A COMPARISON OF THE TEACHER-BASED AND STUDENT-BASED ACTIVE

LEARNING PEDAGOGY

by

MORALES, ESPERANZA

March 2014
 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

The Problem and Its Background

Education should be a part of everyone's life. A good education offers something for

everyone, whether it be on the simple level or a more complex one. Education should provide an

opportunity for students to develop a strong sense of creativity, a high self-esteem, and a lifelong

respect for learning. Education should help students establish a strong sense of confidence in

themselves. A teacher will be one factor that helps a student learn and progress along their way

through life. Teachers combine their own ideas with other people's to be able to give a good

education to their students.

Todays teachers are overwhelmed with the need to raise test scores. Whether being

driven by No Child Left Behind or The Race to the Top high-stakes testing has stifled the

creativity of many teachers. Many, who have made small changes to create an atmosphere with

the student needs in mind, have resorted back to traditional teacher-based active learning

pedagogy geared towards teaching to the test. Teacher-based active learning pedagogy tends to

prevent students from making a connection between school content and real life hence the

student become passive and disengaged.

Student-based active learning pedagogy on the other hand recognizes that a student

transitions through stages and are designed to nurture true interests. Teachers should create an

atmosphere conducive to learning and encouraging in the development of students personal

learning experiences. McWhorter and Hudson-Ross (1996) have found that without new
approaches to instruction that connect to the needs and learning styles of students, many will

continue to fail and are likely to drop out of school.

The present study primarily seeks to understand difference between teacher-based and

student-based active learning pedagogy. Results of the study will serve as basis for development

of paradigm, directed at improving teaching and learning conditions, among the students and

their teachers. It aims to provide knowledge and equip participants with the skills and steps to

follow in the planning of a curriculum in any educational institution. All students benefit from

participating in well-designed classroom activities. Such activities arranged in an orderly manner

respond to the developmental needs of students. The design of a comprehensive curriculum

guide in school involves the careful identification of content, presentation methods and structure.

The ability to implement of such effectively goes a long way towards determining the success of

the entire institution and its stakeholders.

Statement of the Problem

The study focused on comparing teacher-based and student-based active learning

pedagogy. Specifically, the researchers sought answers to the following questions:

1. How can teacher-based and student-based active learning pedagogy increase

achievement of students?
2. How can teachers implement teacher-based and student-based active learning

pedagogy in the classroom?

3. What effects does student-based instruction have in decreasing behavior problems?
4. What are teacher and student attitudes about teacher-based and student-based

instruction in the classroom environment?

5. Is there a significant difference between teacher-based and student-based active
learning pedagogy
 6. Based on the results of the study, what teaching strategy for active learning pedagogy

can be proposed?

Statement of the Hypothesis

There is no significant difference between the teacher-based and student based active

learning pedagogy.

Significance of the Study

The researchers has determined the following groups of individuals to be the major

beneficiaries of the present study:

For the students, the study increases students self-knowledge and how to relate

effectively to others. It broadens knowledge about the changing environment. This helps students

reach their fullest academic potential. It also provides opportunities for career exploration,

planning and decision-making. In a broader sense, this will open up doors of opportunities for

networking with services and thus establishes an effective support system. Hence, this

undertaking teaches responsible behavior.

For the teachers, this will enable their students to master effectively their subjects with

an understanding of the importance of each one. Furthermore, this research offers an opportunity

to work in collaboration with other teachers and parents.

For the parents, the findings could serve as an eye-opener for them to realize their

significant roles as parents as well as a deeper understanding to give full support for their childs

educational and personal development. It means an increase chances for parental involvement in

the education of the child. This equips them with skills necessary to support their child.
 For the schools administrators, results of this study will help them realize the

responsibility not only to train students acquires technical knowledge and skills, but they must

also help build positive social values among these young people. By integrating family influence

and social values, educators can become valuable instruments to mold desirable members of the

society.

For the community people, they will become aware of the special role they play in

collaborating with the school officials in preparing the students towards the successful career

path and responsible citizenship.

For future researchers, they can use the provided data and other literature as reference

for their own studies. Replicated or similar studies in different settings and population or sample

is also encouraged as doing so can make achieved results generalized if provided with sufficient

amount of scientific evidences

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

The main thrust of the researchers in conducting this study is to assess the gender, family

profile and social values of Grade VII students of Bocaue, Bulacan.

The scope is limited among selected Grade VII students of Bocaue, Bulacan only. Views

presented in the study was not reflected the family profile and social values of the total

population or those of all families or individuals in the locale of the study. Only predetermined

students who are living with their immediate family members was recruited to participate. The

study also did not determine the type of family structure of the respondents, as long as the

respondent lives with his/her immediate family members since birth. Absence of one parent or
none availability of siblings does not disqualify a prospective respondent. However, there must at

least be one parent living with the respondent. Only students, who are Filipino citizens, as well

as their immediate family members, were recruited to participate.

Theoretical Framework

The present study is primarily anchored to Albert Banduras Social Learning Theory

(2006). The social learning theory posits that social behaviours are learned and acquired by

humans as they observe and imitate others. In his famous series of experiments, Bandura and

colleagues demonstrated that by watching and initiating another persons behaviour, one can

learn how to be aggressive.

Banduras social learning theory is a provocative view of how one person may exert his

power within an environment as he becomes a model of behaviour/s that can be replicated by

others. An explicit example of this is that children usually emulate their parents behaviours

sooner or later in life as they watch and listen to their parents and teachers. Childrens

observations are mentally organized, memorized, and recalled as similar situations for thinking

and acting arise in their lives. The process of environmental influences and social learning are

played out as the individual recalls the visual or aural codes of earlier observation and practices

the behaviours first demonstrated by the models (Cambell and Kassner, 2012).

The theory of Human Behavior in the Social environment, young individuals, easily learn

from their environment and try to seek acceptance from the society they live in by imitating their

behavioral norms. Rewards or punishments further influence development of social behaviors. It

must also be recognized that both conforming and deviant behaviors are learned through the

same learning process (Alexander, 2010).

 Recent syntheses of several studies indicate the fact that since the first years of

childhood, the family, the school and the community influence simultaneously the children's

growth and development. The continuous importance of these contexts in each stage of the

child's development is minutely described by a number of theoretical connected perspectives

cited on the Concept of Social Capital of Coleman (2007).

