed very little about how teachers’ thoughts influence their practice; this second line of research has revealed a great deal about how teachers’ practices have influenced their thoughts. This line of research focuses on the unique nature of teaching as a profession and seeks to understand how the features of this work influence teachers’ thoughts and actions. Whereas the first line of work was based in psychology, this one is based in sociology. And whereas the first consisted of dozens of small-scale studies, this line consists of just a handful of large studies, each of which comes to us in book-length, rather than journal article-length form.

This line of work is also the oldest of the three reviewed here; it dates back to 1932, when Willard Waller published Sociology of Teaching (Waller, 1932/1961). Waller focused especially on the teachers’ status, both within the classroom and in the broader community, where, he said, teachers stood on such tall pedestals that it was difficult for them to have normal friendly relations with others adults. Within the school, Waller saw the teacher’s authority as the central issue of classroom life. He believed that school subject matter was so tedious that teachers had to find ways to force students to learn it. He saw students as continually resisting teacher domination. Because students never fully ceded authority to the teacher, authority relationships in the classroom were inherently unstable and the balance could be upset at any moment. Waller argued that all leadership is tenuous in this way and that it easily arouses hostility. In the case of teachers, Waller thought the constant struggle to subordinate students ultimately took a toll on teachers. Subordinates—in this case students—can create problems even when they give only a small part of their own energy to the encounter. It is easy for them to challenge the teachers’ authority. On the other hand, domination—in this case the teacher’s—can be maintained only when the dominant personality gives its entire energy to the relationship. This difference in relative investment of energy means that it is easy for students to exhaust teachers. In classrooms, teachers try to dominate by laying down rules, but students continually diminish teachers’ authority by stripping rules of their meaning, either laughing them off or overconforming to the letter of the rules but not to their spirit. Enforcement can be draining when there is a large number of students to control. Waller argued that this continuous pressure was a central aspect of teachers’ work and that contending with it eventually affected the teachers’ entire personality.

Between good teaching and bad there is a great difference where students are concerned, but none in this, that its most pronounced effect is upon the teacher. Teaching does something to those who teach. (Waller, 1932/1961, p. 375, emphasis added)

Waller thought that the constant pressure from students forced teachers to become rigid and inflexible. Teachers are continually confronting the childish ways of their students yet are expected to always and unwaveringly represent adult norms. They must continuously defend their own authority and maintain their own dignity against student mischief, pranks, and outright challenges to their authority. In so doing, teachers forego all tendencies toward spontaneity, human responsiveness, and adaptability. Most significantly, Waller also saw a gradual deadening of the intellect as teachers grew into their profession. Tasks such as grading, which depends on fixed standards of performance, can discourage intellectual growth; similarly the sense of being continuously evaluated by others, both within and outside the classroom, can discourage inventive thinking. For Waller, then, the experience of teaching itself had a substantial influence on teachers’ approach to their work, discouraging flexible thinking and intellectual engagement and encouraging rigid rule-following behavior.

Another influential study, Philip Jackson’s Life in Classrooms (Jackson, 1968/1990), aimed mainly to describe classroom life, not to describe its effects on teachers. Yet in doing so, Jackson also showed us a great deal about how teachers think about their work. Jackson described three dominant features of classroom life: crowds, praise, and power. The presence of a crowd meant that both students and teachers were constantly being interrupted in their work and that students usually had to wait to be called on or wait to get help. Praise and power refer to teachers being in charge and evaluating students constantly, often out loud so other students are aware of the teacher’s selective praise. Teachers also control what happens to students through their grouping and instructional practices, their disciplinary practices, and their grading practices. In this sense, they have great power.

When Jackson interviewed teachers, he learned that teachers often had a difficult time discerning whether their students were paying attention or not and whether they were learning or not. Teachers watched for clues such as raised hands, alert facial expressions, and the like and considered these immediate signals to be far more informative than formal tests of achievement. These ambiguities of teaching, combined with problems of crowding and interruptions, made teaching a difficult and complicated process. Jackson speculated that the job of teaching requires that teachers be able to tolerate an “enormous amount of ambiguity, unpredictability, and occasional chaos” (p. 149).

Yet, while Jackson could see the difficulties of teaching through teachers’ eyes, he was nonetheless critical of teachers’ nonanalytic approach to their work. He characterized teachers’ language and thought as conceptually simple and lacking in technical vocabulary, in contrast to the kind of specialized vocabularies that characterize other professions. He argued that they not only avoided complex ideas but actually shunned them. Jackson chastised teachers for their reliance on intuition rather than reason when interpreting classroom events and for their simple and uncomplicated interpretation of causality, in which discrete  causes yield discrete events. For instance, when seeking the reason for a complex phenomenon, teachers typically sought single sources (e.g., the parents didn’t care or the student was lazy) rather than complex patterns of events. When easy solutions were not available, teachers seemed willing to accept events without question and without further probing. And when referring to potentially complex concepts such as motivation or intellectual development, teachers tended to use narrow working definitions that glossed over the nuances of these concepts. There was an immediate social and physical reality evident in teachers’ language and at the same time an acceptance of classroom life as inevitable and unalterable. About teachers’ habits of thought, Jackson says,

