Page 128 - The SpeakTeach method - Esther de Vrind

Chapter 5. Perspective of the teachers – professional development
5.5.2 Results for research question B
To what extent did the teachers follow adaptive learning routes in the context of the innovation, i.e. the SpeakTeach method, and to what extent do they intend to continue the SpeakTeach method in the future?
Table 5.1 shows that nearly all teachers (9/11) strongly intended to apply all or parts of the teaching approach (highest score 7) in the future and that 10 teachers actually applied the teaching approach in the subsequent school year.
What did their routes look like? The scores in the fourth column of Table 5.1 indicate the extent to which each teacher had applied the three procedures in their teaching. First of all, a division can be made into 1) teachers who took one or two steps in the procedures starting from their regular teaching methods, but never took two steps at once to the maximum score 3; and 2) teachers who immediately took big steps in innovation (at least for two procedures to the maximum score 3). In the model of Bransford et al. (2005), the first group of teachers (teachers H, I and J) stayed close to the dimension of routines, built stepwise on routines from their regular teaching practice and inserted the procedures progressively. In contrast, the second group seemed to be innovators who experimented directly with big steps. From there we can look at how the teachers developed in subsequent SpeakTeach lesson series: one group of innovators can be distinguished who took big steps back (teachers A, B and C) and another group of innovators seemed to fine-tune in later lesson series (teachers D, E, F and G). One teacher fell outside this classification (teacher K), as he did not succeed in applying one of the three procedures at all. Hence, four patterns can be discerned.
Classification 1: the builders (from routine) (n=3, see Table 5.1: teachers H, I and J)
Builders are teachers who applied the procedures of the innovative teaching approach, step by step, building on their own teaching practice. Starting from their regular teaching approach, these teachers took one or two steps in each lesson series, but not always for each procedure and they never took two steps at once to the maximum implementation of a procedure (score 3). They had goals that corresponded with the goals of the innovation among other goals of their own, and were satisfied with what they achieved. In the next school year, they reported that they were still using one or more procedures of the teaching approach in their teaching.
126
125