Home⇛DMMMSU Research and Extension Journal⇛vol. 6 no. 1 (2022)

Multifaceted Teaching Pedagogies of Elementary Education Instructors in the Philippines: A Locus Classicus KAP (Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices) Approach

Jomar L Aban

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

In the present technological age, concerned stakeholders should innovate pedagogical approaches to achieve authentic learning. Four commonly used teaching pedagogies are presented in this study: lecture method, cooperative learning, inquiry-based learning, and learning with emphasis on communication skills. The level of awareness, attitudes and utilization of these four common teaching pedagogies by Bachelor in Elementary Education (BEEd) faculty members were explored using an educational-descriptive-quantitative approach. Results show that respondents are highly aware of inquiry-based learning but are only moderately aware of lecture method, cooperative learning and learning with emphasis on communication skills. The faculty respondents have the most positive attitude on cooperative learning compared to the other three pedagogies. Contrary, the utilization of the four pedagogies in teaching are comparable. Although lecture method is the least preferred method, it is still commonly used because of its practicability in terms of class size, and convenience to the teacher. The other three pedagogies are also considered and moderately practiced. The proposed synergistic pedagogical model is formulated to intertwine the captured awareness, attitudes and practices of the BEEd faculty members on the four commonly used teaching pedagogies.



References:

  1. Aban, J., Abubo, R. and Sario, C. (2020). Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices on the Six Common Teaching Strategies of Tertiary Level Teachers and Students: A Brief Cross Sectional Case Report. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Studies, 15(2), 83-97.
  2. Aban, J., Aban, J., Sario, C. and Abubo, R. (2015). Awareness, Perspectives and Practices on Multifaceted Pedagogies. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. OmniScriptum GmbH & Co.KG.  p1-105
  3. Andersen, M. H. (2011). Knowledge, Attitudes, and Instructional Practices of Michigan Community College Math Instructors: The Search for a KAP Gap in Collegiate Math.
  4. Arcelo, A. A. (2003). In pursuit of continuing quality in higher education through accreditation: The Philippine experience. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning.
  5. Archambault, L., Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Kim Williams, M. (2010). Professional development 2.0: Transforming teacher education pedagogy with 21st century tools. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(1), 4-11.
  6. Arellano, E. L., Barcenal, T. L., Bilbao, P. P., Castellano, M. A., Nichols, S. E., & Tippins, D. J. (2001). Using case-based pedagogy in the Philippines: A narrative inquiry. Research in Science Education, 31(2), 211-226.
  7. Balkcom, S. (1992). Cooperative Learning. Education research consumer guide.
  8. Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of teacher education, 51(3), 241-247.
  9. Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 147-161). Springer, Dordrecht.
  10. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning. Routledge.
  11. Beyer, C. J., & Davis, E. A. (2012). Learning to critique and adapt science curriculum materials: Examining the development of preservice elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96(1), 130-157.
  12. Bhowmik, M., Banerjee, B., & Banerjee, J. (2013). Role of pedagogy in effective teaching. Basic Research Journal of Education Research and Review, 2(1), 1-5.
  13. Bourn, D. (2015). A pedagogy of development education: Lessons for a more critical global education. In The State of Global Education (pp. 29-42). Routledge.
  14. Bozalek, V., Ng’ambi, D., Wood, D., Herrington, J., Hardman, J., & Amory, A. (Eds.). (2014). Activity theory, authentic learning and emerging technologies: Towards a transformative higher education pedagogy. Routledge.
  15. Braine, G. (2003). From a teacher-centered to a student-centered approach: A study of peer feedback in Hong Kong writing classes. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 13(2), 269-288.
  16. Brookhart, S. M., & Chen, F. (2015). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review, 67(3), 343-368.
  17. Cabrera, G. A. (1997). Development of Higher Education in the Philippines. 東京大学大学院教育学研究科紀要, (37), 333-340.
  18. Cerbin, W., & Kopp, B. (2006). Lesson Study as a Model for Building Pedagogical Knowledge and Improving Teaching. International journal of teaching and learning in higher education, 18(3), 250-257.
  19. Clark, J. E. (2010). The digital imperative: Making the case for a 21st-century pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 27(1), 27-35.
  20. Cornett, C. E. (1983). What You Should Know About Teaching and Learning Styles. Fastback 191. Phi Delta Kappa, Eighth and Union, Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402.
  21. Corpus, M. T. (2003). Historical perspectives of the Philippine quality assurance system. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance, 1(1), 1-7.
  22. Covill, A. E. (2011). College students' perceptions of the traditional lecture method. College Student Journal, 45(1), 92-102.
  23. Dalli, C. (2008). Pedagogy, knowledge and collaboration: towards a ground‐up perspective on professionalism. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 16(2), 171-185.
  24. Dukes, R. L., & Victoria, G. (1989). The effects of gender, status, and effective teaching on the evaluation of college instruction. Teaching Sociology, 447-457.
  25. Ekeler, W. J. (1994). The lecture method. Handbook of college teaching: Theory and applications, 85-98.
  26. Ellis, E. S. (1993). Integrative strategy instruction: A potential model for teaching content area subjects to adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of learning disabilities, 26(6), 358-383.
  27. Ellsworth, E. (1997). Teaching positions: Difference, pedagogy, and the power of address. Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027.
  28. Emaliana, I. (2017). Teacher-centered or student-centered learning approach to promote learning?. Jurnal Sosial Humaniora (JSH), 10(2), 59-70.
  29. File, N., & Gullo, D. F. (2002). A comparison of early childhood and elementary education students’ beliefs about primary classroom teaching practices. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17(1), 126-137.
  30. Florian, L., & Black‐Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British educational research journal, 37(5), 813-828.
  31. Fornaciari, C. J., & Lund Dean, K. (2014). The 21st-century syllabus: From pedagogy to andragogy. Journal of Management Education, 38(5), 701-723.
  32. Fox, Lindsay , (2008) . The effects of gender-based strategies and same-sex grouping in a high school social studies classroom . In Proceedings: 4th Annual Symposium: Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects. Wichita, KS: Wichita State University, p.139-140.
  33. Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of educational psychology, 101(3), 705.
  34. Green, C., Eady, M., and Andersen, P. (2018). Preparing quality teachers. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 6(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.1.10
  35. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of research on technology in education, 41(4), 393-416.
  36. Henschke, J. A. (2013). Nation building through andragogy and lifelong learning: On the cutting edge educationally, economically, and governmentally. In Handbook of research on technologies for improving the 21st century workforce: Tools for lifelong learning (pp. 480-506). IGI Global.
  37. Herrington, J. (2005). Authentic learning environments in higher education. IGI Global.
  38. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational technology research and development, 48(3), 23-48.