It is easy, of course, to make fun of such oversimplifications, but the complexity underlying most classroom events is so great that the teacher’s search for a quick resolution of this complexity is understandable, perhaps even forgivable. (1968/1990, p. 144)

Shortly after Jackson’s examination of classroom life was published, another major treatise on teaching, Daniel Lortie’s Schoolteacher, appeared (Lortie, 1975). Lortie was interested in teaching as a profession, and he wanted to see how the work itself hindered or enhanced the professionalization of teaching. One central feature of teaching he noticed, for instance, was that it is “career-less.” That is, experienced teachers do essentially the same job that novices do, and their salaries are not substantially different. Moreover, standardized salary schedules mean that extra effort or initiative is rarely rewarded. And novices are introduced to the work virtually unaided. They enter their practice just a few months after being students themselves and are left entirely to their own devices to fashion a practice.

Lortie believed these features of the work led to a particular set of attitudes among teachers. The ease of entry into teaching means that teachers needed little commitment to the field. The egg crate structure of schools means that teachers have very little shared knowledge or experiences. Learning to teach is a private, sink-or-swim affair. Teachers’ isolation leads them to adopt an attitude of individualism in which they are reluctant to work with other adults and trust only their own judgments and experiences. Indeed, most of the negative events in their lives consist of interferences from outside the classroom, thus furthering their desire to be autonomous. Moreover, the work itself is ambiguous, as Jackson had also noted, and teachers often don’t understand the relationship between their own actions and their students’ learning. This ambiguity, Lortie believed, adds a tendency to focus on the moment.

These circumstances of teachers’ work, Lortie argued, lead to three important attitudes. One is “presentism,” a tendency to focus on immediate situations more than on long-term goals. Another is “conservatism,” a tendency to focus on narrow goals that are easily achievable, and to rely on tried-and-true solutions to their problems, rather than to experiment with new ideas. The third is “individualism,” a tendency to define their own private criteria for success and to prefer to work in isolation.

All three of these authors showed us a variety of ways in which the task of teaching influences teachers themselves. Teachers must work in isolation and maintain control over a large number of students, who in turn must learn to subordinate their own needs to those of the group. Teachers who can’t discern how students are responding to their instruction can’t know whether progress is being made. Both Waller and Jackson argued that these circumstances discourage deep analysis and ultimately deplete teachers intellectually. Lortie added that these circumstances encourage teachers to take on only the most narrow educational goals and the most predictable instructional routines. All three authors also suggested that these effects on teachers are inevitable. Though none of them directly addressed questions about how we might try to improve teachers’ practices or improve their reasoning about their practices, all implied that such improvements are unlikely to be found, for the practices we see are a direct response to the character of the work itself.

How Thought Shapes Practices

The third line of research combines elements of the first two. It acknowledges that the circumstances of teaching influence the way teachers approach their work but seeks to learn more about how teachers reason about their circumstances and devise practices that can accommodate those circumstances. With an eye toward eventually improving teaching practices, these studies are often interested in understanding why teaching practices are not more progressive, or not more intellectually rigorous, than they are and whether there are strategies we have overlooked that might help teachers raise their practices to a new level. They try to trace a path from the circumstances of teaching through teachers’ thoughts, and ultimately to teachers’ practices, in the hope that understanding this path may ultimately yield ideas about how to help teachers find ways to improve their practices while also accommodating the realities of their situations.

One example of this work is Walter Doyle’s program of research on classroom ecology and academic tasks. Doyle began, as others had, by identifying aspects of classroom life that influenced teachers (Doyle, 1979). He identified five important features of classroom life: multidimensionality, simultaneity, immediacy, unpredictability, and history. Both teachers and students must accommodate these realities, and they do so in different ways. Students, for instance, try to reduce unpredictability by negotiating with teachers about rules and standards. Teachers also try to simplify by creating routines and operating procedures within which academic work will occur.

These observations are similar to those made by Lortie and Jackson, but Doyle went beyond them to examine the effect of the situation on the quality of teaching practice itself. Determining which academic tasks students will work on is one important decision that teachers make. Doyle argued that academic tasks provide a bridge between the student and the content. These tasks determine the content students will learn and the kind of intellectual work they will engage in with that content (Doyle, 1983). Academic tasks may require students to memorize something (say, the Gettysburg address), practice a procedure (such as subtraction with borrowing), gain an understanding of a concept (such as gravity), or express their own thoughts through an essay or poem. Academic tasks are central to student learning.

Academic tasks are also central to reform, for most reformers want academic tasks to be more intellectually demanding and to draw on more rigorous content. But Doyle argued that such tasks are not very suitable to classroom life (Doyle, 1986). He pointed out, for instance, that familiar, routine tasks go smoothly whereas novel tasks are slower, require more explanation, and engender more errors and more incompletions. To make these complicated tasks more palatable to students, teachers tend to break them into smaller pieces and to present them as work tasks rather than intellectual tasks. The alteration makes the work fit better into the classroom but also converts the task into a procedure that can be devoid of content. Ironically, the tasks that best accommodate classroom life are those that render meaning most vulnerable. For Doyle, the secret to improving teaching is to find a way for teachers to manage their students while also presenting them with more complex academic tasks.

