Teaching method as a source of difficulty

The term ‘teaching method’ refers to the way in which a teacher presents new topics to the children, engages them in appropriate learning activities and provides corrective feedback. Methods range from formal (for example, directly presenting and explaining new information or demonstrating a new skill to the children) to the informal (for example, creating a situation in which children are required to discover new information through their own activities). A single lesson in any subject may involve some direct teaching, some student activity using instructional materials, some group discussion, and some feedback and summarising by the teacher.

Teaching methods are usually described as tending towards either ‘teacher-directedness’ or ‘student-centredness’ in their emphasis. Different subject areas in the school curriculum call for different methods of teaching in order to achieve the goals for learning in that subject. Teachers need to select the most appropriate teaching methods to suit the type of subject matter to be taught, the age and ability level of the children, the children’s previous experience and knowledge, and the available time and resources.

Until recently, the method of teaching was rarely investigated as a possible cause of learning difficulty. Teachers seem to assume that if something is taught (which usually means explained or demonstrated), it is

automatically learned; and if it is not learned, then the problem must be due to inadequacies in the child’s own ability, motivation or persistence, not to the effectiveness of the teaching method. Parents also assume too
readily that a learning problem must be related directly to the child’s ability or effort, not to the method of instruction. Researchers in the field of education are now recognising, however, that learning problems arise
if inappropriate methods of instruction are applied. Not all methods are equally effective in achieving particular goals in learning. Let us examine the teaching of reading and mathematics as examples of situations where some popular approaches have proved to be less effective than others.

Direct teaching versus indirect teaching: the case of learning to read
In the past few years, important reports published in Britain, the United States of America and Australia have been highly critical of the way in which literacy skills are being taught in the majority of primary schools in
those countries. Basically, the reports indicate that over the previous two decades the direct teaching of phonic skills – designed to enable a young child to read and spell using knowledge of letter-to-sound correspondences – has been seriously neglected. Instead, teachers have been trained and encouraged to use a popular method called ‘whole language approach’ in which direct teaching of phonic skills and spelling is frowned upon.

Teachers who use whole language approach believe that children will learn to read, write and spell without needing direct instruction if they are given daily opportunities to engage in reading and writing activities, and if they receive positive feedback from the teacher. In other words, these teachers believe that learning to read and write is a ‘natural’ process; all it requires is for children to be self-motivated and active learners in order to discover their way to functional literacy with minimal guidance from the teacher.

The evidence is, however, that some children (particularly in the early stages) simply do not discover the basic principles of reading and writing in an alphabetic language unless they are clearly and directly taught. The absence of direct teaching is the main cause of reading difficulty for most of these children.

Direct teaching versus indirect teaching: the case of mathematics
In recent years, the teaching of number skills and mathematical problem solving has also favoured a ‘discovery’ or ‘activity’ approach rather than direct instruction. It has become unpopular, for example, for teachers to drill children in basic arithmetic processes and multiplication tables because it is claimed that they will easily pick up these skills along the way if they simply engage every day in solving problems that involve counting, measuring, comparing and calculating. But some (possibly many) children do not benefit from this activity-based approach and instead need to have basic numeracy skills taught directly and then practised to the point of mastery. It is clear that some children have significant difficulties learning mathematics because the underlying skills and concepts have not been taught clearly and effectively or practised sufficiently.
Read More : Teaching method as a source of difficulty

A challenge for the system: educating and retaining effective teachers for diverse classrooms

Increasing diversity in the classroom is taking place against the background of a changing role for teachers. Teachers Matter (OECD , 2005) breaks this down to different levels and provides insight into how teacher roles that have been changing over time, on the:

• Individual student level: respond to individual learning needs, identify strengths and weaknesses of their students, and adapt their curricula and teaching in response to the increasing use and reliance
• on standardised tests. 
• Classroom level: deal with multicultural learning environments and apply cultural knowledge of different groups of students.
• School level: develop and exercise management and leadership skills, become more interactive and collaborate with other teachers in order to plan and monitor school-level progress.
• More broadly: taking the initiative to engage parents and the rest of the community in their practices and classrooms.

Although most teachers perform some of the roles outlined above, there is a growing expectation that more and more of their classroom time will focus on practices and exercises consistent with these new roles. Viewing students as active participants in the learning process and personalising teaching and assessment to better suit individual (and multicultural) student needs require time and space to engage in these practices, as well as the support and training to learn them. Yet teachers seem to view these changes positively, reporting
that they prefer a “constructivist” view of teaching (in which students are active participants in the process of acquiring knowledge) to a “direct transmission” view of student learning (which implies that a teachers’ role
is to communicate knowledge in a clear and structured way, to give students clear and resolvable problems, and to ensure calm and concentration in the classroom) (OECD , 2009b). This suggests that teachers are, at least in theory, prepared and able to offer the kinds of personalised instructional capacities that active learners require.

However, reporting on a teaching belief is not the same thing as reporting on a teaching practice. Indeed, when teachers report on their teaching practices, i.e. what they actually do in the classroom, they report using practices that are more consistent with a direct transmission approach (e.g. explicitly stating learning goals, summarising earlier lessons and reviewing homework) than practices that would be more consistent with a constructivist view of teaching (working in small groups, encouraging student self-evaluation and student participation in classroom planning, making a product or debating arguments) (OECD , 2009b).

There is thus a disconnect between teachers’ preferred beliefs and their expressed practices. Although the data from the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS ) do not allow us to explore this link further, it is likely that one of the contributing factors is the time and focused attention required to engage in constructivist activities. There is also another, more subtle force likely to be at work however: the difficulty of changing behaviour once one has been trained or exposed to one type of model. Most teachers and teacher educators have had a lifetime of exposure to structured practices in teaching, as students, student teachers and teachers. In making teaching with constructivist patterns a part of the everyday routine, there is
thus a need to break with previous learning, modelling and behaviour.

Breaking patterns and changing behaviour requires ongoing training and preparation on the teachers’ part as well as support and capacity building from school authorities. How well are teacher’s development needs being met in this domain? TALIS reveals that approximately 55% of teachers feel that they need more professional development than they have received in the previous 18 months (OECD , 2009b). When asked why they did not take part in development activities, the most commonly cited reasons were “conflict with work schedule” (47%) and “no suitable professional development” (42%).

There is thus much room for improvement both in terms of better targeting types of professional development that reflect teachers’ needs, and in terms of seeking ways to provide more flexible timing and delivery of training opportunities.

In order to address these issues, a key element is strengthening the evaluation, feedback and appraisal in the system to better identify strengths and weaknesses in teaching practice. Given that over 75% of teachers participating in TALIS reported that their appraisal and feedback was helpful in developing their work as teachers and that 63% also agreed that the appraisal and feedback they receive was a fair and just assessment of their work, there is room to use this process to effectively address training and development
needs. Overall, there is a need for more research in this area. Despite work on teacher perception and the demographic shifts affecting classroom composition, we do not yet have clear answers to essential questions such as: what are the best ways to prepare teachers to deal with highly diverse classrooms while at the same time improving students’ learning achievements? And, what education and training programmes for teachers have been demonstrated to be most effective?
Read More : A challenge for the system: educating and retaining effective teachers for diverse classrooms