Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Hong Kong Libraries]On: 21 September 2013, At: 13:18Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
European Journal of Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cete20
A profile of the effective teacher:Greek secondary education teachers’perceptionsKonstantina Koutrouba aa Department of Home Economics and Ecology, HarokopioUniversity, Athens, GreecePublished online: 27 Feb 2012.
To cite this article: Konstantina Koutrouba (2012) A profile of the effective teacher: Greeksecondary education teachers’ perceptions, European Journal of Teacher Education, 35:3, 359-374,DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2011.654332
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2011.654332
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
A profile of the effective teacher: Greek secondary educationteachers’ perceptions
Konstantina Koutrouba*
Department of Home Economics and Ecology, Harokopio University, Athens, Greece
This paper examines the perceptions of Greek secondary education teachers oneffectiveness in teaching. Through a structured questionnaire, 340 teachersreported their views on the tactics which are considered to contribute to effec-tive teaching and on the behaviour and personal traits attributed to effectiveteachers. Descriptive and factor analysis showed that teacher flexibility inknowledge dissemination and sociability in communication, the display offriendliness, open-mindedness, tactfulness, supportiveness, respect and humour,are considered, among others, to be outstanding attributes of an effective tea-cher. However, the inflexibility of Greek curricula and their obsession with aca-demic performance objectives discourage teachers from implementing effectiveinstructional strategies, from establishing real human relationships with their stu-dents and from displaying behaviour and developing personal traits attributed toeffective teachers.
Keywords: teaching; effectiveness; secondary education; teachers’ perceptions;Greece
Introduction
Teaching effectiveness has become, over the past few decades, an overriding ambi-tion for all educational systems around the world. Effective teaching is consideredto be ‘a complex set of knowledge, abilities, and personal attributes in dynamicinterplay’ (Davey 1991, 121) that impacts on the personalities and abilities of thegrowing students.
Learner-centred teaching strategies chosen and implemented by teachers in theclassroom, such as free and directed dialogue, inquiry/discovery learning, groupwork, differentiated learning, brainstorming, role playing, multimedia learning, etc,have been reported to highly contribute to effective teaching and produce, whenappropriately used, significant cognitive, social and affective outcomes (Sharan2010; Valiente 2008; Van Gog and Paas 2008).
Teacher effectiveness is also considered to depend on the personal attributes ofthe educators and on the behaviour they display towards students, parents andcolleagues. Pozo-Muñoz, Rebolloso-Pacheco, and Fernández-Ramírez (2000),providing a list of characteristics that students attribute to effective teachers, describethem, among others, as: expert, kind, calm, understanding, empathic, sensitive, bal-anced, self-controlled, prestigious, objective, sociable, accessible, active, organised,informed, able to listen, speak, and explain, able to promote participation, and to
*Email: [email protected]
European Journal of Teacher EducationVol. 35, No. 3, August 2012, 359–374
ISSN 0261-9768 print/ISSN 1469-5928 online� 2012 Association for Teacher Education in Europehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2011.654332http://www.tandfonline.com
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
motivate students. In addition, effective teachers are reported to be adaptable, flexi-ble, willing to implement changes or innovations, apt at acquiring the intendedknowledge, skills and attitudes and incorporating them into practice (Cimer, Çakır,and Çimer 2010). Effective teachers are, also, considered to be competent in class-room management, to provide ample time for learning and encourage constructiveparental participation (Hart 2010; Hill and Tyson 2009; Roache and Lewis 2011;Ryan and Cooper 2007). Additionally, Goldstein and Freeman (2003) and Nilssen(2010) found a close relation between effective teachers’ values and personal attitudetowards teaching, and their ability to react successfully to ongoing stimuli providedby students during teaching/learning practice. Moreover, Curry (2008) andMcLaughlin and Talbert (2001) reported that teachers who were open to constructivecriticism tended to be more effective, while this tendency was encouraged in caseswhere teachers participated for extended periods of time in professional learningcommunities where experience was shared and good practices were presented anddiscussed. Moreover, as regards teachers’ effectiveness, Little (2002) has shown thatthe more the teachers are engaged in shared teaching practices in each other’s pres-ence, the more effective they become in teaching, since they open up and are willingto observe and discuss with their colleagues varied aspects of teaching difficulties.Also, teachers’ pre-service education has been reported to have a major impact onteachers’ willingness to implement innovative, student-centred practices in theirclassrooms; Krull, Oras, and Sisask (2007) have shown that adequate student teach-ers’ pre-service training can help them implement different effective approaches forpresenting learning material and support students’ cognitive, emotional and socialdevelopment. Moreover, Papastamatis et al. (2009), Heeralal and Bayaga (2011) andCattley (2007) have shown that when teachers have been provided with pre-servicetraining, they are able to develop their personal professional skills and self-concept,becoming this way more effective, dynamic and active.
Finally, as far as the outcomes of effective teaching are concerned, internationalreports confirm that when educators teach effectively they largely contribute to thedevelopment of sound social relationships, the provision of a variety of learningexperiences, the experiential involvement of students in all learning procedures, thedevelopment of students’ positive attitude towards work, and the development ofstudents’ social, moral and cognitive values such as persistence, self-confidence,cooperativeness, intuitiveness, discipline, eagerness for questioning, understanding,learning and implementing knowledge (Opdenakker and Van Damme 2006; Parkeret al. 2009).
As regards Greece, few steps have been made towards the promotion andsupport of effective teaching. Despite international progress in the development andimplementation of effective teaching strategies, the Greek educational system,despite minor reforms (Ifanti 2007; Koustourakis 2007), remains conservative andinflexible (Alahiotis and Karatzia 2006). Curricula restrictions drastically limitteacher initiative and motivation for effective instructional strategy implementation.Content-centred in-class lecture remains the most popular way of teaching in Greeksecondary education schools, where cognitive academic achievements dominate (inpractice, not in theory) over social and affective ones (Poulou 2007) and themaintaining of discipline constitutes a prime interest of the majority of teachers(Saiti 2007). Differentiated teaching and learning is almost prohibitive due to thelarge number of students per classroom, lack of teacher pre-service training, andpoor, ineffective establishment of learning communities among teachers, parents
360 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
and students (Katsikas and Therianos 2008). Even in cases where teachers havebeen, to some extent, trained in utilising more student-centred techniques and are(theoretically) well educated about the pedagogical principles of effective teachingand the communicative, emotional and social needs of their students, positiveoutcomes in the classroom are rather poor, since, as Zounhia and others (2002, 27)report:
… in Greece, pupils perceive no difference in instructional and pedagogical effective-ness between teachers who had attended courses on pedagogy, psychology and didac-tics and those who had not. Pupils perceive the instructional effectiveness of teachersto be higher than pedagogical effectiveness.
The present study aims at examining the perceptions of Greek secondaryeducation teachers about effectiveness in teaching. More specifically, it examinesthe tactics which are considered to contribute to effective teaching and thebehaviour and personal traits attributed to effective teachers.
Methodology
The present research was conducted in 2010 and was based on a distribution of 400questionnaires addressed to a random sample of a corresponding number of highschool teachers in Greece. Teachers were allocated after establishing contact with46 secondary education schools; 20 of these schools (43.5%) were located in bigurban areas while 26 (56.5%) were located in rural and insular areas of Greece.Two hundred (50%) of the invited teachers worked in the first geographical cate-gory of schools, while the remaining 200 teachers (50%) worked in the second cate-gory of schools. These schools were selected on the basis of criteria regardingteacher and student population and socio-financial features of local communities inorder to ensure that as many teachers as possible, living in varied social, economicand educational environments, would provide relevant information. More specifi-cally, the catchment areas of the schools were divided into four categories (low,low/medium, upper/medium, high) on the basis of their socio-economic characteris-tics using a property value indicator provided by the Ministry of Economics.Schools were then allocated to one of four categories: 12 schools were identified asserving areas of low socio-economic status, 12 as serving areas of low/mediumsocio-economic status, 12 were considered to serve areas of upper/medium and 10areas of high socio-economic status. The ratios of the selected teachers to schoolsand of schools to each area represented the corresponding national ratios, ensuring,as far as possible, that the sample was representative.
The questionnaire comprised 48 close-ended questions with pre-coded replies.Six of these questions required teachers to provide information about demography,studies, professional experience and postgraduate training. Additionally, 42 specialquestions examined two relevant topics selected on the basis of the findings ofrelated international studies. More specifically, the synthesis of the first topic,regarding teachers’ beliefs about the tactics which are considered to contribute toeffective teaching, was based on the research findings of Sharan (2010), Valiente(2008) and Van Gog and Paas (2008). The items of the second topic, regardingteachers’ beliefs about behaviour and personal traits attributed to effective teachers,were selected on the basis of findings by Cimer et al. (2010), Pozo-Muñoz et al.
European Journal of Teacher Education 361
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
(2000), Goldstein and Freeman (2003), Nilssen (2010), Hart (2010), Hill and Tyson(2009), Roache and Lewis (2011) and Ryan and Cooper (2007). The scoring of thespecial questions was based on nominal five-point Likert-type scales, incorporatingproperties of labelling and classification.
Three hundred and forty teachers completed and returned the questionnaire ofthe present study in a ready-to-use form, a response rate of 85%. A statistical cod-ing of questions and answers followed collection of questionnaires. Data elaborationand statistical analysis was performed using PASW Statistics 18 and factor analysiswas employed, using PCA with Varimax rotation extraction method, to pinpoint themain factors influencing the participants’ views on teaching effectiveness. All rele-vant statistical tests were performed at a significance level α = 0.01. A broad out-line of the more significant results and conclusions of the present research arepresented below.
Analysis of results
Participants’ profile
Of the teachers who participated in the research, 40.3% were women, while 59.7%were men. One hundred and ninety-four of these teachers (57.1%) worked in 20schools established in large urban areas, while 146 teachers (42.9%) worked in 26schools established in rural and insular areas of Greece. The teachers’ age rangedas follows: 21–25 years: 4.4%, 26–35: 16.5%, 36–45: 29.4%, 46–55: 38.2%, over56 years: 11.5%. The specialty of the respondents was as follows: humanities:48.8%, natural sciences: 32.1%, practical and technological sciences: 19.1%. Theirteaching experience in years ranged as follows: 0–5 years: 17.1%, 6–10: 20.9%,11–15: 15.6%, 16–20: 12.4%, over 20 years: 34%. Finally, a percentage of 12.7%of the participants had obtained postgraduate diplomas in education (masters:10.3%, PhD: 2.4%).
