1 / 102

Index

Influence of the Kansas Collaborative Research Network on Teacher Beliefs, Instructional Practices and Technology Integration. Index. Purpose Significance Background: The KanCRN Project Variables and Questions Research Methodology Theoretical Models Analysis of Data Structural Models

jaafar
Télécharger la présentation

Index

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Influence of the Kansas Collaborative Research Network on Teacher Beliefs, Instructional Practices and Technology Integration

  2. Index • Purpose • Significance • Background: The KanCRN Project • Variables and Questions • Research Methodology • Theoretical Models • Analysis of Data • Structural Models • Longitudinal Analysis • Conclusions • Implications • Further Research

  3. Purpose of this Study • Evaluation of the impact of the KanCRN project on teachers’ beliefs, practices and technology. • Beliefs (about students, about their practices and self-efficacy) • Practices (engaging, inquiry and conventional) • Technology (self-efficacy, integration)

  4. Significance of this Study • Improving the quality of teachers and their instructional practice is key to transforming our educational system and improving achievement. • Inquiry is an organizing principle of the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996). • Inquiry is more often advocated than implemented (Bybee, 2000). • Teachers require support in implementing inquiry. • Evaluating the support provided by KanCRN will help us better understand how to maximize our professional development efforts in the future.

  5. Significance: Inquiry Gap – Beliefs and Practice • + statements are made by teachers about inquiry. • More attention given to… teaching facts, things which show up on tests, basics, structure and work ethic.

  6. Significance: Teacher Beliefs are an Instructional Influence (Cronin-Jones, L., 1991) • Beliefs about how students learn. I. e. drill and practice. • Beliefs about the role of the teacher. I. e. disciplinarian. • Beliefs about the ability of students. I. e. influenced by past success or failure of instruction. • Beliefs about the relative importance of content topics. I. e. influenced by teacher content knowledge and enjoyment of content topic.

  7. Significance: The Role of Technology in Inquiry is Important • Basic technology • Information Access Technology • Data Analysis Technology • Multimedia Publication Technology

  8. The KanCRN Project • Five Year U. S. Dept of Ed Technology Innovation Challenge Grant 1997-2002 • Goals • Delivery system for on-line project based learning: Includes on-line projects created by teachers, web-based mapping for data analysis, student publications on-line • Research / inquiry based curriculum model • Serving Disadvantaged students • Professional Development for Teachers in Content, Pedagogy and Technology • Build a learning community around inquiries

  9. KanCRN Inquiry Model • Question or problem identification • Hypothesis generation • Experimental / research design • Data gathering • Assessment of hypothesis through data analysis • Generalizing to Conclusions

  10. KanCRN Model of Inquiry / Research Based on Bob Gowin’s Vee Heuristic (Novak,J. D., Gowin, D. B., 1984)

  11. Variables and Questions

  12. Research Focus Question 1 • Did participation in KanCRN result in changes in beliefs of participants about inquiry teaching methodologies, about the abilities of their students to engage in inquiry and about their own self-efficacy regarding implementing inquiry teaching methods?

  13. Research Focus Question 2 • Did participation in KanCRN result in reported changes in frequency of classroom instructional practices such as using a scientific research process (inquiry), using project-based learning, using authentic and engaging work and in conventional classroom practices?

  14. Research Question 3 • Did participation in KanCRN result in an increase in the integration of technology in support of inquiry?

  15. Research Question 4 • Did participation in KanCRN result in changes in teacher’s self-reported content knowledge in support of inquiry

  16. Teacher Background Characteristics • Gender • Ethnicity • Educational attainment level • Years of teaching experience • Level/subject taught • Retrospective, self-estimates of frequencies of instructional practices

  17. Independent Variables • Participation Variables • the degree of participation in the KanCRN project. • the degree of participation in other school-based in-service activities.

  18. Dependent Variables (Beliefs) Intensity of beliefs in student inquiry ability. Intensity of beliefs in authentic, engaging inquiry approach. Intensity of beliefs in teacher-directed learning. Intensity of beliefs in conventional teaching. Self-efficacy of teachers in supporting collaborative inquiry. Self-reported content expertise supporting inquiry.

  19. Dependent Variables (Practices) Frequency of classroom practice characterized by inquiry through a scientific research approach. Frequency of classroom practice characterized by authentic and engaging work. Frequency of classroom practice characterized by project/problem-based learning. Frequency of classroom practice characterized by conventional classwork.

  20. Dependent Variables (Technology) • Technology self-efficacy for basic technology, information access technology, data analysis technology and multimedia publication technology. • Technology integration for basic technology, information access technology, data analysis technology and multimedia publication technology.