Cuban’s history of teaching practices, How Teachers Taught (Cuban, 1984), also seeks to learn more about how the circumstances of teaching influence practice itself. The premise for this study is that classroom practices have tended to be relatively uniform, both across time and across contexts. Cuban argued that the central reform dilemma, which has occupied reformers for many decades, is how to move teaching practices from teacher-centered to student-centered. He noted that the dominant approach to teaching has always been teacher-centered. But, he argued, it is also clear that some changes have occurred, so any plausible explanation of this history must be able to account both for the broad resistance to change and for the occasions when change has occurred. Over time, Cuban believes, there has been a gradual adoption of more child-centered approaches to teaching and that classrooms in the 1960s were friendlier than they had been a century earlier. Certainly the depictions of teaching that Waller provided in 1932 are different from those made decades later by other researchers.

So, Cuban asked, If teacher-centered practice is the default, when and under what circumstances are student-centered practices adopted, and what kinds of student-centered practices are adopted versus rejected? His study is essentially a history of the failures of progressive movements to change teaching practices. But he used that history to evaluate alternative hypotheses about the conditions of schooling that might account for both resistance and occasional changes. For instance, the structure of schooling cannot be entirely responsible for the resistance to change because it cannot explain why changes do occasionally occur. After considering a number of hypotheses, Cuban settled on something called “situationally-constrained choice,” by which he meant that both organizational constraints and teacher culture shape the practices and beliefs of teachers, but not to the point where they are entirely immutable; teachers’ beliefs can and do sometimes change.

Another study that emphasized the ways in which teaching practices accommodate the circumstances of teaching is Kennedy’s Inside Teaching (Kennedy, 2005). Like Cuban, Kennedy began with the acknowledgement that reformers have tried on numerous occasions over the past decades to alter the character and quality of teaching practices in American schools but that, for the most part, they have been unable to do so. She was particularly interested in reforms that aim to increase attention to complex subject matter, increase intellectual engagement in the classroom, and expand participation to a wider swath of the student body. She noted that such reforms have largely been unsuccessful. Instead of asking why teachers are not doing what reformers wished for, Kennedy asked why they are doing what they are doing. So she began her analysis by examining the concerns that govern teachers’ decisions as they engage in their practice. She identified six overarching areas of concern: (1) identifying learning outcomes, (2) fostering student learning, (3) increasing student willingness to participate, (4) maintaining lesson momentum, (5) establishing the classroom as a community, and (6) satisfying their own personal needs. While teachers thought about most of these issues most of the time, they frequently encountered conflicts among them. If, for instance, a stu-dent becomes confused and needs to clarify some arcane point, the teacher may find that her interest in fostering this student’s learning conflicts with her interest in maintaining lesson momentum. Conversely, if an enthusiastic student speaks out continually and interrupts other students, even if all remarks are substantively relevant to the lesson, the teacher may find that encouraging this student’s willingness to participate conflicts with establishing a community in the classroom.

Kennedy found that teachers make decisions that involve more than one of these areas of concern simultaneously, sometimes trading one against another and sometimes choosing an action because it simultaneously satisfies multiple areas of concern. As Cuban did, Kennedy evaluated a handful of competing hypotheses that had been put forward to account for teachers’ inability to engage in more rigorous and intellectually engaging practices:

  • Teachers need more knowledge and instructional strategies.
  • Teachers’ personality traits or dispositions impede reform.
  • Teachers’ beliefs conflict with those of reformers, and they base their practices on their beliefs.
  • The circumstances of teaching itself hinder reforms.
  • Reform goals are not realistic.

Kennedy found some evidence for each of these hypotheses, but ultimately argued that the most compelling explanation is that the reforms themselves are too ambitious and do not acknowledge the realities of classroom life. Reformers, she suggested, think about only one or two of the concerns that teachers think about. They may attend only to the content being taught or only to students’ intellectual engagement and do not offer teachers any help in addressing these concerns while also addressing teachers’ other concerns, such as maintaining lesson momentum and meeting their own personal needs.

This third group of studies offers a more evaluative look at teachers’ thoughts, focusing explicitly on the types of practices that result from those thoughts and comparing those practices to the practices that reformers seek. These researchers examined the relationship between teachers’ thinking and their practices, but emphasized the ways in which the practices teachers devise are ultimately designed to accommodate the circumstances they encounter.

Research on teacher thinking has not only helped us understand teachers’ thoughts but helped us understand the kinds of events that teachers are trying to control. We see from these studies that teachers are trying to simultaneously establish and maintain classroom norms, respond to unwilling students, organize materials and events so that learning may occur, and converse with students about substantively abstract ideas while also conversing with them about rules and procedures. We also find that they have a difficult time ascertaining what their students are thinking or whether students understand important concepts. They work at their task in virtual isolation and have no opportunities to step away from their work long enough to recover their composure or gather their thoughts when confronting a problem.

It should not be surprising, then, to learn that teachers’ plans look less like task analyses of content and instructional goals and more like envisioned sequences of events. In their visions, teachers imagine how all aspects of the lesson will work together—the discipline, the resources, the social networks, the routines and operating procedures, the needs of the more difficult students, and the needs of the more ambitious students. Nor should it be surprising to learn that teachers rely heavily on routines and standard operating procedures, nor that they still, even after students have learned all the routines, need to make interactive decisions more often than once per minute. Nor should it be surprising that their primary concern is maintaining lesson momentum and not losing any individual students as the group moves through the day’s activities.