Research conducted in the educational domain discovered an essential aspect: the

children who are included into well-developed social networks have much better educational

results than the children who do not have the benefit of such a network. Coleman (2011) wrote

that the social networks provide social support (defined as "the availability of people we can rely

on, people that we know can take care of us and love us"). He sustained that the bigger the social

support during adolescence is, the bigger the probability for a student to be successful in school.

Coleman suggested that schools can strengthen the support systems for young people, especially

for the poor or for minorities, through guiding, tutoring and pedagogical programs led by

responsible adults.
Conceptual Framework

Gordons KNOWLED
JUVENILE SURVEY OF GE ON THE
DELIQUENTS PERSONAL IMPACT OF
VALUES, and PERSONAL
COPING VALUES TO
BEHAVIOR THE
SCALE FOR COPING
JUVENILE BEHAVIOR
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
DELINQUENT
S

Figure 1.1 Paradigm of the Study

Figure 1.1 In this paradigm, Personal Values of those Youth in Conflict with the Law

were served as the independent variable of the study because as we all know its an innate

variable or characteristics in an individual. Survey of Personal Values and Coping Behavior

Scale was used to know the impact of personal values of the selected juvenile delinquents. The

dependent variable of this study was the coping behavior of the youth-in-conflict with the law of

Molave Youth Home.

Definition of Terms

To clearly understand the terms in the study, the researchers operationally defined the

following:
 Concrete operations. According to Piaget, the period in the child's

mental development from preschool through upper elementary grades

(about junior high school) in which analysis of situations and events is based

largely upon present perceivable elements.

Formal operations. According to Piaget, the final stage in mental development of the

child in which he is able to use symbols and deal with abstractions.

Classroom technique. The particular method of execution chosen by the teacher to

transmit to students in the classroom the knowledge of some skill, theory, or idea.
Pedagogy.
Perception. In its most limited sense, awareness of external objects, conditions,

relationships, etc., as a result of sensory stimulation.

Student-based learning.
Teacher-based learning.
Informal evaluation: Appraisal of an individual's status or growth by means other than

standardized instruments.
Basic skill. A skill that is fundamental to the mastery of a school subject.

Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

 This chapter presented the conceptual and research literatures and studies that are

relevant to the variables in the study and provide background and basis in the conduct.

Related Literature

Student-based instruction, by definition, is placing the student at the center of the

learning process, but today education continues to function like a business operating on the

efficiency model grounded in the Industrial Revolution which resembles a factory, assembly-line,

and production model created back in 1892-93 used to produce functional members of society.

The instructional model in which education of today implements continues to operate on a

system handed down by The Committee of Ten 1892-93 (Johnson, 2003). This system operates

on the teacher-centered instructional model which is designed to teach the four major curriculum

subjects: math, English, mathematics, and social studies, with no emphasis on including any

involvement in the arts. The original education schedule, which is considered to be teacher-

centered because it places all the emphasis on the teacher and not the student, still dominates the

education scene. This teacher-centered instructional model was not designed for educating all but

only a small percentage of students who adapted to it (Johnson, 2003). Is there any reason why a

vast number of students continue to fail at an increasing rate? Bil Johnson considers teacher-

centered education to be thoughtlessly unphilosophical (p. 3) and one that is dictated by bus

schedules, track classes, and policy makers which lead one to believe that it is not about the

student but about the adults. Yet, according to Johnson, the main purpose of public schools is to

create active, democratic citizens.

 As we struggle to create twenty-first century classrooms, we are faced with the

devastating reports that, as a nation, we are lagging behind and that our students are failing at an

alarming rate. There is great evidence that the students we are educating lack the ability to be

productive members of society because they lack critical thinking and problem-solving skills,

and they have little or no knowledge of how to be responsible members of society. Evidence of

this failing rate is based on the only nationally acceptable measure of student achievement,

multiple-choice and five-paragraph testing, which does not truly determine whether the students

have truly learned the content. Facts have shown that with multiple-choice testing; only two out

of seven of Gardners multiple intelligences are being met so the much publicized results only

reveal that students can or cannot regurgitate the information the teacher has trained them to

learn. Yet, educators are pressed to increase test scores; therefore many educators opt to teach the

test and the students are pressured to pass the test which causes many students and educators to

harbor negative feelings about education and its process.

Implementing Instruction

A movement to reform education was developed but was met with many changes that

were not beneficial to the learner, only to the adults. Many educators say they want change, but

many are afraid or are not equipped to make the change. Educators or Administrators may

implement changes, but when the change does not work out, they are ready to move on to the

next method. Creditability is then lost and this affects not only the students but the society as a

whole. Nobody likes change, but when you are making change a period of time should be

expected before you see the desired result. Just because it looks like it may not be working, does

not mean it wont work. Johnson (2003) said it best, dissonance is essential for change. Until
we accept that, and put the learners at the center of the debate (not the adult and their interests),

we may well see numerous changes without making any significant progress (p. 4). As

previously mentioned, student-based instruction is such a model that places the student as the

center of the learning process. Student-based instruction allows the student to make the

connection between what goes on in the classroom and their real life. According to McWhorter

and Hudson-Ross (1996), a need to know the information must be established in order to

motivate students to achieve.

Felder describes several methods of implementing student-based into the classroom.

These methods include active learning, in which students solve problems, answer questions,

formulate questions of their own, discuss, explain, debate, or brainstorm during class;

cooperative learning, in which students work in teams on problems and projects under conditions

that assure both positive interdependence and individual accountability; and inductive teaching

and learning, in which students are first presented with challenges (questions or problems) and

learn the course material in the context of addressing the challenges. Inductive methods include

inquiry-based learning, case-based instruction, problem-based learning, project-based learning,

discovery learning, and just-in-time teaching.

Johnson gives some practical steps when implementing student-based instruction in

classrooms. First, plan backwards from the outcome and the evidence. Begin with the end in

mind. Second, teachers should start small. Use graphic organizers (mind maps/webs, T-charts,

etc.) when implementing the lesson. Third, use groups, jigsaws, Socratic seminars. Fourth, the

use of role-plays, simulations, and debates are very effective. And fifth, the authentic assessment

should be in the form of projects and portfolios. Howard Gardner (2006) claims that based on his

theory of multiple intelligences:

 that almost any topic which is worth spending time on can be approached from at least

six different windows into the same room: 1 Narrational: the story mode. 2 A

quantitative, logical rational way of dealing with numbers, principles, causality. 3 A

foundational way, asking basic kinds of questions such as: Why is this important? How

does it relate to what came before? How is it related to our lives today? 4 Aesthetic: What

does it look like? What does it sound like? What appearance does it make? What patterns

and configurations? How does it impress you? 5 Hands on: What is it actually like to be

this thing, to do this thing? If youre studying evolution, what is it like to breed

Drosophila? If youre studying democracy, whats it like to be in a group that decides by

consensus as opposed to one that decides by autocracy, oligarchy or some other political

principle?

