Page 119 - Empowering pre-service teachers through inquiry - Lidewij van Katwijk

Relationship among quality of inquiry, quality of teaching and perceptions toward inquiry
Profile 2, Average students (n = 191; 29%): pre-service teachers who score average on both pre-service teacher inquiry (M = 7.2) and teaching practice (M = 7.8).
Profile 3, High achievers (n = 127; 20%): pre-service teachers, who have high scores on both pre-service teacher inquiry (M = 7.8) and teaching practice (M = 8.6).
Profile 4, Low achievers (n = 125; 19%): pre-service teachers who score below average on both pre-service teacher inquiry (M = 6.2) and teaching practice (M = 6.8).
5
Figure 5.2 Cluster analysis of scores on the pre-service teacher inquiry project and scores on the teaching practice assessment, leading to four profiles (N=650)
Perceptions of pre-service teacher inquiry in the profiles
We analysed whether students in the four profiles differed in attitudes toward pre-service teacher inquiry or their perceptions of the most important learning outcome. The ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between the profiles for all the scales (see Figure 5.3): Value affective F(3, 227) = 9.73, p = .000, Value cognitive F(3, 227) = 7.39, p = .000, Self_Efficacy F(3, 227) = 8.53, p = .000, and Future F(3, 227) = 4.04, p = .008. The Bonferroni post hoc test showed significant differences on the first three scales between the good practitioners (profile 1) and the high achievers (profile 3), and between the high achievers and the low achievers (profile 4). For the scale Future, we only found significant differences between the good practitioners and the high achievers. Profile 2 (average students) showed no significant differences
117