The task teachers set out for themselves is not the one reformers set for teachers. Teachers do not begin the day thinking about fascinating new ways to approach particular substantive ideas. Instead, they begin by thinking about how to get two dozen restless youngsters to cooperate on a set of activities that will be roughly educative but not so engaging that students will become overly excited (Kennedy, 2005). The task is to find a path through the curriculum that can be taken by a large group of people traveling in tandem, many of whom are not particularly interested in whether they arrive at the destination or not.

Observers who look at the classroom with a cold eye see problems of domination and subordination, of crowds and power, and of students testing the limits of rules, negotiating their workloads, and goading their friends. Those who look at the classroom with the eyes of idealists are disappointed by the difference between reality and their own visions of enthusiastic students pursuing rigorous substantive ideas—visions that don’t address the question of how teachers create such classrooms while accommodating the real circumstances they face. This dilemma presents the next set of questions researchers must address.

Bibliography:

  • Berliner, D. C. (1990). The place of process-product research in developing the agenda for research on teacher thinking. Educational Psychologist, 24(A), 325-344.
  • Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C. -P., & Loef, M. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 499-531.
  • Clark, C. M. (1983). Research on teacher planning: An inventory of the knowledge base. In D. Smith (Ed.), Essential knowledge for beginning teachers. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.
  • Clark, C. M., & Lampert, M. (1986). The study of teacher thinking: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(5), 27-32.
  • Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan.
  • Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1987). Teacher planning. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teacher thinking (pp. 84-103). London: Cassel Educational Limited.
  • Cuban, L. (1984). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1980. White Plains, NY: Longman.
  • Doyle, W. (1979). Classroom effects. Theory Into Practice, 18, 138-144.
  • Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 159-199.
  • Doyle, W. (1986). Content representation in teachers’ definitions of academic work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18(4), 365-379.
  • Grimmett, P. P., & Erickson, G. L. (Eds.). (1988). Reflection in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Hargreaves, D. H. (1979). A phenomenological approach to classroom decision making. In J. Eggleston (Ed.), Teacher decision making in the classroom (pp. 74-81). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  • Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms. Reissued with a new introduction. New York: Teachers College Press. (Original work published 1968)
  • Kennedy, M. M. (Ed.). (1991). Teaching academic subjects to diverse learners. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Kounin, J. (1970). Discipline and group management in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Leinhardt, G. (1987). The development of an expert explanation: An analysis of a sequence of subtraction lessons. Cognition and Instruction, 4, 225-282.
  • Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers ‘ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Reynolds, M. C. (Ed.). (1990). The knowledge base for beginning teachers. New York: Pergamon.
  • Rosenshine, B., & Furst, N. (1971). Research on teacher performance criteria. In B. O. Smith (Ed.), Research on teacher education: A symposium (pp. 37-72). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Sandefur, J. T. (1970). An illustrated model for the evaluation of teacher education graduates. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.
  • Schoenfeld, A. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4, 1-94.
  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
  • Shavelson, R. J. (1983). Review of research on teachers’ pedagogical judgments, plans, and decisions. The Elementary School Journal, 83(4), 392-413.
  • Shavelson, R. J., & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(4), 455-498.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Webb, N. M., & Burstein, L. (1986). Measurement of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 50-92). New York: Macmillan.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986a). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3-36). New York: Macmillan.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986b). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
  • Stein, M. K., Baxter, J., & Leinhardt, G. (1990). Subject-matter knowledge and elementary instruction: A case from functions and graphing. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 639-663.
  • Waller, W. (1961). The sociology of teaching. New York: Russell and Russell. (Original work published 1932)

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

research paper about teaching

The Daring English Teacher on Teachers Pay Teachers

Teaching the Research Paper Part 1: Introducing the Research Paper and Preparing Students for the Assignment

Teaching the Research Paper Part 1: Introducing the Research Paper and Preparing Students for the Assignment

There are three things every teacher should do before taking their students to the computer lab to research information for their research papers: teach the difference between reliable and unreliable sources, check to make sure every student has a self-generated research question, and help prepare students with key phrases and words to search.

Whenever I begin teaching the research paper , I always share with my students the story of how I wrote my Master’s thesis paper. It was a 50 page paper with 50 different sources.

I don’t do this to toot my own horn. I don’t do this to scare my students away from post-secondary education. I don’t do this to make the students feel like their research assignment is petty and small. I do this so that I can explain the process of research to them and so that they know I was once in their shoes.

So how exactly do you write a 50-page research paper that has 50 unique, credible sources? One source at a time.

Teaching the Research Paper: 3 Critical Steps to Take

Teaching the research paper: find credible sources.

When teaching the research paper to my secondary ELA students, I first show them about research and credible sources. Before students can even begin looking for their sources, they have to know how to distinguish between reliable and unreliable sources. Being able to do so is the first step in finding a reliable source.