6 Personal: Can you integrate this topic through debate, role play, projects, jigsaw

participation and other joint interactions? (p. 142)

Scholars Schumacher and Kennedy (2008) list several pros and cons, or drawbacks to

student-based teaching. The authors conducted a study that revealed teachers who implemented

student-based found that this type of instruction involved a lot of preparation work. The teachers

had questions of how to divide time between lecture and group work and what to do with at-risk

student that retreated and postponed learning, in which, the teacher suspected may or may not

happen at a later time. The drawbacks are that student-based takes a lot of classroom time and

teachers felt compelled to cover all the concepts outlined in the standards. When choosing to

implement student-based instruction most teachers will find they have embarked on a journey

which has life changing implications for both the teacher and the student but mainly for the

students.
Student Outcome

Evidence has shown that many teachers have found with student-based learning, students

are learning the skills necessary for critical thinking, problem-solving, and becoming responsible

citizens. Student-based classrooms empower students and give them a voice, making them

responsible for their work and actions (Johnson, 2001). McWhorter et al. (1996) research shows

that focusing on individual student learning connects cooperative learning, performance

assessment, multiple intelligences, and constructivism, in which, all of the concepts mentioned

positions the students in the center. Johnson also contends these concepts are the inevitable

product of constructivist thinking.

As cited by Rutledge (2008), Klionsky, Lawson, and Lord reported on studies that

revealed the effectiveness of student-based, active learning strategies in promoting meaningful

learning, retention of content, improved student attitude and the development of critical thinking

skills. The use of Howard Gardners six approaches appears to support the implementation of

student-based instruction by offering two advantages. One advantage is more likely to reach all

students and the second advantage is gives the opportunity to model what its like to be an

expert. With all of the positive research and evidence of the effectiveness of student-based

teaching, still very few teachers are implementing this type of instruction within classrooms.

Research has claimed many benefits to using student-based instruction at the secondary level.

According to McWhorter and Hudson-Ross student-based reduces competition, encourages

students to work together, builds classroom communities, and allows students to become partners

in the classroom in which the teacher operates as facilitator, collaborating with students on

decisions that are to be made.

 While these benefits serve to offer many benefits of building life-long skills necessary for

students to function in the real world, Chall (2000) found that student-based failed to produce

increased academic achievement for all students. Chall found that traditional teacher-centered

approach yield higher academic achievement within all social classes and race, for students with

disabilities, and with at-risk students. Students from low socio-economic backgrounds were

found to show greater achievement when taught with traditional methods. These students lacked

the readiness skills necessary to move forward academically at a young age. As the students

moved up in grade level, it became more apparent that the students were not performing at grade

level. The low functioning students and students from low-income families were found to thrive

better in a more traditional setting due to lack of knowledge content. Students from middle-class

or higher-class distinction proved to perform at a higher achievement level with the progressive

(student-based) approach, possible due to home factors and exposures. Chall (2000) reported on

teachers experiences with student-based instruction. The teachers had implemented methods that

are favored by student-based but the results lead to sleepless nights for one teacher and lower

reading achievement scores. Another teacher experienced disruptive behaviors in classes which

were only managed by returning to traditional teacher-approach instruction.

Self-Reflection and Student Affect

Scholar Passman (2000) discovered that when teachers were faced with the pressure of

high-stakes assessments, they felt compelled to stick with a traditional classroom setting and

teacher-directed instruction. Teachers often are afraid to take risks and try something new.

Teachers are afraid to do the very thing students are asked to do dailyto take a risk. On the

other hand the scholar, Aaronsohn (1996), found that the problem does not always lie with the

teacher feeling pressured and resorting back to traditional instruction but the main reason was the
lack of support. Many teachers have reported that they have tried it and when it didnt work out

they went back to the only teaching method they were most familiar with which was traditional

instruction. Aaronsohn (1996) completed a case study to prove that with support and effort,

student-based instruction works for the both the student and the teacher. In this case study,

Aaronsohn documented her experience with a teacher who taught high school English in a

teacher-centered manner felt she was not fully meeting students needs. The teacher in the case

study began to implement methods that would allow the students to construct their own meaning.

The scholar, Aaronsohn reported on the frustrations and isolation from colleagues felt by

the teacher and also on the resistance of the students when more responsibility of learning was

placed onto the students. The teacher in the study reported that at times she struggle to stay back

when the students complained about the responsibility given to them but she continued to try

despite how hard it was. Also the teacher in the case study felt without the support of her mentor,

Aaronsohn, she would have resorted back to traditional instruction. The conclusion of the case

study proved success for both the teacher and the students. The longer the teacher committed to

student-based, the less pressure she felt and she actually liked it and enjoyed her work. And more

importantly the students no longer resisted but instead moved in the groups cooperatively and

began working without having to be told what to do. The case-study teacher went on to supervise

more student teachers and hold workshops for others who believed that student student-based

methods could work in high schools.

Challs (2000) research study that focused on what really works in classrooms, found that

when looking at non-academic attitudes; there was little difference in how teachers and students

felt when comparing traditional and student-based instruction. In fact, Chall (2000) came across

descriptive reports of the education of low-socioeconomics-status children, from early 1900s to

the present, notes that parents of these children voiced serious objections to having their children

educated in schools that followed an informal, student-based approach (p. 172). Chall also

included facts on how the two instructional approaches affected the educational policy. During

the years 1995-1996, five out of seven books on education and educational policy were reviewed

and were found to all favor the greater effectiveness of the traditional approach. Scholars

Stevenson and Stigler (1992) found that Japanese children who were taught using a traditional

instructional approach liked school better than U.S. children who were taught using a progressive

(student-based) instructional approach. While there were many, including parents and students,

who favor the traditional teaching approach, there were many who were highly committed that

a progressive (student-based) approach is bestfor a democracy and for the social and

emotional well-being of the child, as well as for academic progress (Chall, 2000, p. 178). As

concluded in her book, Chall reported on an eight-year study of high school students, which

found no significant difference between a progressive or traditional approach, but the small

differences that were found seemed to favor the progressive, student-based approach.

In conclusion, there will be new and veteran teachers opposed to student-based

instructions, there are teachers who are willing to take the risk and try something different.