Special questions
Table 1 presents teacher responses to the questions about their views on the tacticsthat are related to teaching effectiveness in the classroom. Variables 1–9 of thistable portray a teacher who is considered to be effective when his/her teaching tac-tics in the classroom aim at safeguarding and supporting comprehensibility (vari-ables 1, 3, 4) reducing, in this way, cognitive toil (variable 5). They are, also,considered to be effective tactics when they aim at protecting differentiation and atmoulding a setting where a teacher’s caring-for-all behaviour is distinctively preva-lent and ensures cohesion, participation and democracy (variables 2, 7, 9). More-over, an effective tactic is considered by the majority of the participants to be basedon teacher’s balanced initiative and modernisation (variables 6, 8). Teacher adapta-tion to student, individual and group, cognitive, social and emotional needs, his/herlanguage use and simplification of the learning material, his/her careful deregulationfrom stereotyped Curricula restrictions, his/her tendency to process knowledge andconnect it to contemporary experiences seem to be regarded as tactics that serveeffective teaching satisfactorily.
Variables 10–15 of the same table provide the image of a teacher who is viewedas effective when s/he utilises alternative teaching/learning strategies in a ‘moderate’rather than in a plethoric way. It is interesting that, according to the majority of the
362 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Table 1. Teachers’ responses (in percentages) to the questions about tactics which areconsidered to contribute to effective teaching.
Variables An effective teacher:
Notatall Slightly Moderately Much
Verymuch
1. Certifies students’ knowledgescaffolding and assimilation by checkingtheir prior knowledge before providingnew information
2.3 5 16.8 48.5 27.4
2. Encourages weak and timid students 0.9 2.4 14.3 45.6 36.83. Ensures comprehensibility by using
simple and intelligible language duringthe lesson
0.5 2.9 7.4 47.4 41.8
4. Avoids misconceptions and passivenessby adapting lesson difficulty to theaverage student’s understanding ability
0.9 5.3 14.7 54.4 24.7
5. Simplifies obscure terms/notions/factsand reduces learning effort by providingexamples and paradigms
0.6 3.5 11.2 44.7 40
6. Modernises knowledge acquisition byproviding students with supplementaryupdated learning material
2.6 10.6 27.1 36.8 22.9
7. Ensures solidarity/cohesion and a caringenvironment by providing students whopresent learning difficulties withindividualised learning material/ supportand by asking them simpler questions orproviding enough time for them toanswer
4.4 13.5 30 34.5 17.6
8. Deviates partially from curriculum andschoolbooks to meet students’ learningneeds and interests
2.9 10 21.8 41.8 23.5
9. Stops teaching procedure to discuss withstudents when a problem hinders theirparticipation in learning process
1.2 3.2 18.8 49.7 27.1
10. Prevents students from straying from thesubject by implementing teacher-centredmethods like lecture
6.7 25.0 35.3 25.6 7.4
11. Utilises dialogue to motivate students’active participation
1.7 4.7 27.1 46.8 19.7
12. Boosts students’ cognitive and socialreadiness by utilising brainstormingtechniques
9.7 15.6 37.1 30 7.6
13. Utilises visual aids such as pictures/graphs/maps/films/power point
1.8 7.6 30 46.8 13.8
14. Boosts interest and motivation byutilising information technology
1.8 10.6 22.9 42.1 22.6
15. Develops student cooperativeness,openness and friendliness byencouraging group work
10 20.6 34.4 28.2 6.8
16. Assigns a large amount of homework toensure knowledge assimilation
12.3 29.4 40.6 15.9 1.8
17. Makes students feel safe and secure byhelping them to accomplish projectassignments
19.4 32.4 27.9 16.2 4.1
(Continued)
European Journal of Teacher Education 363
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
teachers, lecturing, brain-storming and group-work facilitate effectiveness ‘moder-ately’ (variables 10, 12, 14, 15). On the contrary, the use of dialogue and the util-isation of visual aids provided seem to be considered by the majority of theparticipants as a powerful means that highly facilitates effective teaching (variables11, 13).
Variables 16–22 portray a teacher who is effective when s/he provides studentswith functional information about their assignments and performance (variables 20)and assesses students’ skills and personalities through a holistic perspective (vari-able 19,22), without, however, over-smoothing out students’ personal access toknowledge (variable 17) and, also, without overburdening students with a largeamount of homework (variable 16). The majority of the participants, also, seem toconsider the formation of a teacher’s perception about student performance throughtraditional written tests (variable 21) or modern self-evaluation procedures (variable18) respectively as ‘moderate’ or ‘not at all’ effective tactics.
Table 2 presents the teachers’ responses to the questions addressing their percep-tions about the teachers’ attributes and behaviour that facilitates effective teaching.Through variables 23–42 an effective teacher is portrayed by the majority of therespondents, as one who is ‘much’ to ‘very much’ affable, thoughtful, tactful andan expert in communication skills and emboldens students with encouragingcomments and stimuli (variables 23, 27, 29, 30, 33). Moreover, s/he is ‘much’humorous and friendly, establishes a sincere direct contact with students and is sen-sitive to the different needs, potentials and experiences of the students (variables24, 32, 34–37). In addition, s/he is receptive to criticism, considers students’ con-cerns as preponderant over teaching procedures and establishes an honest and caringrelationship with parents (variables 28, 39–41). Any action, however, thatdiminishes a teacher’s professional authority is ‘moderately’ considered by the
Table 1. (Continued).
Variables An effective teacher:
Notatall Slightly Moderately Much
Verymuch
18. Facilitates students’ meta-cognitiveawareness and self-knowledge byencouraging their self-evaluationthrough scientifically designedquestionnaires
30.9 22.6 21.5 18.5 6.5
19. Avoids circumstantial judgments byassessing student’s overall learningeffort and development
1.5 2.6 9.7 49.4 36.8
20. Encourages improvement incentives byproviding students with feedback andinformation about their learningperformance
1.2 5 18.8 46.5 28.5
21. Reduces subjective judgments andprovides parents and students withmanifest assessment evidence byconsidering mainly student performancein written tests
5.6 20 39.1 26.5 8.8
22. Highlights inseparability of personalityby assessing behaviour in classroomtogether with learning performance
2.6 10 28.5 39.7 19.2
364 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Table 2. Teachers’ responses (in percentages) to the questions about behaviour andpersonal traits attributed to effective teachers.