Slide31

Once I feel my students have a firm understanding of the sources they will be looking at, we then dive into the research topic, and the students select their issues related to the main topic.

Teaching the Research Paper: Create Questions

One of the critical parts of teaching the research paper to students is having them come up with their self-generated research questions. To do this, I encourage students to work collaboratively and talk about their research topics.

Students can work in small groups to see what their peers would like to know about that matter.

Working in small groups first provides extra support for EL and struggling students. From there, students come up with their questions to answer. There is also a graphic organizer in my Research Paper Writing resource that is especially helpful during this process.

Teaching the Research Paper: Brainstorm Key Words

Once students have a self-generated question, it is time to get students to think about keywords and phrases they will use in their search for sources. All too often I see students typing precise, wordy questions into a search engine. This only creates frustration for the students as well as the teacher.

Taking half a class to discuss keywords and phrases helps students tremendously, and it even speeds up the research process because students can find credible sources a lot easier. When teaching keywords and phrases to my students, I encourage them to type no more than four words into the search engine. I tell them that they must think of the most important words directly related to their topic.

To help students think about keywords and phrases they can use in the search engine, have them think about hashtags for their research topic. This fun, easy, and engaging strategy will get students thinking about what to research and what is explicitly related to their subject.

Teaching the Research Paper: A Research Paper Writing Instructional Unit

Take the stress out of teaching your students how to write a research paper with this complete research writing unit ! This comprehensive and complete research paper writing unit will help you teach your students how to write a research paper. Now available in print + digital!

This step-by-step resource teaches your students the eight steps of research writing, and it includes every single thing you could need for a successful research writing unit! Plus, it is updated for 9th edition MLA!

The editable teaching presentation (which comes in both PowerPoint and Google Slides®) is ideal for direct instruction and includes multiple days of guided instruction! The research writing presentation introduces students to the eight steps for completing a research project: selecting topics, generating questions, brainstorming, researching and gathering credible information, organizing and outlining, writing the first draft, peer editing, and finalizing the paper.

Research Paper Teaching Unit

Take the stress out of teaching your students how to write a research paper with  this complete research writing unit ! This comprehensive and complete research paper writing unit will help you teach your students how to write a research paper. Now available in print + digital!

Read more about teaching the research paper

Read more about research in the classroom with Part 2 which covers research paper topics and Part 3 which includes using Google Apps for research.

THANK YOU! I've had to sit through some painfully tedious COLLEGE classes because so many students aren't learning this in K12 that we're required to take classes on things like how to do a search. I greatly appreciate those of you who are teaching these important skills!

Is there a part 2?

Hi Deena, Thank you for reaching out. Yes. There is a part 2 and a part 3. I will link them to this post!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Daring English Teacher on Teachers Pay Teachers

SUBSCRIBE NOW

  • Manage Account
  • Voter Guide
  • Solar Eclipse
  • Bleeding Out
  • Things to Do
  • Public Notices
  • Help Center

news Education

How are computers scoring STAAR essays? Texas superintendents, lawmaker want answers

Educators and legislators are concerned about transparency and a spike in high schoolers scoring zero points on written answers..

Texas superintendents want answers from the state education commissioner Mike Morath about...

By Talia Richman

11:10 AM on Feb 15, 2024 CST — Updated at 8:00 PM on Feb 15, 2024 CST

Texas superintendents — and at least one lawmaker — want answers from the state education commissioner about how computers are scoring STAAR essays.

The Texas Education Agency quietly debuted a new system for examining student answers on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, or STAAR, in December . Roughly three-quarters of written responses are scored by a computer rather than a person.

“This is surprising news to me as a member of the House Public Education Committee, as I do not recall ever receiving notice of this novel and experimental method for grading high-stakes, STAAR tests,” Rep. Gina Hinojosa, D-Austin, wrote in a recent letter to Commissioner Mike Morath, which was also shared with The Dallas Morning News .

Superintendents across the state also were caught off guard until recently. Many school districts already are suing the state over changes to the academic accountability system that’s largely based on STAAR performance.

Receive our in-depth coverage of education issues and stories that affect North Texans.

By signing up you agree to our  Terms of Service  and  Privacy Policy

Related: Computers scoring Texas students’ STAAR essay answers, state officials say

The News reported on the rollout of computer scoring Wednesday.

The use of computers to score essays “was never communicated to school districts; yet this seems to be an unprecedented change that a ‘heads up’ would be reasonably warranted,” HD Chambers, director of the Texas School Alliance, wrote to Morath in a letter shared with The News .

TEA spokesman Jake Kobersky said in a statement that the agency is developing a comprehensive presentation for educators, explaining the changes in detail and addressing outstanding questions.

He added that the agency alerted the House Public Education Committee in August 2022 that it was pursuing automated scoring.

The final bulletpoint on an 18-page slideshow read: “TEA is pursuing automation for scoring where appropriate to reduce costs while ensuring reliability. Full human scoring is not possible under item-level computer-adaptive (B), and full human scoring with no automation under the current system would require at least $15-20M more per year.”

The new scoring method rolled out amid a broader STAAR redesign. The revamped test — which launched last year — has a cap on multiple choice questions and essays at every grade level. State officials say it would cost millions more to have only humans score the test.