Student-based instructors should know they are not alone in what they are feeling. It will take

some time to undo all the years of traditional instruction taught. The key is to gradually introduce

the new method and reflect on any issues that may arise. Teachers should also seek out other

teachers who feel the same way they do, who are willing to take a risk on implementing student-

based instruction, as a support system to ensure success of the transition. Evidence has shown

teachers who decided to make the transition, with the help of a support system or mentor, ended

successfully.
Teaching Methodology

A review of the literature disclosed no recent studies relating to student and teacher

perceptions of classroom practices on the junior high school level. However, there were many

exhaustive and conclusive studies regarding student attitudes, abilities, achievement, and

behavior (Parker, 1977; Atwood, 1978; Berger, 1978; Hess, 1978). Teacher attitudes, practices

and perceptions of different aspects of students and schooling were also found in many of the

studies reviewed (Parach, 1965; Orgren, 1977; Roger, 1967; Tyler, 1966).

There is presently a great deal of controversy among educators concerning the abilities of

early adolescents. For instance, Chiappetta (1975) reported on several studies at the National

Association for Research in Mathematics Teaching Convention which indicated "that normal

adolescents are unlikely to reach the level of formal thinking until their late teens or early

twenties if they reach it at all" (p. 1). From studies such as this came the generalization that "the

majority of adolescents and adults function at the concrete operational level and not at the formal

operational level when having to deal with abstract mathematics materials" (p. 1). Therefore, if

this is indeed the case, then the methods employed to teach mathematics to ninth-grade students

would need to be adjusted accordingly. Weiss (1978) reported that lectures and discussions are

the predominant techniques used in mathematics, mathematics, and social studies classes.

Discussions occur "just about daily" (p. 17) in half or more of these classes. Approximately two-

thirds of the classes in each subject have lectures once a week or more, with many of these

classes having lectures "just about daily" (p.17).

 Mathematics and social studies classes are generally more likely than mathematics

classes to use alternative activities such as library work, student projects, field trips and guest

speakers.

Berger (1978) stated that teachers should introduce a lesson using concrete laboratory

examples and then move to formal thinking, rather than introduce the formal laws and verify

them with laboratory work. "Hands-on" problem-solving mathematics sessions can show

students that when they believe they can control situations, they can predict what will happen.

This has great portent for the future.

The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) News Exchange

(1978) reported on a study designed to determine the status of mathematics, mathematics, and

social studies in the aftermath of two decades of improvement efforts at local, state and national

levels. One study related that students spend their time processing the contents of the textbooks

in some way by filling out worksheets, w~'~ting answers to questions at the end of the chapter,

or taking part in teacher-led recitations. This indicates that more emphasis is placed on rote

memory than on the process used.

In contrast, studies tend to substantiate the belief that students retain more when they are

actively involved in the learning process.

Class Size

While investigating the relationship between class size and student achievement, Hess

(1978) reported that studies concerning class size fall into three basic groups: those relating class

size to academic achievement, those relating class size to institutional factors, and those relating

class size to financial conditions.

 Most of the research has focused on achievement and has revealed little relationship

between class size and academic success.

Research has also been conducted on institutional factors. While reductions in class size

spur innovations in teaching methods, it is not clear whether the relationship is direct, nor has it

been shown that the innovative techniques themselves lead to any real results in terms of student

achievement. Financial considerations reveal only that larger classes are less expensive to

operate.

Student Responsibilities

Parker (1977) believed that junior high school students should be responsible for their

own basic skills and that, from the time a student is promoted to seventh grade, he should be

confronted with the minimum competencies in which he must perform proficiently to be eligible

to advance to the next higher grade. Parker stated that students should be trained to recognize

acceptable and unacceptable. Performances in basic skill areas, and to discover their errors and

discuss their error patterns with the teacher.

Berger (1978) concluded that, with limited training, mathematics teachers can move

toward allowing students to make more of the classroom decisions. When this happens, he found

students made better predictions and were able to solve problems better, and that teachers

became better listeners. Teachers who move in this direction would, therefore, experience a

change classroom situation in which students could develop more consistent thought that is what

is often called scientific literacy.

Student Preferences for Learning

 In a study of mathematics process attainment, Atwood (1978) concluded that a strong

preference for application is both advantageous and desired by students in ninth-grade

mathematics. He noted that student preference for memory or questioning is neither an advantage

nor a disadvantage in terms of learning. This means that rather than conventional textbook

mathematics, ninth grade students prefer to become involved. They prefer to learn by doing, as

well as by applying knowledge gained.

Classroom Practice

In an attempt to identify and determine favorable classroom practices in high school

biology, Kochendorfer (1967) formulated a list of teaching practices that were judged to

contribute positively to the attainment of inquiry objectives. Since a need for a method of

observation of realities in the classroom existed, and a trend in mathematics toward inquiry

rather than conventional mathematics was evident, Kochendorfer used a checklist to determine

the amount of inquiry and the degree to which teaching methods paralleled the stated objectives.

He found that a comparison of the profiles of individual teachers-based on student

assessment-revealed specific differences in classroom practices among individual teachers and

groups of teachers.
 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presented the methodology employed in analyzing and interpreting the data

pertaining to the variables of this study.

Research Design

A descriptive-comparative method of research design were used in this study.

Descriptive research involves description, recording, analysis and interpretation of

conditions that currently exists. It involves some type of comparison or contrast and attempts to

discover relationship between existing non-manipulative variables.

Research Locale

This research took place in high schools located in Pand, Bulacan. A request for

permission to complete this research was submitted to the coordinator of the program and to the

superintendent of the school system. Both parties approved the research study.

Respondents of the study

This research consisted of 22 subjects ranging from grades 9 through 10 in a

heterogeneous grouping using both quantitative and qualitative methods to measure the

effectiveness of student-based learning pedagogy in a secondary classroom. Two classrooms of

11 students with mixed abilities were given a pretest to measure academics standing before

implementation of teacher-based learning pedagogy.

Sampling Technique

Purposive sampling was employed in selecting the sample-respondents.

Research Instrument

A posttest was given to measure improvement in academics at the end of each teaching

instruction implemented. Students were taught for a period of two weeks first using the

traditional teaching method. A posttest was given and then the students were taught another two

weeks using the student-based method. At the end of the research, students were given surveys to

reflect their feelings about methods used for both two-week sessions. Additionally, students were

observed for behavior and engagement during entire four week period.