Variables An effective teacher is:
Notatall Slightly Moderately Much
Verymuch
23. Kind and open in communication withstudents
0.5 1.5 7.4 43.2 47.4
24. Humorous, jocular and pleasant 7.6 10.9 25.6 35.9 2025. Strict with disobedient students by
imposing exemplary punishments8.5 32.1 35.9 19.4 4.1
26. Unbending and uncompromising asregards in-class order/quiet
6.8 16.2 34.7 34.1 8.2
27. Mindful, thoughtful and attached tostudents
2.5 8 17.4 32.9 39.2
28. Self-sarcastic and fearless of self-criticism
11.5 20.3 41.8 21.8 4.6
29. Tactful 3 8.5 17.4 32.9 38.230. Frank and affable when looking a
student in the face5 8.8 16.8 45.6 23.8
31. Spontaneous and warm during discreetphysical touch (friendly thump on theback, pat on the cheek, handshake etc.)
11.8 14.4 33.8 27.4 12.6
32. Friendly, soothing and familiar whilebeing on first name terms with students
1.7 5 16.8 39.7 36.8
33. Encouraging and supportive whenprompting students to activelyparticipate in the teaching/learningprocess
0.6 1.5 5.6 38.5 53.8
34. Patient, not over-demanding andconciliatory with weak and shy students
0.8 2.4 14.4 45.6 36.8
35. Respectful to students’ personalexperiences and sensitivities duringteaching
5.9 7.1 20 39.1 27.9
36. Responsive to cognitive and emotionalneeds of students’ average
0.6 2.9 12.6 48.2 35.7
37. Secretive and trustworthy whenheartening students to talk about theirpersonal matters and ask for teacher’sadvice
1.8 10.9 26.5 43.8 17
38. Free of hang-ups and complexes whenrevealing personal experiences relevantto the subject in question
8.2 20 35 30.9 5.9
39. Democratic when permitting students toexpress comments about a teacher’steaching techniques/classroommanagement/behaviour
2.6 14.4 36.2 40.3 6.5
40. Vigilant, watchful and listenssympathetically to students when talkingwith them about problems that havearisen
1.2 3.2 18.8 49.7 27.1
41. Sociable and skilful in communicationwith parents when exchanginginformation to facilitate improvement ofstudent’s academic performance
0.6 2.9 22.9 58.6 15
42. Willing to present good teachingpractices to colleagues in class
40 28.8 15.6 12.4 3.2
European Journal of Teacher Education 365
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
majority of teachers as facilitating effective teaching (variable 38). The same alsooccurs with actions that arouse even the slightest suspicion of a teacher’s physicalrather than spiritual attachment to a student (variable 31), or bring out a teacher’sstrict authoritative/controlling power (variables 25, 26). Finally, the diffusion/dem-onstration of good practices to colleagues is only ‘slightly’ regarded as a behaviourthat facilitates effective teaching (variable 42).
Factor analysis
Of the above-mentioned variables, 27 were placed under consideration, related inlevel of significance α = 1% to the beliefs of the 340 secondary education teacherson effective teaching (chi-square independence tests were performed). These 27variables were as follows.
The teacher should:
(1) Ensure comprehensibility by using simple and intelligible language duringthe lesson.
(2) Certify students’ knowledge scaffolding and assimilation by checking theirprior knowledge before providing new information.
(3) Avoid misconceptions and passiveness by adapting lesson difficulty to theaverage student’s understanding ability.
(4) Encourage weak and timid students.(5) Simplify obscure terms/notions/facts and reduce learning effort by providing
examples and paradigms.(6) Utilise dialogue to motivate students’ active participation.(7) Encourage improvement incentives by providing students with feedback and
information about their learning performance.(8) Be tactful.(9) Be sociable and skilful in communication with parents when exchanging
information to facilitate improvement of the student’s academic performance.(10) Stop teaching procedure to discuss with students when a problem hinders
their participation in the learning process.(11) Reduce subjective judgments and provide parents and students with manifest
assessment evidence by considering mainly student performance in writtentests.
(12) Be strict with disobedient students by imposing exemplary punishments.(13) Assign a large amount of homework to ensure knowledge assimilation.(14) Modernise knowledge acquisition by providing students with supplementary
updated learning material.(15) Ensure solidarity/cohesion and a caring environment by providing students
who present learning difficulties with individualised learning material/ sup-port and by asking them simpler questions or providing enough time forthem to answer.
(16) Deviate partially from curriculum and schoolbooks to meet students’ learningneeds and interests.
(17) Be friendly, soothing and familiar while being on first name terms withstudents.
(18) Be frank and affable when looking a student in the face.(19) Be self-sarcastic and fearless of self-criticism.
366 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
(20) Be spontaneous and warm during discreet physical touch (friendly thump onthe back, pat on the cheek, handshake, etc).
(21) Be democratic when permitting students to express comments about a tea-cher’s teaching techniques/classroom management/ behaviour.
(22) Make students feel safe and secure by helping them to accomplish projectassignments.
(23) Develop student cooperativeness, openness and friendliness by encouraginggroup work.
(24) Be willing to present good teaching practices to colleagues in class.(25) Boost students’ cognitive and social readiness by utilising brainstorming
techniques.(26) Utilise visual aids such as pictures/graphs/maps/films/power point.(27) Prevent students from straying from the subject by implementing teacher-
centred methods like lecture.
Applying factor analysis, we attempted to ascertain the main factors that affectteachers’ beliefs about the main characteristics of effective teaching.
The value 0.840 of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure for sampling adequacy asan indicator of comparison in the observed values of correlation coefficients to thepartial correlation coefficients implied factor analysis of variables was acceptable asa technique for analysing the data. In addition, Bartlett’s test of sphericity showedhigh statistical significance of the statistic v2 (zero p-value), rejecting the hypothesisthat the correlation matrix is an identity one and, consequently, factor analysis wasadequate (see Table 3).
We applied factor analysis to the group of 27 previously mentioned variables(Cattell 1977, 1978; Howitt and Cramer 2008). Since performance of principal com-ponent analysis (PCA) from the first seven components explained 58.369% of thetotal variance and that only the first seven components had eigenvalues greater than1, we proceeded by using PCA with Varimax rotation extraction method in sevencomponents. The results are presented in Table 4.
Comments on the factor analysis results
Based on the results of the factor analysis, the seven main factors were as follows:
Factor 1: Teacher’s flexibility in knowledge dissemination and sociability incommunication
Since the variables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 had the highest factor loadings,they identify the first factor. According to the results, there appears to be asignificant positive influence between these 10 variables. More specifically, the par-ticipants reported that teachers should ensure comprehensibility and assimilation ofknowledge, while being, at the same time, tactful, sociable and flexible.
Factor 2: Teacher’s objectivity, strictness and demandingness
Since the variables 11, 12 and 13 had the highest factor loadings, they identify thesecond factor. According to the results, a significant positive influence appearsbetween these three variables. In particular, some teachers believe that impartiality,sternness and demandingness can ensure the success of the teaching/learning process.
European Journal of Teacher Education 367
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Factor 3: Teacher’s initiative and individualisation
Since the variables 14, 15 and 16 had the highest factor loadings, they identify thethird factor. According to the results, a significant positive influence appearsbetween these three variables. More specifically, teachers believe that they should
Table 3. KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity.
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy 0.840
Bartlett’s test of sphericity Approx. Chi-square 2778.668df 378Sig. 0.000
Table 4. Factor analysis results.
Rotated component matrix
Variables
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Communalities
1. 0.777 -0.078 0.063 0.011 -0.038 0.099 0.013 0.6402. 0.689 0.131 -0.088 0.228 0.049 0.118 0.142 0.4733. 0.669 0.028 0.165 0.163 0.021 -0.055 0.060 0.5874. 0.643 -0.075 0.084 -0.109 0.028 -0.020 0.186 0.4865. 0.608 -0.012 0.211 0.205 0.090 0.074 -0.198 0.6096. 0.601 0.032 0.091 -0.038 0.281 0.019 -0.039 0.5327. 0.582 -0.037 0.187 0.295 0.132 0.079 -0.032 0.7208. 0.531 -0.308 0.318 0.139 0.065 0.061 -0.322 0.6269. 0.490 -0.036 0.107 0.366 0.170 0.040 0.249 0.50910. 0.485 0.038 0.091 0.327 0.378 -0.006 0.049 0.56311. 0.112 0.820 -0.099 -0.069 0.002 0.105 -0.100 0.45212. -0.183 0.607 0.049 -0.043 -0.109 -0.144 0.305 0.68513. 0.175 0.505 0.369 -0.330 0.096 0.051 -0.313 0.50914. 0.337 -0.035 0.771 0.058 -0.051 0.067 -0.073 0.72515. 0.180 -0.194 0.660 0.226 0.161 0.149 0.045 0.61316. 0.045 0.333 0.640 0.051 0.079 0.043 0.282 0.60617. 0.262 -0.056 0.074 0.761 0.201 0.080 0.006 0.58818. 0.209 -0.230 0.189 0.692 -0.007 0.073 -0.194 0.65119. 0.059 -0.004 -0.040 0.022 0.791 0.108 -0.007 0.54420. 0.039 0.209 0.122 0.347 0.641 -0.090 0.219 0.65321. 0.280 -0.164 0.124 -0.013 0.640 0.090 0.082 0.64822. -0.014 0.020 0.156 0.051 -0.052 0.784 -0.076 0.70323. 0.178 0.023 -0.068 0.126 0.045 0.694 0.226 0.64224. -0.200 0.387 0.003 -0.200 0.193 0.519 0.090 0.54525. 0.212 -0.255 0.284 0.047 0.176 0.494 0.078 0.47926. 0.253 -0.101 0.116 0.036 0.138 0.191 0.735 0.49727. -0.022 0.341 0.033 -0.342 0.163 0.109 0.538 0.474Percentageof totalvarianceexplained
Rotationsums ofsquaredloadings
16.172 7.570 7.549 7.446 7.207 6.687 5.740
Note: Communality or common factor variance: total variance of each variable explained by commonfactors.
368 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
deviate from the mainstream curriculum, update learning material and provide stu-dents with individualised assistance, so that learning becomes more effective.
Factor 4: Teacher’s friendliness
Since the variables 17 and 18 had the highest factor loadings, they identify thefourth factor. According to the results, there appears to be significant positive influ-ence between these two variables. More specifically, teachers believe that teacherfriendliness and affability can highly contribute to effective teaching.