  21. Background Characteristics Descriptive Statistics

  22. ScaleMax Range Mean SD N Alpha KanCRN Participation Intensity 27 0-21 3.2 3.8 253 .88 School-based Participation Intensity 55 14-54 20.3 2.9 253 .74 Participation Descriptive Statistics

  23. ScaleMax Range Mean SD N Alpha Student Inquiry Ability 16 4-16 11.5 2.6 253 .94 Auth. Engag. Work 32 18-32 25.3 3 253 .81 Teach-dir. Learning 28 11-28 20.3 2.9 253 .74 Conventional Teaching 20 5-17 10.7 2 253 .67 Self-efficacy collab. Res. 40 14-40 32.2 6.5 253 .93 Teacher Beliefs Descriptive Statistics

  24. ScaleMax Range Mean SD N Alpha Authentic Engaging Inquiry 50 14-50 34.2 9 253 .88 Conventional Classwork 40 8-39 25 6.4 253 .79 Scientific Research 20 4-20 8.3 3.5 253 .81 Project/Problem- based Learning 20 4-20 11.5 4.2 253 .79 Teaching Practices Descriptive Statistics

  25. ScaleMax Range Mean SD N Alpha Basic Skills 12 0-12 6.3 3.2 251 .85 Information Access 20 0-18 10.6 4.6 251 .92 Data Analysis 10 0-10 2.1 2.2 251 .80 Multimedia Publication 20 0-18 6.3 5 251 .91 Technology Skill Efficacy Descriptive Statistics

  26. ScaleMax Range Mean SD N Alpha Basic Skills 12 0-12 4.4 3.2 251 .83 Information Access 20 0-18 6.8 4.4 251 .89 Data Analysis 10 0-9 1.1 1.5 251 .67 Multimedia Publication 20 0-18 3.1 3.6 251 .87 Technology Integration Descriptive Statistics

  27. Hypotheses: Background and Participation

  28. Hypotheses: Background and Beliefs

  29. Hypotheses: Background and Beliefs

  30. Hypotheses: Background and Practices

  31. Hypotheses: Background and Technology Skill-efficacy and Integration

  32. Hypotheses: Background and Technology Skill-efficacy and Integration

  33. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Beliefs

  34. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Beliefs

  35. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Beliefs

  36. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Practices

  37. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Practices

  38. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Technology Self-efficacy

  39. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Technology Self-efficacy

  40. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Technology Integration

  41. Hypotheses: Professional Development and Technology Integration

  42. Research Methodology Overview • Design of Surveys 1999 and 2002 • Establish Sampling Frame • Administer Questionnaire to 280 subjects (2002) • Data analysis procedures • Establish reliable variables and hypotheses (2002 data) • Establish, test and revise theoretical models with structural equation modeling (2002 data) • Longitudinal Analysis with paired-comparison T-test (1999 – 2002 data)

  43. Data Analysis Procedures • Develop variable factors from survey items with factor analysis procedures. • Confirm internal reliability of item scales with intercorrelations and Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Estimates. • Use theory and Spearman Correlation Coefficients to identify relationships and establish hypotheses. • Incorporate hypothetical relationships into the design of theoretical models.

  44. Data Analysis Procedures (cont.) • Test theoretical models using SAS software. Models are accepted when: Chi-square values are not significant, Comparitive fit index (CFI) and Non-normed fit index (NNFI) > .9, Root Mean Square Estimate Approximation (RMSEA) < .05, path t-test statistic exceeds 1.96 with absolute value of the path coefficient exceeding .05. • Wald and LaGrange tests suggest deleting or adding of paths.

  45. Research Methodology Overview Continued • Examine longitudinal data using paired t-tests representing scores of 54 teachers surveyed in 1999 and again in 2002.

  46. Level Elementary Schools 11 Mid. Schools 7 High Schools 4 Gender M F M F M F Totals Total Population of Schools 8 121 30 133 77 106 475 99 survey takers included 2 17 6 17 5 7 54 Random sample 6 60 24 51 37 48 226 Total sample 8 77 30 68 42 55 280 Returned surveys 7 70 25 64 38 49 253 Sampling Frame 2002 Survey

  47. Longitudinal Study Variables • The belief by teachers in authentic, engaging inquiry approach to teaching • The beliefs by teachers in teacher-directed learning • The beliefs by teachers in conventional teaching practices • The frequency of classroom practice characterized by authentic, engaging inquiry • The frequency of classroom practice characterized as project / problem-based learning • The frequency of conventional classwork

  48. Longitudinal Study Hypotheses Hypothesis L1: There is a significant and positive increase in the frequency of a classroom practice characterized by authentic, engaging inquiry when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project. Hypothesis L2: There is a significant and negative decrease in the frequency of conventional classwork when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project.

  49. Longitudinal Study Hypotheses Hypothesis L3: There is a significant and positive increase in the frequency of classroom practice characterized as project / problem-based learning when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project. Hypothesis L4: There is a significant and positive increase in the belief by teachers in authentic, engaging inquiry approach to teaching when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project.

  50. Longitudinal Study Hypotheses Hypothesis L5: There is a significant and negative decrease in the beliefs by teachers in teacher-directed learning when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project. Hypothesis L6: There is a significant and negative decrease in the beliefs by teachers in conventional teaching practices when comparing responses of participants representing levels before and after participation in the KanCRN project.

More Related