Research on the
effects of teachers' graduate degrees is limited (Goldhaber
& Brewer, 1996; Wayne & Youngs, 2003) and a
definitive relationship between graduate coursework and improvement in teaching
or student learning has not been established (Hill, 2007). Although much of the
existing research indicates that a graduate degree may have limited impact,
most studies have not considered the type of graduate degree pursued. An
exception is a study by Goldhaber and Brewer (1996)
in which data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study indicated that
teacher subject-specific training in mathematics and science had a significant
impact on secondary studentsŐ test scores. However, the implication that
subject-specific graduate coursework in mathematics and science can positively
impact studentsŐ achievement has not been supported across the K-12 curriculum
(Wayne & Youngs, 2003). The mixed nature of
research results indicates a need for further study of the ways in which
teaching is influenced by graduate coursework. Such a focus is particularly
important given that teachersŐ instructional practice is directly related to
the nature and quality of student learning.
Our research has
focused on characterizing changes in instructional practice as teachers
participate in a MasterŐs degree program. In the research reported here, we
sought to answer the following question: What changes occur in teachersŐ
questioning over the course of a MasterŐs degree
program designed to increase teachersŐ mathematics
content and pedagogical knowledge?
Theoretical
Perspective
A wealth of literature has underscored
the importance of teacher questioning. For this study, we drew on questioning
frameworks from the mathematics and science education literature (Boaler & Brodie, 2004; Chin,
2007; Erdogan & Campbell, 2008; Newcomb & Trefz, 2005) to examine the individual questions teachersŐ
posed and to construct detailed rubrics to characterize the nature of teachersŐ
questioning and detect shifts in questioning over time. When examining
individual teacher-questions, we relied heavily on: Erdogan
and CampbellŐs (2008) categories for closed-ended, open-ended, and
task-oriented questions and Newcomb and TrefzŐs (2005)
levels of cognition hierarchy–remembering, processing, creating, and
evaluating.
Methods
Participants
This study was situated within the
context of a mathematics-science partnership project conducted as a 3-year
MasterŐs degree program in two tracks, mathematics and science. Teachers earned
a Master of Science degree in either Curriculum and Instruction (science
education) or Mathematics (mathematics education). Participants included 22
teachers from a public school district in a mid-sized Midwestern
city.
Data Sources
Data
were drawn from a three-phase video reflection cycle. At the beginning of the
program, each teacher planned, taught, and video recorded a lesson that became
the basis for reflection and revision throughout the program. About halfway
through the program, teachers reviewed their initial lesson plan, viewed the
recorded lesson, and reflected (in writing) on their teaching in light of the
coursework, readings, and program activities in which they had subsequently
been engaged. They modified the lesson plan, wrote a rationale for the
modifications, re-taught and recorded the modified lesson, and reflected on the
differences between the two lessons as taught. This process was repeated at the
end of the program. Our final data set was comprised of 65 video-recorded
lessons.
Analysis
Analysis
was conducted in three phases. For every lesson, we constructed a verbatim
transcription of the teachersŐ questions and recorded the nature of student
responses (e.g., short answer, extended, discussion). Although these
transcripts sufficiently captured the overall flow of discourse and allowed us
to recognize shifts in focus or content, questions were more meaningfully
interpreted within the context of a sequence, or cluster, of questions. Thus, in phase one, three researchers individually
identified clusters and met to compare and agree upon cluster designations.
In the next phase of analysis, three
researchers individually coded each question within a transcript using the Erdogan and Campbell (2008) and Newcomb and Trefz (2005) frameworks. This information was used to code
each cluster using a 5-point researcher-developed rubric and write a brief description
of the overall lesson. Cluster codes were compared, agreement was negotiated,
and intercoder reliabilities were computed. One
researcher then constructed a narrative characterization of the overall lesson
based on the cluster codes and a synthesis of each researcherŐs narrative
descriptions of the lesson.
In
the final phase of analysis, lesson narratives were analyzed using a 5-point lesson
rubric (similar to the cluster rubric). Changes in teachers' questioning were
examined broadly according to shifts in lesson rubric designations and more
specifically through qualitative analysis of the three narrative
characterizations for each lesson.
Findings and Conclusions
The
majority of teachers exhibited changes in their questioning indicated by shifts
in lesson rubric designations between the first and third lessons. For the
first lesson, rubric designations for the vast majority of teachers were at the
lowest two levels, characterized by a predominance of closed-ended, short-answer
recall questions (e.g., remember number facts or computational procedures). By
the third lesson, many teachers had progressed to Level 3 of the rubric,
characterized by a mix of open- and closed-ended questions requiring students
to apply procedures to solve problem, explain their thinking, and (infrequently)
to draw original conclusions. Only three teachersŐ lessons were rated at Level
4 of the rubric, characterized by numerous open-ended questions that elicited
student explanations, novel thinking, and critical analysis.
Analyses
of the narratives characterizing each of the teachersŐ three lessons
highlighted distinct, yet often subtle, changes in teachersŐ questioning
practices. For many teachers, we noted a trend of increased higher-order
thinking questions requiring greater student engagement and less teacher
direction and funneling to a particular solution. More specifically, we found
greater follow-up to student responses, increased focus on activating studentsŐ
prior knowledge, and more probing for student explanation.
Although
we make no claims of causality between participation in the MasterŐs degree
program and changes in teachersŐ questioning, we do have evidence that
teachersŐ engagement in the video reflection cycle (our data source) acted as
an impetus for change, in general, and believe it was an essential component of
the program. This has broader implications with regard to the influence of
MasterŐs degree programs on teaching practice.
References
Boaler, J., & Brodie,
K. (2004). The importance nature and impact of teacher
questions. In D. E. McDougall, & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of twenty-sixth annual meeting
of the North American Chapter of the International Group for Psychology of
Mathematics Education, 2, 773-782.
Chin, C. (2007).
Teacher questioning in science classrooms: approaches that stimulate productive
thinking. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 44(6),
815-843.
Erdogan, I., & Campbell, T. (2008). Teacher
questioning and interaction patterns in classroom facilitated with differing
levels of constructivist teaching practices. International Journal of Science Education,
30(14), 1891-1914.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, J. D. (1996).
Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on education performance.
Rockville, MD: Westat, Inc.
Hill, H. C. (2007). Learning in the
teaching workforce. The Future of Children, 17(1),
111-127.
Newcomb, L.H., & Trefz,
M.K. (June, 2005). Toward teaching at higher levels of
cognition. NACTA Journal,
56-60.
Wayne, A. J., & Youngs,
P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review
of Educational Research, 73(1), 89 – 122.
The speakers examined graduate study as professional development, for perspective on how it might influence a practicing teacher. They will report on changes that occurred in teachers’ questioning during participation in a master’s degree program designed to increase teachers’ mathematics content and pedagogical knowledge.
Session Type: Poster Session