Factor 5: Teacher’s open-heartedness and open-mindedness
Since the variables 19, 20 and 21 had the highest factor loadings, they identify thefifth factor. According to the results, a significant positive influence appearsbetween these three variables. More specifically, teachers believe that when they arespontaneous, democratic and free from personal hang-ups, they are more effectiveduring teaching.
Factor 6: Teacher’s establishment of a supportive and innovative learningenvironment
Since the variables 22, 23, 24 and 25 had the highest factor loadings, they identifythe sixth factor. According to the results, there appears to be a significant positiveinfluence between these four variables. More specifically, teachers correlate, withrather moderate hesitation, the provision of help to students to complete theirassignments, the use of alternative teaching strategies, such as group work andbrainstorming, and the dissemination of good practices to their colleagues.
Factor 7: Teacher’s use of visual aids and lecture
Since the variables 26 and 27 had the highest factor loadings, they identify theseventh factor. According to the results, there appears to be a significant positiveinfluence between these two variables. More specifically, some teachers believe thatthe use of visual aids in combination with the implementation of the traditionalmethod of lecture can ensure the effectiveness of the teaching and learning process.
Conclusions
The present research shows that, according to the majority of secondary schoolGreek teachers, increased teaching effectiveness emerges in classrooms where teach-ers tend to involve students in multiple learning procedures, and implement success-ful communication techniques to disseminate knowledge in a simpler, moreunderstandable, individualised and participatory way. Greek teachers, like theirinternational counterparts (Davis 2006; Ferreira and Bosworth 2001; Shoffner 2009;Walls et al. 2002) seem to believe that the establishment of trusting relationshipsbetween teachers and students encourages the latter to feel comfortable and experi-ence strong motivation for learning, especially when the teacher is comprehensible,tactful, flexible, and has socially effective communication skills (factor 1).
It is also apparent that, according to Greek teachers, the responsiveness to stu-dent needs during instruction by teachers who seem to envisage classrooms not as
European Journal of Teacher Education 369
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
technical arenas but as places where human characters are being built, largely con-tribute to effective teaching. Such an attitude towards the students probably releasesGreek teachers from their stereotyped excessive expectations and helps them estab-lish relations of friendship and respect with students, just as is reported by their col-leagues worldwide (Hargreaves 2000; Klaassen 2002; Sockett and LePage 2002).
For Greek teachers, also, building a rich teacher–student interaction seems toboost high-quality teaching and learning. This positive outcome is considered by therespondents to be reduced, however, in cases where teachers behave in a high-handeddiscipline-oriented manner. Such a reduction has been verified in practice andreported through international research (Iverson 2003; Pšunder 2005; Vitto 2003).Nevertheless, Greek teachers seem to believe that a teacher’s ability to satisfactorilyensure productive classroom management is an important feature of the effective edu-cator, probably because, according to them, ‘effective’ does not, in any way, meanunjustifiably soft and too pliant, but, on the contrary, steady and objective duringdemanding circumstances (factor 2) – a view commonly accepted worldwide byteachers and students as well (Johansson and Johansson 2003; Osler 2000; Thornberg2008).
Moreover, character and behavioural features such as kindness, mindfulness,tactfulness, helpfulness, warmness, patience, supportiveness, responsiveness, respect,sociability, trustworthiness, humour, seem to be strongly related to teacher effective-ness. In particular friendliness and affability seem to be considered as sine qua nonattributes of the effective teacher (factor 4), while the spontaneity of an open-hearted and open-minded teacher who does not hesitate to be self-sarcastic, toaccept criticism from the students and to be warm during discreet physical touch is,also, considered as a significant attribute of an effective educator (factor 5).
Moreover, teachers who care about students’ prior knowledge, who simplify theprovided learning material in ways that meet individualised needs and respect diver-sity of any kind (factor 3), who ensure solidarity and implement democratic proce-dures, who reduce students’ learning load, who encourage feedback, and so on,tend to be considered as effective educators.
On the contrary, unlike international reports (Danielson 2007, 176–7; Dann2002; Feden and Vogel 2003), strong reservation is apparent when the participantsare asked to report whether effective teachers should engage themselves in proce-dures where good practices have to be presented to colleagues and students’ self-assessment has to be implemented. The inflexibility of Greek curricula and theirobsession with academic performance objectives are legitimate reasons for this reser-vation. Given the fact that in Greece all alternative teaching strategies, all modern-ised teaching tactics exclusively aim towards more effective assimilation ofknowledge and not to more integrated development (social, emotional, cognitive) ofa student’s personality, it is clearly understood why a teacher in Greece seems toconsider an educator as effective only when s/he is in alignment with the fundamen-tal, central academic orientation of the educational system of the country. In thesame way it is easy to understand why the majority of the participants believe that ateacher in Greece does not feel ‘highly’ effective when using group-work and brain-storming; Apparently, the respondents believe that a Greek teacher feels insecurewhen working in an innovative learning environment (factor 6) and s/he is uncertainwhether these methods endanger his/her prevailing role in a classroom where anydeviation from the official curriculum’s instructions is rather risky and where anyteacher’s role different to that of the knowledge-transmitter is regarded as rather sus-
370 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
picious. This reservation could also be considered as a result of Greek teachers’ edu-cation and training. Firstly, training on the implementation of innovations duringschool teaching is quite poor and inadequate due to the prolonged under-financing ofGreek universities. More specifically, as regards universities for secondary educationteachers, there is a remarkable lack of modern infrastructure and equipment, sylla-buses are not updated, and the staff teaching and presenting ‘teaching practices’ isquite limited in contrast to the staff teaching ‘teaching theory’. In particular, studentteachers’ education is primarily focused on specific, strictly defined cognitivedomains, such as mathematics, physics, language, history etc and almost minimallyon pedagogics, psychology or information technologies, which could provide studentteachers with the necessary scientific and experiential background, motivation, skillsand willingness to make their teaching more attractive and effective. Secondly, thelinks between local schools and the universities’ practicum offices are rather weakdue to the large number of student teachers and the insufficient ineffective universitydepartments’ cooperation with secondary education schools (Katsikas and Therianos2008; Koustourakis 2007). Finally, given the fact that in Greece, the quantity ofknowledge is overrated in comparison to the quality of the teaching process, second-ary education teachers are obliged to officially record and report, every teachinghour, the schoolbook pages and even the paragraphs they have taught, but not theteaching methods and strategies they have used. As a result, Greek teachers spendmore time disseminating knowledge than establishing an innovative, constructiveenvironment in their classrooms. Teachers who would do otherwise would have toapologise and explain to the administration why fewer pages or paragraphs havebeen taught, given the fact that innovative practices are more time-consuming whilethe amount of knowledge that has to be disseminated per hour is strictly and inflexi-bly defined by the Ministry of Education.