The “automated scoring engines” are programmed to emulate how humans would assess an essay, and they don’t learn beyond a single question. The computer determines how to score written answers after analyzing thousands of students’ responses that were previously scored by people.

Among the district leaders’ biggest concerns is a huge spike in low scores among high schoolers under the new system.

Roughly eight in 10 written responses on the most recent English II End of Course exam received zero points this fall.

For the spring test — the first iteration of the redesigned test, but scored only by humans — roughly a quarter of responses scored zero points in the same subject.

Members of the Texas School Alliance , which represents 46 districts, “examined their individual district results and found shockingly consistent scoring differences.”

Chris Rozunick, the director of the state’s assessment development division, previously told The News that she understands why people connect the spike in zeroes to the rollout of automated scoring based on the timing. But she insists that the two are unrelated.

Many students who take STAAR in the fall are “re-testers” who did not meet grade level on a previous test attempt. Spring testers tend to perform better, according to agency officials who were asked to explain the spike in low scores in the fall.

“It really is the population of testers much more than anything else,” Rozunick said.

Kobersky added that, under the previous STAAR design, a score of zero was reserved for “unscorable responses,” meaning the question was left blank or written in a nonsensical way. The redesigned test rubric allows for a zero both if a response is unscorable or if it’s the value of the response as determined by the scorer, he said.

Some district leaders requested the state education agency provide them images of students’ responses so that they could “better understand what led to the significant increase in the number of zeroes, and most importantly how to help students write their responses” to receive better scores.

“Each request has been denied,” Chambers wrote in his letter to Morath.

Kobersky said fall questions are not released because they can be reused for other tests.

TEA officials say a technical report, with a detailed overview of the system, will be available later this year.

STAAR scores are of tremendous importance to district leaders, families and communities. Schools are graded on the state’s academic accountability system largely based on how students perform on these standardized tests.

Related: What are Texas’ A-F school grades, and why do they matter?

“As with all aspects of the STAAR test and the A-F accountability system, it is important that there is transparency, accuracy and fairness in these high-stakes results,” Hinojosa wrote.

The DMN Education Lab deepens the coverage and conversation about urgent education issues critical to the future of North Texas.

The DMN Education Lab is a community-funded journalism initiative, with support from Bobby and Lottye Lyle, Communities Foundation of Texas, The Dallas Foundation, Dallas Regional Chamber, Deedie Rose, Garrett and Cecilia Boone, The Meadows Foundation, The Murrell Foundation, Solutions Journalism Network, Southern Methodist University, Sydney Smith Hicks and the University of Texas at Dallas. The Dallas Morning News retains full editorial control of the Education Lab’s journalism.

Talia Richman

Talia Richman , Staff writer . Talia is a reporter for The Dallas Morning News Education Lab. A Dallas native, she attended Richardson High School and graduated from the University of Maryland. She previously covered schools and City Hall for The Baltimore Sun.

City of Dallas allows residents to donate blankets to waive some misdemeanor fees

Historic inwood theatre in dallas is ‘temporarily closed’, texas county declares state of emergency ahead of solar eclipse, dallas residents concerned old city park takeover will strip land of history, lies and dirty tricks: texas republicans are eating their own in this year’s primaries.

Watch CBS News

OpenAI's new text-to-video tool, Sora, has one artificial intelligence expert "terrified"

By Megan Cerullo

Edited By Anne Marie Lee

February 16, 2024 / 5:19 PM EST / CBS News

Another groundbreaking generative artificial intelligence tool from the company behind ChatGPT unveiled Thursday is expected to accelerate the proliferation of deepfake videos and have implications for virtually every industry. 

Sora, an AI application that takes written prompts and turns them into original videos, is already so powerful that one AI expert says it has him "terrified." 

"Generative AI tools are evolving so rapidly, and we have social network — which leads to an Achilles heel in our democracy and it couldn't have happened at a worse time," Oren Etzioni, founder of TrueMedia.org, told CBS MoneyWatch. The nonprofit organization dedicated to fighting AI-based disinformation in political campaigns focuses on identifying manipulated media, including so-called deepfake videos . 

"As we're trying to sort this out we're coming up against one of the most consequential elections in history," he added, referring to the 2024 presidential election. 

Sora maker OpenAI shared a teaser of its text-to-video model on X, explaining that it can instantaneously create sophisticated, 60-second-long videos "featuring highly detailed scenes, complex camera motion and multiple characters with vibrant emotions."

The tool is not yet publicly available. For the time being, OpenAI has restricted its use to "red teamers" and some visual artists, designers and filmmakers to test the product and deliver feedback to the company before it's released more widely. 

Safety experts will evaluate the tool to understand how it could potentially create misinformation and hateful content, OpenAI said.

Landing soon

Advances in technology have seemingly outpaced checks and balances on these kinds of tools, according to Etzioni, who believes in using AI for good and with guardrails in place. 

"We're trying to build this airplane as we're flying it, and it's going to land in November if not before — and we don't have the Federal Aviation Administration, we don't have the history and we don't have the tools in place to do this," he said. 

All that's stopping the tool from becoming widely available is the company itself, Etzioni said, adding that he's confident Sora, or a similar technology from an OpenAI competitor, will be released to the public in the coming months. 

