Establishing Theoretical Frameworks to Describe Teacher Effectiveness

Abstract

Chapter 1
Introduction

Carroll’s (1963) state that school learning to the comprehensive model of

educational effectiveness, which is a multilevel model that places emphasis on
instruction and ultimately on the dynamic model of educational effectiveness, the
complex nature of educational effectiveness can be discribed more precisely. Thus,
the comprehensive model is discribed in the first part of this chapter, and some
limitations of the model are identified. In the second part, we refer to the dynamic
model of educational effectiveness, and it is shown that this model takes into
account the dynamic perspective of education. The dynamic model also
incorporates the results of differential teacher effectiveness research into a generic
model describing effective teaching practice. Furthermore, it is acknowledge that
previous studies on teacher effectiveness have not been able to make a significant
impact upon teacher training and professional development, whereas the
establishment of the dynamic model of educational effectiveness may contribute
significantly to addressing these weakness of the field.

The Comprehensive Model of Educational Effectiveness: General

Characteristics A model speci fi es or visualises complex phenomena in a simpli fi
ed or reduced manner. In more abstract terms, it is described in terms of a set of
units (facts, concepts, variables) and a system of relationships between these units.
A distinction should also be made between conceptual and formal models.
Creemers’s model distinguishes between levels in education (see also Scheerens,
1992 ; Slavin, 1996 ; String fi eld, 1994 ; String fi eld & Slavin, 1992 ) and is
therefore multilevel in nature. Speci fi cally, the model has four levels: the student
level, the classroom level, the school level and the context level. Higher levels are
expected to provide conditions for the operation of lower levels.

The Carroll Model for Learning in Schools: A Starting Point for Developing the
Comprehensive Model
A favourite model within EER was Carroll’s model for learning in schools
(Carroll, 1963 ) . It was popular because it related individual student characteristics
important for learning to characteristics of education important for instruction.

The Carroll model states that the degree of student mastery is a function of the
ratio of the amount of time spent on learning tasks to the total amount of time
needed. Time actually spent on learning is de fi ned as equal to the smallest of
three variables: (1) opportunity (i.e. time allowed for learning), (2) perseverance
(i.e. the amount of time during which students are willing to engage actively in
learning) and (3) aptitude (i.e. the amount of time needed to learn in optimal
instructional conditions).

Instructional Theories as the Basis for the Development of Creemers’s Model

Theories about effective education that start at the classroom level focus on the
instructional elements of learning theories. In fact, these theories, taking into
account the background characteristics at the student level, try to explain how the
instructional factors can contribute to the outcomes of education or, more
precisely, how differences in educational outcomes can be explained by differences
in instruction at the classroom level. These theories emphasise instructional factors
that are changeable. In addition to the student background characteristics,
instructional theories take into account elements or components of instruction at
the classroom level, such as the methods used at the classroom level, other learning
methods, the learning environment and especially teacher behaviour in the
classroom.

In this context, Creemers ( 1994b ) made a distinction between time on task, on the
one hand, and opportunity to learn, on the other. Thus, Creemers developed
Carroll’s model of learning by adding to the general concept of opportunity the
more specific notion of opportunity to learn.

In summary, Creemers’s model concentrates on the classroom level since most

studies on educational effectiveness have supported the idea of the predominance
of classroom-level factors over school-level factors (Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000 ).
Moreover, the classroom factors most directly related to time on task and
opportunities to learn used at the student level are the corresponding factors used at
the class level: ‘time for learning’ and ‘opportunity to learn’.
Summary of Chapter 1