Scaling and Quantification

A 5-point scale with their description was employed as shown below:

Student Survey Rating Scale

The Rating Scale:

4 I strongly agree with this statement.

3 I agree with this statement.

2 I disagree with this statement.

1 I strongly disagree with this statement.

Reliability of the Instrument

The teacher-made pretest and posttest were analyzed for reliability using a dependent t-

test to determine if there were significant differences between the groups tested. I analyzed this

at a significant level of p<.05. Popham (2008) refers to the use of test-retest as a way to show

reliable consistency of test results over time. When constructing assessments, Popham also

points out that all classroom teachers routinely need to use absence-of-bias as one of the three

evaluative criteria by which they judge their own assessments and those educational assessments

developed by others (p. 92). The interval data collected from the pretest and posttest supports

the dependability of the procedures and assessments implemented during the study. The

mathematics notebooks and behavior charts were used also used to establish a chain of evidence

connecting the research question to the focus question and to provide complete and accurate

supporting data which helped to determine absence of unfair, offensive, or disparate impact bias.

Validity of the Instrument

The questionnaire was subjected to content validation to be composed of the guidance

counselors and two secondary school teachers from non-respondent schools. They were

requested to accomplish the form for content validation of the questionnaire such form is affixed

in Appendix. Their suggestions and comments then were considered in revising the instrument.

A rubric was designed to assess the instructional plan which was analyzed by a colleague

to ensure content validity was present. Qualitative data were gathered through an in-depth

recorded interview based on the answers constructed on the instructional plan rubric.
Data Gathering Procedure

After choosing the research topic and researching the literature, a method of organizing

the data should be created. A data shell (see Table 3.1 below), allows the researcher to list any

data to be used to support research findings. The data shell also serves as a graphic organizer

categorizing the collected data to its key focus question.

Table 3.1 Data Shell

Focus Question Literature Type of How these Rationale
Sources Method, Data, data are
Validity analyzed
How can teachers McWhorter Type of Qualitative: Qualitative: Looking
implement student- & Hudson- Method: Coded for for categorical and
based instruction in a Ross Instructional themes aligned repeating data that
secondary (1996), plan, Rubric, with focus form patterns of
exceptional education Johnson, B. and interview questions behaviors
classroom? (2003),
Felder, Type of Data:
R.M.(n.d.) qualitative

Type of
Validity:
Content,
What effects does Rutledge, Type of Quantitative: Quantitative: To
determine if there
student-based M. (2008), Method: Descriptive
are significant
instruction have on Chall, Behavior chart, and inferential differences
between means
students learning Jeanne S. Teacher made Statistics,
from two
within exceptional (2000), tests independent t- independent
education classroom? Hargrove, (pre/posttest), test groups.

T.Y. and science

Nesbit, C. notebook
(2003)
Type of Data:
interval
 Type of
Validity:
Content,

What are teacher and Passman, Type of Quantitative: Quantitative: To

student attitudes R. (2000)., Method: Chi Square determine if there are
about student-based Chall, Surveys, significant differences
instruction in the Jeanne S. Reflective between means from
secondary (2000), Journal, focus Qualitative: two independent
exceptional education Aaronsohn, group journal Coded for groups.
classroom E. (1996), questions themes aligned
environment? with focus Desire to find what
Data: questions questions (items) are
Nominal significant (and which
ones are not).
Type of
Validity: Qualitative: Looking
Construct for categorical and
repeating data that
form patterns of
behaviors

An instructional plan (see Appendix A) was then created which includes everything that

is relevant to the activities which will be implementing during the action research. After the

completion of the instructional plan, an experienced colleague evaluated the content of the

instructional plan for validity using a rubric (see Appendix B) and offered written feedback. The

initial feedback received was not as in-depth and did not offer specific information which could

be important to the success of the research. Hence, I sought another colleague experienced in the

field of the content I chose to implement. I used the same instructional plan and rubric and
completed a taped interview which provided specific key information and ideas which validated

that the chosen activities were good activities that apply real-world concepts.

Richard Felder (n.d.) describes three methods used to implement student-based

instruction. The three methods are active learning, cooperative learning, and inductive teaching

and learning which is also known as inquiry-based learning, case-based instruction, problem-

based learning, project-based learning, discovery learning, and just-in-time teaching.

Cooperative learning is the method chosen to implement student-based instruction for this action

research. The practical steps provided by Johnson (2003) corroborate the method of

implementation of student-based instruction described by Felder. Johnson informs investigators

that implementation should begin with planning with the end in mind (plan backwards). Next, he

suggests starting small and using groups. Assessment should be authentic and carried out in the

form of projects and portfolios. Cooperative learning is also discussed by McWhorter and

Hudson-Ross (1996) as being an effective method for connecting the focus on individual

students learning. As mentioned by the previously mentioned authors, cooperative learning will

be used and the participants will be assessed on their final projects, which fall into the category

of inquiry-based and discovery learning (project-based learning). The students will also science

notebooks as communicative devices related to final assessment on the cooperative learning

project.

The action research was implemented by first administering a pretest (see Appendix C) to

set a basal level of performance for each participant. The pretest was designed based on the state

standards for the coverage of the curriculum unit. The control group was administered traditional

instruction. The traditional lesson was administered for approximately seven days followed by

the same posttest (see Appendix C). As conducted with the control group, a pretest for Activity
One (see Appendix D) was administered based on state standards for the curriculum unit. Also on

day one, an overview of the research was given along with instructions on the use of the science

notebooks (Hargrove & Nesbit, 2003) (see Appendix E). Day two, students were given a copy of

cooperative learning assignment and instructions. The assignment and instructions were

reviewed before placing students in their pre-assigned cooperative groups. The cooperative

groups were facilitated from that point on. This initial part of the action research lasted for

approximately three days. On the fifth day, students were administered the same Activity One

post test on the coverage of the curriculum implemented.

The second week of the research, participants will be introduced to another cooperative

learning project which will follow the same implementation pattern as the previous week.

Students were given a pretest for Activity Two followed by the same posttest (see Appendix F).

Rutledge describes research studies in which student-based instruction was very effective in

improving student attitudes along with developing critical-thinking skills. Johnson (2000)

describes student-based instruction as an effective tool for empowering students and making

them responsible for their work and actions; therefore, a chart documenting cooperative and

participatory behaviors (see Appendix G) was used to determine whether the instruction had any

effect on student behavior. This chart was used throughout the research.