Of course, any ordinary citizen can be affected by a deepfake scam, in addition to celebrity targets. 

"And [Sora] will make it even easier for malicious actors to generate high-quality video deepfakes, and give them greater flexibility to create videos that could be used for offensive purposes,"  Dr. Andrew Newell, chief scientific officer for identify verification firm, iProov, told CBS MoneyWatch. 

This puts the onus on organizations, like banks, to develop their own AI-based tools to protect consumers against potential threats. 

Banks that rely on video authentication security measures are most exposed, he added. 

Threat to actors, creators

The tool's capabilities are most closely related to skills of workers in content creation, including filmmaking, media and more. 

"Voice actors or people who make short videos for video games, education purposes or ads will be the most immediately affected," he said. 

"For professions like marketing or creative, multimodal models could be a game changer and could create significant cost savings for film and television makers, and may contribute to the proliferation of AI-generated content rather than using actors," Reece Hayden, senior analyst at ABI Research, a tech intelligence company, told CBS MoneyWatch.

Given that it makes it easier for anyone — even those without artistic ability — to create visual content, Sora could let users develop choose-your-own-adventure-style media. 

Even a major player like "Netflix could enable end users to develop their own content based on prompts," Hayden said. 

  • Artificial Intelligence

img-6153.jpg

Megan Cerullo is a New York-based reporter for CBS MoneyWatch covering small business, workplace, health care, consumer spending and personal finance topics. She regularly appears on CBS News Streaming to discuss her reporting.

More from CBS News

Google strikes $60M deal with Reddit, allowing it to train AI on posts

S&P 500, Dow rally to new records after Nvidia's earnings report

What happens if I don't make my credit card payments?

House heading toward "nuclear" war over Ukraine funding, one GOP leader says

IMAGES

  1. 🎉 Research paper about education sample. Education Research Paper. 2022

    research paper about teaching

  2. Teaching High School Students How To Write A Research Paper

    research paper about teaching

  3. Lovely Teacher Research Paper

    research paper about teaching

  4. Critique Paper Example About Education : Sample Literature Review Essay

    research paper about teaching

  5. Research Paper Examples Education

    research paper about teaching

  6. How to Write a Research Paper in English

    research paper about teaching

VIDEO

  1. Research Paper Writing online Workshop

  2. MAHA-SET EDUCATION PAPER Teaching aptitude ADDIE Model

  3. Workshop on how to write a research paper. Registration Link in comments #research #lawstudent #law

  4. Research Paper Topics 😮😮😯 Best for Beginners 👍

  5. teaching and learning 2nd sem question paper 2022 B.ed. #hpu

  6. Lecture No. 5, How to Write a Research Paper

COMMENTS

  1. Full article: Reviews of teaching methods

    The overview format. This study is situated within the frames of a research project with the overall aim of increasing and refining our knowledge about teaching and teaching research (Hirsh & Nilholm, Citation 2019; Roman, Sundberg, Hirsh, Nilholm, & Forsberg, Citation 2018).In order to clarify the context in which the present study has emerged, a brief description of starting points and ...

  2. Improving 21st-century teaching skills: The key to effective 21st

    The education delivery system has a substantial impact on the way in which 21st-century skills develop in learners. ... Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Research Paper. MET Project. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Google Scholar. Kayabwe S, Asiimwe W ...

  3. Research Papers in Education: Vol 39, No 1 (Current issue)

    Pages: 1-23 Published online: 18 Jun 2022 265 Views 5 CrossRef citations 0 Altmetric Article Be true to your school? Teachers' turnover intentions: the role of socioeconomic composition, teachability perceptions, emotional exhaustion and teacher efficacy Lennart Van Eycken, Ama Amitai & Mieke Van Houtte Pages: 24-49 Published online: 23 Jun 2022

  4. ERIC

    ERIC is an online library of education research and information, sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) of the U.S. Department of Education.

  5. American Educational Research Journal: Sage Journals

    (AERJ) is the flagship journal of AERA, with articles that advance the empirical, theoretical, and methodological understanding of education and learning. It publishes original peer-reviewed analyses View full journal description Browse by Most recent Most read Most cited Trending Videos Articles most recently published online for this journal.

  6. Effective Teaching Methods in Higher Education: Requirements and

    Teaching is one of the main components in educational planning which is a key factor in conducting educational plans. Despite the importance of good teaching, the outcomes are far from ideal.

  7. A Review of the Literature on Teacher Effectiveness and Student

    Researchers agree that teachers are one of the most important school-based resources in determining students' future academic success and lifetime outcomes, yet have simultaneously had difficulties in defining what teacher characteristics make for an effective teacher. This chapter reviews the large body of literature on measures of teacher ...

  8. Research in Education: Sage Journals

    Research in Education provides a space for fully peer-reviewed, critical, trans-disciplinary, debates on theory, policy and practice in relation to Education. International in scope, we publish challenging, well-written and theoretically innovative contributions that question and explore the concept, practice and institution of Education as an object of study.

