Models for considering how to educate effectively:
As previously stated, it is critical to consider the specific qualities of the learning activity's setting (e.g., kind of school, subject matter, and degree of attainment) as well as the desired educational outcomes when considering successful teaching (e.g., increased pupil academic self-confidence, and examination success).
Three methods of thinking about good teaching have arisen from studying the "what" and "how" of effective teaching. These three models are, in reality, complementary and logically congruent. They reflect three perspectives on the same phenomenon, but they differ in the basic frameworks they apply to elaborate on the essential features. Each framework has its history of development and unique contribution to the comprehensive understanding of effective teaching.
Model 1: An essential degree of investigation
This methodology is mainly based on research and theorizing about successful teaching. This method has concentrated on two complementary constructs that appear to be significant predictors of effectiveness. Active learning time (ALT), often known as 'academic learning time' or 'time-on-task,' is the first construct.
This refers to the amount of time that students spend actively engaged in the learning task and activities that are intended to achieve the desired educational objectives. The quality of instruction is the second construct (QI). This relates to the presentation and applicability of the learning tasks and activities to achieve the desired educational goals.
It essentially equates good teaching with maximizing ALT and QI (Galton, 2007; Wilen et al., 2008). In his analysis of effective teaching in terms of 'time management and 'classroom learning environment,' Creemers constructed a model of educational efficacy that includes this distinction (Creemers and Kyriakides, 2008).
ALT's design has evolved, becoming more elegant and sophisticated. Early studies focused on the number of time students spent on outcome-related activities and found that more time spent on-task behavior was linked to higher educational achievement. This was true due to instructors devoting more curricular time to task behavior (for example, primary school teachers saving more time during classes to actual numerical work) or to individual teachers being more effective at keeping students on target throughout the lesson.
Such studies frequently emphasized how time was spent during less effective teaching (for example, lessons where students had to wait extended periods to see a teacher or where discipline issues were allowed to disturb the work at hand). The concept of wasting time, on the other hand, should be approached with caution because some learning activities designed to foster specific educational outcomes (e.g., pupil autonomy, practical equipment skills) may appear to be time-consuming if the researcher is measuring effectiveness using a further academic development.
A later study has attempted to move away from the simplistic notion of 'length of time' and instead investigate the nature of being actively engaged.' Being on the ask in the sense of listening to a teacher or completing a task, it is said, does not take into account the nature of the experience. Some students appear to be capable of meeting the work without being fully engaged cognitively and effectively. The concept of 'actively engaged' signifies a shift away from a 'keeping children occupied' approach to being on task and toward a conception of generating and maintaining the necessary mental engagement with the learning activities required to achieve the educational results desired effectively. The distinction between ALT and QI is becoming more challenging to keep due to this development.
The QI construct supports ALT by emphasizing the importance of quality teaching and learning for effectiveness. Teachers who can maintain a high on-task behavior and create poor-quality learning experiences will be ineffective. QI, in essence, relates to the degree to which instruction makes it simple for students to obtain the desired learning goals. This no mainly tails considering whether the learning experience is organized in the most sound and acceptable manner when the context is considered.
This can be accomplished in two ways. First, emphasize the psychological components of education. This method is expanded upon in the second paradigm for considering effective teaching, which is explained below. Second, consider the overall characteristics that appear to be relevant. This method is expanded upon in the third paradigm for con thinking effective teaching, described below.
However, before moving on to these two models, one more comment concerning the link between ALT and QI must be stated. These two conceptions have been emphasized as complementary. When considering effective teaching, I believe that the most as room process variables influence both ALT and QI. This is because elements of education that maintain high ALT levels frequently entail high levels of QI ad vice versa. While distinguishing between these two conceptions is helpful, they should not be seen as working independently.