The final day of research, participants were administered a survey (see Appendix H) to

assess participants attitudes about the student-based instructional method implemented. Scholar

Chall describes research in which students and parents favored the progressive instructional

method over traditional instruction. Hence, additional data were gathered using focus group

journal questions (Morton, 2008) (see Appendix I) to determine level of engagement of

participants. I also completed a daily reflective journal (see Appendix J) to assess attitude about
instructional methods implemented. Aaronsohn (1996) found that reflecting on daily experiences

gave her insight on the effectiveness of her practice.

Data Analysis

The first focus of this research was to find out how student-based instruction could be

implemented or taught in a secondary exceptional education classroom. A qualitative analysis

was conducted for this part of the study. An instructional plan, instructional plan rubric, and an

interview were designed to evaluate this focus. In looking for categorical and repeating data that

forms patterns of behaviors, the rubric produces qualitative data coded for recurring, dominant,

and emerging themes. The instructional plan produced qualitative data which reveal if the length

of time for data collection is persistent and prolonged.

A quantitative analysis to determine if there are significant differences between means

from one group tested twice was conducted for the second focus question of the research when

looking at student outcome using a dependent t- test. The decision to reject the null hypothesis

was set at p<.05. The results of the pretest to posttest were analyzed using an effect size R

calculation. The decision for effect size was set at small effect size, r=0.1-0.23; medium effect

size, r=0.24-0.36; and large effect size, r=0.37 or larger.

The third question focused on self reflection and student affect. A qualitative analysis was

conducted in order to determine categorical and repeating data that forms patterns of behaviors.

At the end of the study, the students were given a Likert scale survey to reveal the attitudes of the

instructional methods used. A Chi Square was used to find what questions (items) were

significant (and which ones were not). Reflective journals and open-ended focus group journal
questions were coded for recurring, dominant, and emerging themes. As a part of the cooperative

learning project, students recorded their findings in a science notebook. Also, a behavior chart

was used to document behaviors seen throughout the study which will be used to determine if the

particular instruction had any effect on students behavior.

Looking at the study holistically, validation was reach by consensual validation of the

study provided upon approval by the faculty advisor. Epistemological validation was shown in

the comparison of the results to the literature viewed. Credibility was shown through structural

corroboration through the use of various methods was used within the study. Fairness was

determined by representing opposing point of view. Rightness of Fit was established in showing

that great care was taken to provide precision and accuracy to ensure presentation of a tight

argument, coherent case, and strong evidence to assert judgments. Transferability of this study

shows referential adequacy and can be duplicated by others and easily used for future research.

This study also proves it is transformational through catalytic validity in that it causes a positive

change or transformation for researchers and others.

 Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This study aims to determine the gender, family profile and social values of Grade VII

students in Bocaue, Bulacan: basis for an intervention program in guidance and counseling

practice. This chapter comprises a number of data presented in a tabular form for statistical

purposes.

The tabular presentations and discussions were organized on the basis of the sequence of

the statement of the specific problems.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and recommendations.

Summary of Findings

Based on the statistical treatment of data, the following are the salient findings of the

study:

Conclusions
 Based on the foregoing findings, the fact that none of the three teachers in the present

study think in terms of trying to achieve a match between instruction and management is also an

intriguing finding that deserves a closer look. Clearly, future research should continue to

examine the way that teachers think about management (especially in relationship to instruction)

and explore whether they find the managerial continuum helpful. It would also seem beneficial

for pre-service and in-service programs to discuss the relationship between instruction and

management and to frame both in terms of teacher-based and student-based.

Recommendations

On the basis of findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are offered for

consideration:

1. The overall findings pose challenge to parents to further strengthens the constructive

inculcation of values by tightening the family relationship and giving spiritual

leadership in the family. Likewise, they should be aware of their roles and

responsibilities in upbringing their children

2. The role of teachers as second parents is likewise emphasized since teachers are

considered as second parents; they should serve as a role model in influencing

positive to their students. The inculcation of and trimming of values should be

exercise while in the class, not as form of work but as ones responsibility according

to the call of service.

3. Likewise, the students are challenge to strengthen the basic social values practiced by

a normal human being with human reason. The students should be aware that the

social values are necessary to maintain harmonious relationship with others.

4. The same responsibility is given to the guidance counselors to improve and create

counseling method in helping these young to become mature to discern their own

path as the successor in the future.

5. It is also recommended for the Guidance Counselors that they come up with a

guidance program wherein it will cater on strengthening family relationship.

6. Likewise, it is recommended that Guidance counselors must show that he or she has a

broad understanding of the struggles of adolescents and knowledge of the kinds of

tensions that build up both inside the counselees and within their homes.

7. Much challenge is given to the church leaders, authorities, as adults whom the student

looks up to as models. Their actions reveal their motives and intentions and these are

not left and unnoticed by the young.

8. That a more concentrated research on relationship to gender, family profile and social

values amongst Grade VII students as a basis for an intervention program in Guidance

and Counseling practice be made by the future researchers to determine a more

focused result on the relationship.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. Books

Alexander, R. (2010). Human behavior in the social environment: A macro, national, and

international perspective. California, USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Arce, E. (2012). Curriculum for young children: An introduction. USA: Wadsworth Cengage

Learning.

Basavanthappa, BT. (2008). Community health nursing. Second edition. India: Jaypee Brothers

Medical Publishers.

Bandura, Albert (2006). Social Learning Theory. USA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Broussard, A. & Joseph, A. (2009). Family poverty in diverse contexts. UK: Routledge.

Brown, DS. (2008). Critical success: The 2 rules of 3. USA: Author House.

Campbell, P. & Kassner, C. (2012). Music in childhood: From preschool through the elementary

grades. USA: Cengage Learning.

Chitkara, MG. (2004). Rashtriya swayamsevak sangh: National upsurge. India: APH Publishing

Corporation.

Coleman, James (2007). Families and schools. Educational Research, 16(6), 32-38.

Kostelnik, M.; Gregory, KM.; Soderman, A.; & Whiren, AP. (2012). Guiding childrens social

development and learning. USA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Loveless, S. & Holman, T. (2007). The family in the new millennium: Strenghtening the family.

USA: Praeger Publishers.

Mongrue, J. (2011). Liberia: Americas footprint in Africa. Making the cultural, social, and

political connections. USA: iUniverse.

Nadal, K. (2011). Filipino American Psychology. USA: Wiley Publishers.

Neeraja, KP. (2006). Textbook of growth and development for nursing students. India: Jaypee

Brothers Medical Publisher.

Shek, D., Chan, Y, and Lee, P. (2005). Quality of life research in Chinese, Western and global

contexts. Netherlands: Springer.

Shergill, HK. (2010). Psychology. Part I. India: PHI Learning Private Limited.

Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. (2009). What we know about emotional intelligence.

USA: MIT Press.

B.Published and Unpublished Masters Thesis and Dissertations

Andagan, Joseph. (2009). What Does It Means to Me: A Content Analysis on Childrens

Essays. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of the Philippines.

Alvarez, Anna Lourdes. (2011). The Impact of Social Values to the Coping Behavior of Juvenile

Delinquents. Published Dissertation, University of the Philippines Press.

Bransford, J.D., Brown A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (2009). How Children Learn: Experience and

Social Influence. Published Dissertation, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Cohen, D.K. (2004). Gender Policy: When State Gender Rules Reform Society. Published

Dissertation, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

de Leon, Corinna (Maria Socorro) T. (2006). Intervening Decision-Maker Variables: A Process

Model of Participative Decision-Making, MA thesis, Ateneo de Manila University,

Philippines.
De Rueda, Ma. Concepcion Manalili. (2013). Interpersonal, Intrapersonal and Self Esteem

Level of Secondary Students with Absentee Parents: Inputs to Special Needs Assessment

Program. Unpublished MA Thesis, Bulacan State University.

Dungo, N.G. (2009). Organizational Behavior in a Bulacanern Industrial Complex, Published

MA Thesis, Philippines: Community Development Research Council, University of the

Philippines Press.

Durualp, E. (2006). The Collaborative Community that can be Usable in the Development of

Social Studies. Published Masters Thesis, Gazi University Education Mathematicss

Institute, Ankara.

Fernandez, Karina Galang. (2011). Filipino Adolescents Conceptualization of Social Support.

Published PhD Thesis, Ateneo De Manila University.

Jimmy-Gama, Dixon Bester. (2009). An assessment of the capacity of faculty-based youth

friendly reproductive health services to promote sexual and reproductive health among

unmarried adolescents. PhD thesis, De La Salle University.)

Jocano, F.L. (2004). Culture-bound Approach to Philippine Industrial Relations: A Search for an

Indigenous Model, Published MA thesis, Ateneo De Manila University.

Macadaeg, Joselita L. (2008). Expressions of the Filipino Male Psyche in Mig Enriquez "Three

Philippine Epic Plays". Thesis (M.A.: Literature), Saint Louis University, Baguio City.

zalp, I. (2006). Implementng the technique of Family and Social Intervention in Mathematics

and Environmental Education. Published Master Thesis, Graduate School of Natural and

Applied Mathematicss, University of Celal Bayar, Manisa.

Parreas, R.S. (2005). The gender paradox in the transnational families of Filipino migrant

Women. Published PhD thesis, De La Salle University.

Twomey, F.C. (2009). Enquiring Teachers, enquiring Learners: A Constructivist Approach for

Counseling. Published Dissertation, New York: Teachers College Press.

C. Electronic Sources

Aleta, J. (2012). What are the good citizenship values of Filipinos? Retrieved September 7, 2013

from http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_good_citizenship_values_of_Filipinos.

Anish, H. (2010). Role of family size for maintaining quality of life. Retrieved September 5,

2013 from http://educationsansars.blogspot.com/2010/05/role-of-family-size-for-

maintaining.html

Better Health Channel. (2011). Family conflict: How to cope. Retrieved September 7, 2013 from

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Family_conflict_how_to_

cope,

Cassey, A. (2005). Low income working families: Facts and figures. Retrieved September 7,

2013 from http://www.urban.org.

Esteban, J. (2009). Roles and responsibilities of family members. Retrieved September 6, 2013

from http://www.bukisa.com.

Fischer, E. (2013). 10 tips for resolving conflict in your family. Retrieved September 5, 2013

from http://www.hitchedmag.com/article.php?id=1022.

Jen, Y. (2007). Childs emotional and social development: Dependent on parental influences.

Retrieved September 7, 2013 from http://voicesau.yahoo.com.

Jendayi, K. (2007). The different parenting styles and how they affect children. Retrieved

September 7, 2013 from http://voicesau.yahoo.com.

Kapuno, R. (2010). Values on good citizenship. Retrieved September 6, 2013 from

http://www.tribephilippines.com/2No/Fn2-citizen.html.

Mahalihali, K. (2012). Family influences in the development of a childs behaviour. Retrieved

September 4, 2013 from http://www.kon.org/urc/v5/mahalihali.html.

Paragas, R. (2013). The work values of Filipino workers. Retrieved September 6, 2013 from

http://ronytparagas.hubpages.com/hub/THE-WORK-VALUES-OF-FILIPINO-

WORKERS.

Scott, E. (2011). Conflict resolution for healthy relationships. Retrieved September 5, 2013 from

http://rcdow.org.uk/att/files/faith/aff/conflict+resolution+skills+for+healthy+relationships

.pdf.

Sibal, J. (2009). Promoting positive work values in workplace relationship among overseas and

local Filipino workers. Retrieved September 7, 2013 from

xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/.../Positive+work+values+among+Filipinos.doc.

Sherfield, R. (2011). Service to others. Retrieved September 7, 2013 from

http://www.netplaces.com/self-esteem/giving/service-to-others.htm.

Velasquez, M.; Andre, C.; Shanks, T.; & Meyer, M. (2012). Justice and fairness. Retrieved

September 7, 2013 from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/justice.html.

 Appendix A

Student-Based Pedagogy
DIRECTIONS: FOLLOWING ARE TWENTY STATEMENTS ABOUT TEACHERS AND

STUDENTS. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR PERSONAL OPINION ABOUT EACH STATEMENT

BY CIRCLING THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE AT THE RIGHT OF THE STATEMENT.

SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree U = Undecided D = Disagree SD = Strongly

Disagree

1. It is desirable to require pupils to sit in assigned seats during assemblies

SA A U D SD

2. Pupils are usually not capable of solving their problems through logical reasoning.

SA A U D SD

3. Directing sarcastic remarks toward a defiant pupil is a good disciplinary technique

SA A U D SD

4.Beginning teachers are not likely to maintain strict enough control over their pupils

SA A U D SD

5.Teachers should consider revision of their teaching methods if these are criticized

by their pupils SA A U D SD

6. The best principals give unquestioning support to teachers in disciplining pupils

SA A U D SD

7. Pupils should not be permitted to contradict the statements of a teacher in class

SA A U D SD

8. It is justifiable to have pupils learn many facts about a subject even if they have no

immediate application SA A U

D SD

9. Too much pupil time is spent on guidance and activities and too little on academic

preparation SA A U D SD

10. Being friendly with pupils often leads them to become too familiar

SA A U D SD

11. It is more important for pupils to learn to obey rules than that they make their own
decisions SA A U D SD

12. Student governments are a good safety valve but should not have much inuence

on school policy SA A U

D SD

13. Pupils can be trusted to work together without supervision

SA A U D SD

14. If a pupil uses obscene or profane language in school, it must be considered a moral

offense SA A U D SD

15. If pupils are allowed to use the lavatory without getting permission, this privilege

will be abused SA A U D SD

16. A few pupils are just young hoodlums and should be treated accordingly

SA A U D SD

17. It is often necessary to remind pupils that their status in school differs from that of

teachers SA A U D SD

18. A pupil who destroys school material or property should be severely punished

SA A U D SD

19. Pupils cannot perceive the difference between democracy and anarchy in the classroom

SA A U D SD

20. Pupils often misbehave in order to make the teacher look bad

SA A U D SD
 Appendix B

Interview Protocol #1

I. Rapport Building:

1. Tell me about your experiences as a teacher.

a. How long have you worked in your current position?

b. What are your current job responsibilities (Grade level and subjects)?

c. In todays interview we will talk a little about instruction & classroom management. Does that

sound OK?

III. Instruction
1. As I look around your classroom, I am wondering how you decide on the physical

arrangement? Student desks?

Teachers desk?

2. Tell me how you design your schedule.

3. Can you tell me about your reading lesson today? Math? Mathematics? Are these typical

lessons for you?

4. How do you manage preparation and clean up for activities?

5. I am wondering how you deal with transitions. For example how will you transition between

reading and math today?

IV. Relationships/Social Skills

1. How would you describe your classroom climate?

a) If community is mentioned, ask what she/he does to foster a sense of community. Do you do

specific community building activities?

b) If response is negative, ask what they are doing to try to improve it?

2. What role do you think relationships between students play in classroom management?

3. In addition to relationships between students, let us talk about the relationship between a

teacher and student.

How would you characterize your relationship with your students?

4. Again, what role, if any, do you feel that student/teacher relationships play in classroom

management?

5. If a new student were coming to your class, how would your students describe you to that new

student?

6. Do you use techniques like conict resolution, peer mediation or class meetings?
If yes, do you think these techniques teach social skills and build relationships between students

and student and teacher?

V. Discipline/Motivation

1. Tell me about the expectations that you have for classroom behavior?

a. How do you communicate those expectations to your students?

2. Do you have specific rules for your classroom? How are they established?

b. Are they teacher or studentgenerated? Why?

3. How do you respond when they dont meet those expectations?

a. Do you have specific consequences?

4. How do you respond when they do meet those expectations? (extrinsic vs. intrinsic rewards?)

5. How do you most typically handle discipline problems in your classroom?

6. I like to give you some scenarios and ask you how you would respond:

a. During a mathematics lesson, two students begin fighting over equipment for the experiment.

How would you handle the situation?

b. You ask your class to clear off their desk and get ready for the next activity. One student

refuses to do it. How would you handle the situation?

VII. Closing Questions:

1. What advice would you give to a new teacher about classroom management?

2. What three words would you use to describe your approach to classroom management?
 Appendix C

Interview Protocol #2

Introduction:

Well, now that we have finished our initial interview, four observations and a stimulus recall

interview, the last thing I would like to do is a final interview. I would like to ask you some more

questions about your instructional and managerial approach. Does that sound OK?

Instruction:

1. Throughout the observations, I observed a lesson that included various instructional

techniques. For example, I saw you use (Insert different techniques depending on which teacher I
am interviewing. Example: direct instruction, demonstration, discussion, cooperative learning

and guided discovery). Can you explain to me when you are sitting down to do your lesson plans

for the week, how do you decide which instructional techniques to use?

2. (Share the instructional continuum used during interview #1) Well, if you look at this

instructional continuum, it lists a variety of instructional techniques. Can you pick some of the

techniques and tell me the advantages and disadvantages of that particular technique? (Make sure

they comment on a few from each end. If not, point to one myself and ask about that one).

3. If you were asked to classify your instructional approach in some area of this continuum,

where would you place yourself?

4. Potential Question: (If they place themselves toward the studentcentered end of the

continuum) Well, you just placed yourself more toward the studentcentered end of the

continuum. What do you feel are some of the constraints that prevent you from using more

studentcentered instructional techniques? What are some of the circumstances/things that

facilitate your desire to use studentcentered techniques? (Prompts if needed because they dont

seem to understand the question other faculty, administration, particular classes, and particular

subjects)

Questions about management:

1. Throughout the observations, I saw you use a variety of classroom management

techniques/strategies. For example, I saw you use (Again, insert techniques depending on which

teacher is being interviewed. For example proximity, explicitly stating a childs name, the look,

and conferencing out in the hallway). Can you explain to me how you decide which strategy to

use in a particular situation?

2. Similar to the instructional continuum I just shared with you, there are many people who

conceptualize classroom management along a teachercentered vs. studentcentered continuum.

For example, the PCI inventory that I gave you after our first interview does this. More

specifically, a teachers score on the PCI reects the teachers classroom management beliefs

from a student/teachercentered framework. (Draw and explain the continuum. Share their

score). Do you think this score is an accurate reection? Why or why not?

3. There appears to be a push to implement more student centered classroom management

strategies. We already talked about your feelings for conict resolution and classroom meetings,

which are very studentcentered, what do you think are the pros and cons of studentcentered

management strategies like these? What about the pros and cons of more teachercentered

management strategies?

4. What do you think might be the reasons some teachers dont use studentcentered classroom

management strategies? Can you think of anything that facilitates your use of studentcentered

management techniques? What about any things or circumstances that prevent you from using

studentcentered techniques?

Questions about the relationship between the two approaches:

1. Well, we talked about your instructional approach and your classroom management approach.

You seemed to articulate your beliefs about both instruction and management and what strategies

you fnd effective and why. I am curious if you think about the relationship between instruction

and management and how they work together?

2. Do you think that can work if you are teachercentered with your instruction and student

centered with your management?

3. Well, lets say you are planning an activity in your classroom an instructional activity of some

sort, do you think about management that is going to accompany that activity?

4. Do you think management differs depending on where you are on the instructional continuum?

For example, does your management differ if you are doing a lecture vs. cooperative groups?

5. So, as you move toward the studentcentered end of the instructional continuum, how might

your management look different? Teachercentered end?