  9. Empirical evidence on the relationship between research and teaching in

    Research and teaching are the two predominant knowledge-dissemination activities in the working day of academics (Burke-Smalley et al., 2017).Opinions on possible links, interactions or even interferences between them are extremely varied. Since the time of von Humboldt, most academic institutions claimed research and teaching among their pivotal missions, with a close connection, and mutual ...

  10. Teacher education research, policy and practice: finding future

    Teacher education research. In this policy context, reviews of teacher education research have often concluded that it is underdeveloped, small scale, often undertheorised, fragmentary, and somewhat parochial (e.g. Menter, Hulme, Elliot et al., Citation 2010; Sleeter, Citation 2014).As such, a large section of teacher education research has minimal influence on policy other than being used as ...

  11. (PDF) THE IMPACT OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING STRATEGIES ON ...

    Teaching practices that encourage collaboration between students, create active learning and can improve student achievement through monitoring the progress of their learning process is an ...

  12. Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student

    37 Altmetric Metrics Abstract This paper investigates the effectiveness of a blended learning environment through analyzing the relationship between student characteristics/background, design features and learning outcomes.

  13. Reflection on teaching action and student learning

    2.3. Data collection. The data collection was carried out by means of a reflective tool set, on the one hand, and a focus group on the other. The reflective tool set is defined as a structured organization of several tools to help derive learning from the act of teaching (Beckers, 2002).The reflective tools selected are recognized means of contributing to the development of reflective practice ...

  14. (PDF) EFFECTIVE TEACHING STRATEGIES

    Therefore, a teaching strategy is an instructional method or plan for classroom actions or interactions to achieve specific learning objectives, including induction, referencing, use of examples ...

  15. Shifting images of teaching in student teachers' talk about

    1.Introduction. In an inquiry group meeting with me and three of her Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) classmates, Linda 1 passionately critiqued feedback their practicum instructor had offered after two student teachers' in-class "teaching demonstrations." The instructor had praised the student teachers' materials and preparation but cautioned the class to think ...

  16. Research and teaching writing

    Writing is an essential but complex skill that students must master if they are to take full advantage of educational, occupational, and civic responsibilities. Schools, and the teachers who work in them, are tasked with teaching students how to write. Knowledge about how to teach writing can be obtained from many different sources, including one's experience teaching or being taught to ...

  17. (PDF) Teaching Research Methods: Learning by Doing

    Abstract. This paper outlines ways to structure a research-methods class so that students gain a practical knowledge of how research is done. Emphasis is placed on data collection, using ...

  18. (PDF) Research paper Teaching methods

    ABSTRACT: The present research examines the different teaching strategies especially among the graduated students. This research focuses on the different teaching strategies and how can these types affected on the students. The study examines the effectiveness of the different strategies among graduated students.

  19. Systems Research in Education: Designs and methods

    This exploratory paper seeks to shed light on the methodological challenges of education systems research. There is growing consensus that interventions to improve learning outcomes must be designed and studied as part of a broader system of education, and that learning outcomes are affected by a complex web of dynamics involving different inputs, actors, processes and socio-political contexts.

  20. effective teaching strategies: A research paper

    Effective Teaching Strategies In Teaching-learning process ----- A Research paper presented to Ms. JanneneLiekaCeniza _____ In Partial Fulfillment For the requirements of English 12 Writing in Discipline _____ By Alcantara, Richard Robin, Vanessa Pogoy, Ronald Montalla, Noel Padilla, Rubelyn Cuyo, Andrew Montesclaros, Grace Tauy, Christine BSEd-TLE 1-A 2nd semester, SY: 2014-2015 ...

  21. Research Papers in Education

    Research Papers in Education has developed an international reputation for publishing significant research findings across the discipline of education. The distinguishing feature of the journal is that we publish longer articles than most other journals, to a limit of 12,000 words.

  22. Education Research Paper on Teaching Practice

    Teaching Practice Research Paper. This sample education research paper on teaching practice features: 6000 words (approx. 20 pages) and a bibliography with 32 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our ...

  23. Teaching the Research Paper Part 1: Introducing the Research Paper and

    One of the critical parts of teaching the research paper to students is having them come up with their self-generated research questions. To do this, I encourage students to work collaboratively and talk about their research topics. Students can work in small groups to see what their peers would like to know about that matter.

  24. How are computers scoring STAAR essays? Texas superintendents, lawmaker

    The new scoring method rolled out amid a broader STAAR redesign. The revamped test — which launched last year — has a cap on multiple choice questions and essays at every grade level.

  25. Anti-DEI legislation moves forward in Alabama

    A bill that would ban diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives at certain public institutions in Alabama—including colleges and universities—passed a state Senate committee on Wednesday, according to Alabama Political Reporter.. Among other things, Senate Bill 129 prohibits public entities "from maintaining a diversity, equity, and inclusion office or department or sponsoring any ...

  26. Latest articles from Research Papers in Education

    New and old educational inequalities in socio-cultural minorities: exploring the school choice experiences of families under the new school admission system in Chile. Juan de Dios Oyarzún, Lluís Parcerisa & Alejandro Carrasco Rozas. Published online: 14 Mar 2023. 158 Views.

  27. OpenAI's new text-to-video tool, Sora, has one artificial intelligence

    The groundbreaking technology can be used to create deepfakes, and allow anyone to generate content for films, video games, ads.