On the other hand, however, the participants believe that nor do teachers feel‘very much’ effective when they use the traditional lecture or visual aids such aspictures/graphs/maps/films/power point (factor 7), probably because, according tothe respondents, Greek teachers recognise that, despite personal insecurity, theirteaching should be more updated. These contradictory feelings of the respondentswho, on the one hand, admit that innovation should be an attribute of the effectiveteacher, but, on the other hand, report that a teacher feels insecure when s/he exper-iments with it or presents it to her/his colleagues, result in the participants’ beliefthat Greek teachers are unable to create a productive learning environment, at leastto the extent they would wish to (Juuso and Laine 2006; Yilamz 2008).
If teaching effectiveness has to emerge in the classroom, teachers, in Greece andworldwide, must be given pre-service social skills training on how to behave tact-fully, on how to implement different teaching and managing tactics in order to buildstrong relationships with their students, and on how to help their students achievehigh social and emotional goals in conjunction with academic performance (Bozand Boz 2010; Vescio, Ross, and Adams 2008). Giving teachers a free hand toinvest in their communication with students, providing them with flexible curriculathat counterbalance academic, social and affective objectives, familiarising themwith teacher-decentred practices, providing them professional assistance that makesthem feel more secure, confident and capable of communicating with others aresteps towards the establishment of a more attractive learning environment whereteachers will be and, at the same time, feel effective and successful.
European Journal of Teacher Education 371
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Notes on contributorKonstantina Koutrouba is a PhD Assistant Professor in the Department of Home Economicsand Ecology at Harokopio University, Athens, Greece. Her research interests focus on theinvestigation and implementation of alternative teaching strategies during the learningprocess, on involvement of teachers’ personality and professionalism in teaching practiceand his/her communication with students and parents.
References
Alahiotis, S., and E. Karatzia. 2006. Effective curriculum policy and cross-curricularity:Analysis of the new curriculum design of the Hellenic Pedagogical Institute. Pedagogy,Culture and Society 14, no. 2: 119–47.
Boz, Y., and N. Boz. 2010. The nature of relationship between teaching concerns and senseof efficacy. European Journal of Teacher Education 33, no. 3: 279–91.
Cattell, R.B. 1977. Factor analysis: An introduction and manual for the psychologist andsocial scientist. Westpost, CT: Green Wood Press.
Cattell, R.B. 1978. The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. NewYork, NY: Plenum Press.
Cattley, G. 2007. Emergence of professional identity for the pre-service teacher. Interna-tional Education Journal 8, no. 2: 337–47.
Cimer, S.O., İ. Çakır, and A. Çimer. 2010. Teachers’ views on the effectiveness of in-servicecourses on the new curriculum in Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education 33,no. 1: 31–41.
Curry, M.W. 2008. Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in tea-cher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform.Teachers College Record 114, no. 4: 733–74.
Danielson, C. 2007. Enhancing professional practice. A framework for teaching. Alexandria:ASCD.
Dann, R. 2002. Promoting assessment as learning: Improving the learning process. NewYork, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
Davey, B. 1991. Evaluating teacher competence through the use of performance assessmenttask: An overview. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 5, no. 1: 121–32.
Davis, H.A. 2006. Exploring the contexts of relationship quality between middle schoolstudents and teachers. Elementary School Journal 106, no. 3: 193–223.
Feden, P.D., and R.M. Vogel. 2003. Methods of teaching: Applying cognitive science topromote student learning. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Ferreira, M.M., and K. Bosworth. 2001. Defining caring teachers: Adolescents’ perspective.Journal of Classroom Interaction 36, no. 1: 24–30.
Goldstein, L.S., and D. Freeman. 2003. Challenges enacting caring teacher education.Journal of Teacher Education 54, no. 5: 441–54.
Hargreaves, A. 2000. Mixed emotions: Teachers’ perceptions of their interactions withstudents. Teaching and Teacher Education 16, no. 8: 811–26.
Hart, R. 2010. Classroom behaviour management: Educational psychologists’ views oneffective practice. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties 15, no. 4: 353–71.
Heeralal, P.J., and A. Bayaga. 2011. Pre-service teachers’ experiences of teaching practice.Case of South African University. Journal of Social Sciences 28, no. 2: 99–105.
Hill, N.E., and D.F. Tyson. 2009. Parental involvement in middle school: A meta-analyticassessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Developmental Psychology 45,no. 3: 740–63.
Howitt, D., and D. Cramer. 2008. Introduction to statistic psychology. Harlow: Pearson.Ifanti, A. 2007. Policy and curriculum development in Greece. The case of secondary school
curriculum. Pedagogy, Culture and Society 15, no. 1: 71–81.Iverson, A.M. 2003. Building competence in classroom management and discipline. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Juuso, H., and T. Laine. 2006. Tact and atmosphere in the pedagogical relationship. Analytic
Teaching 25, no. 1: 1–17.
372 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Johansson, E., and B. Johansson. 2003. Etiska möten i skolan [Ethical encounters in school].Stockholm: Liber.
Katsikas, C., and K.N. Therianos. 2008. Y ɛκπαi9δɛυση της αμhɛιας [The education of igno-rance]. Athens: Gutenberg.
Klaassen, C.A. 2002. Teacher pedagogical competence and sensibility. Teaching and TeacherEducation 18, no. 2: 151–8.
Koustourakis, G. 2007. The new educational policy for the reform of the curriculum and thechange of school knowledge in the case of Greek compulsory education. InternationalStudies in Sociology of Education 17, no. 1: 131–46.
Krull, E., K. Oras, and S. Sisask. 2007. Differences in teachers’ comments on classroomevents as indicators of their professional development. Teaching and TeacherEducation 23, no. 7: 1038–50.
Little, J.W. 2002. Locating learning in teachers’ communities of practice. Opening upproblems of analysis in records of everyday work. Teaching and Teacher Education18, no. 8: 917–46.
McLaughlin, M.W., and J.E. Talbert. 2001. Professional communities and the work of highschool teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nilssen, V. 2010. Encouraging the habit of seeing in student teaching. Teaching and TeacherEducation 26, no. 3: 591–8.
Opdenakker, M.C., and J. Van Damme. 2006. Teacher characteristics and teaching styles aseffectiveness enhancing factors of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education22, no. 1: 1–21.
Osler, A. 2000. Children’s rights, responsibilities and understandings of school discipline.Research Papers in Education 15, no. 1: 49–67.
Papastamatis, A., E. Panitsidou, P. Giavrimis, and E. Papanis. 2009. Facilitating teachers’and educators’ effective professional development. Review of European Studies 1, no.2: 83–90.
Parker, M., C. Lee, S. Gunn, K. Heardman, R. Hinks, M. Pittman, and M. Townsend. 2009.A toolkit for the effective teaching assistant. London: Sage.
Poulou, M. 2007. Social resilience within a social and emotional learning framework: Theperceptions of teachers in Greece. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties 12, no. 2:91–104.
Pozo-Muñoz, C., E. Rebolloso-Pacheco, and B. Fernández-Ramírez. 2000. The ‘idealteacher’ Implications for student evaluation of teacher effectiveness. Assessment andEvaluation in Higher Education 25, no. 3: 253–63.
Pšunder, M. 2005. How effective is school discipline in preparing students to becomeresponsible citizens? Slovenian teachers’ and students’ views Teaching and TeacherEducation 21, no. 3: 273–86.
Roache, J.E., and R. Lewis. 2011. The carrot, the stick, or the relationship: What are theeffective disciplinary strategies? European Journal of Teacher Education 34, no. 2:233–48.
Ryan, K., and J.M. Cooper. 2007. Those who can, teach. Boston, MA: HoughtonMifflin.
Saiti, A. 2007. School leadership and educational equality: Analysis of Greek secondaryschool data. School Leadership and Management 27, no. 1: 65–78.
Sharan, Y. 2010. Cooperative learning for academic and social gains: Valued pedagogy,problematic practice. European Journal of Education: Research Development andPolicies 45, no. 2: 300–13.
Shoffner, M. 2009. The place of the personal: Exploring the affective domain throughreflection in teacher preparation. Teaching and Teacher Education 25, no. 6:783–89.
Sockett, H., and P. LePage. 2002. The missing language of the classroom. Teaching andTeacher Education 18, no. 2: 159–71.
Thornberg, R. 2008. School children’s reasoning about school rules. Research Papers inEducation 23, no. 1: 37–52.
Valiente, C. 2008. Are students using the ‘wrong’ style of learning? A multicultural scrutinyfor helping teachers to appreciate differences. Active Learning in Higher Education 9,no. 1: 73–91.
European Journal of Teacher Education 373
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
Van Gog, T., and F. Paas. 2008. Instructional efficiency: Revisiting the original construct ineducational research. Educational Psychologist 43, no. 1: 1–11.
Vescio, V., D. Ross, and A. Adams. 2008. A review of research on the impact of profes-sional learning communities on teaching practices and student learning. Teaching andTeacher Education 24, no. 1: 80–91.
Vitto, J.M. 2003. Relationship-driven classroom management: Strategies that promotestudent motivation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Walls, R.T., A.H. Nardi, A.M. von Minden, and N. Hoffman. 2002. The characteristics ofeffective and ineffective teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly 29, no. 1: 39–48.
Yilmaz, K. 2008. Social studies teachers’ views of learner-centered instruction. EuropeanJournal of Teacher Education 31, no. 1: 35–53.
Zounhia, K., K. Emmanouel, I. Kossiva, and D. Hatziharistos. 2002. Perceived effectivenessof Greek secondary school teachers. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 7, no. 1:19–29.
374 K. Koutrouba
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
ong
Kon
g L
ibra
ries
] at
13:
19 2
1 Se
ptem
ber
2013