  39. Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 401-412). Springer, New York, NY.
  40. Ingvarson, L., Meiers, M., & Beavis, A. (2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers' knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Professional development for teachers and school leaders, 1.
  41. Kahl Jr, D. H., & Venette, S. (2010). To lecture or let go: A comparative analysis of student speech outlines from teacher-centered and learner-centered classrooms. Communication Teacher, 24(3), 178-186.
  42. Kanter, D. E., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2010). The impact of a project‐based science curriculum on minority student achievement, attitudes, and careers: The effects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and inquiry‐based practices. Science Education, 94(5), 855-887.
  43. Kleickmann, T., Richter, D., Kunter, M., Elsner, J., Besser, M., Krauss, S., & Baumert, J. (2013). Teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge: The role of structural differences in teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 64(1), 90-106.
  44. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-762.
  45. Koehler, M., Mishra, P., Yahya, K., & Yadav, A. (2004). Successful teaching with technology: The complex interplay of content, pedagogy, and technology. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2347-2354). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  46. Lasry, N., Charles, E., & Whittaker, C. (2014). When teacher-centered instructors are assigned to student-centered classrooms. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 10(1), 010116.
  47. Leftwich, A. (1991). Pedagogy for the depressed: the political economy of teaching development in British universities. Studies in Higher Education, 16(3), 277-290.
  48. Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause learning initiative, 1(2007), 1-12.
  49. Mahdi, H. S., & Al-Dera, A. S. A. (2013). The Impact of Teachers' Age, Gender and Experience on the Use of Information and Communication Technology in EFL Teaching. English Language Teaching, 6(6), 57-67.
  50. Mascolo, M. F. (2009). Beyond student-centered and teacher-centered pedagogy: Teaching and learning as guided participation. Pedagogy and the human sciences, 1(1), 3-27.
  51. McCroskey, J. C. (1982). Communication competence and performance: A research and pedagogical perspective. Communication education, 31(1), 1-7.
  52. McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2018). Conducting educational design research. Routledge.
  53. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry, MyEducationLab Series. Pearson.
  54. Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting Active Learning. Strategies for the College Classroom. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
  55. Millot, B., & Lane, J. (2002). The efficient use of time in education. Education economics, 10(2), 209-228.
  56. Padua, R. N. (2003). International higher education quality assurance practices: Situating the Philippine system. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance, 1(1), 8-15.
  57. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., ... & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61.
  58. Rindermann, H. (2012). Intellectual classes, technological progress and economic development: The rise of cognitive capitalism. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(2), 108-113.
  59. Roman, J. and Ortega, M. (2019). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. NEIU Digital Commons. Northeastern Illinois University, Department of Health Sciences and Physical Education. https://neiudc.neiu.edu/srcas/2019/schedule/31/
  60. Rosaroso, R. C., Yap, C., & Gador, S. (2015). Current initiatives on internationalization of education in selected higher education institutions in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 2(4), 23-30.
  61. Ruiz, A. J., & Junio-Sabio, C. (2012). Quality assurance in higher education in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 63-70.
  62. Sahlberg, P. (2010). The secret to Finland’s success: Educating teachers. Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education, 2, 1-8.
  63. Segall, A. (2004). Revisiting pedagogical content knowledge: the pedagogy of content/the content of pedagogy. Teaching and teacher education, 20(5), 489-504.
  64. Shapiro, A. M., Sims-Knight, J., O'Rielly, G. V., Capaldo, P., Pedlow, T., Gordon, L., & Monteiro, K. (2017). Clickers can promote fact retention but impede conceptual understanding: The effect of the interaction between clicker use and pedagogy on learning. Computers & Education, 111, 44.
  65. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of educational research, 50(2), 315-342.
  66. Schrum, L., Thompson, A., Maddux, C., Sprague, D., Bull, G., & Bell, L. (2007). Research on the effectiveness of technology in schools: The roles of pedagogy and content. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1), 456-460.
  67. Talmage, H., Pascarella, E. T., & Ford, S. (1984). The influence of cooperative learning strategies on teacher practices, student perceptions of the learning environment, and academic achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 21(1), 163-179.
  68. Tang, T. L. P., & Chamberlain, M. (2003). Effects of rank, tenure, length of service, and institution on faculty attitudes toward research and teaching: The case of regional state universities. Journal of Education for Business, 79(2), 103-110.
  69. Tomiyama, T., Gu, P., Jin, Y., Lutters, D., Kind, C., & Kimura, F. (2009). Design methodologies: Industrial and educational applications. CIRP annals, 58(2), 543-565.
  70. Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and applications, 5, 147-158.
  71. Turner, R. B. (2013). Expert teaching: Knowledge and pedagogy to lead the profession. David Fulton Publishers.
  72. Van Damme, D. (2002). Trends and models in international quality assurance and accreditation in higher education in relation to trade in education services. Higher Education Management and Policy, 14(3).
  73. Wilt, M. E. (1950). A study of teacher awareness of listening as a factor in elementary education. The journal of educational research, 43(8), 626-636.
  74. Zubizarreta, J. (2009). The learning portfolio: Reflective practice for improving student learning. John Wiley & Sons.

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic