Search

Copyright of Novitas-ROYAL is the property of Novitas Royal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract: This qualitative longitudinal study examines the impact of an intensive eight-week in-service teacher education programme in the UK on the beliefs of six English language teachers. Drawing on a substantial database of semi-structured interviews, coursework and tutor feedback, the study suggests that the programme had a considerable, if variable, impact on the teachers’ beliefs. The course allowed teachers to think more explicitly about, become aware of, and articulate their beliefs, to extend and consolidate beliefs they were initially – and sometimes tacitly – positively disposed to, and to focus on ways of developing classroom practices which reflected their beliefs. Teachers also experienced shifts in prior beliefs they held about aspects of language teaching and learning. Nonetheless, despite this evidence of impact, the data also suggest that the in-service course studied here could have engaged teachers in a more productive and sustained examination of their beliefs. Several factors relevant to such engagement are analyzed and recommendations for enhancing the impact of in-service teacher education on language teachers’ beliefs are made. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Many observers have commented on disparities between the theoretical understandings of environmental education portrayed in academic literature and the environmental education that takes place in schools. In much of the literature and in curriculum documents there has been an increasing emphasis on promoting positive attitudes towards the environment, and the results of several surveys suggest that many teachers support this aim. This paper explores the beliefs of three geography teachers teaching controversial environmental issues in UK secondary schools. In contrast to the findings of prior studies, the teachers in this study feel strongly that they should try to avoid influencing students' attitudes, or imposing any kind of pro‐environmental agenda. There is a substantial divergence between the teachers' beliefs and the espoused aims of much environmental education literature and the geography syllabus they were following. This suggests that, unless curriculum developers take account of teachers' beliefs in designing new curriculum materials, those materials are unlikely to be implemented in their intended format. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internationally and historically in the UK, considerable research has been undertaken regarding teachers' pedagogical practices when working with high or low ability classes. Latterly, in the UK, research has focused on pedagogical practices in mixed ability classes. This paper aims to compare secondary school teachers' pedagogical practices in mixed and ability grouped classes and explore whether these are influenced by the extent to which either practice was influenced by the type of grouping practices adopted in the school within which they worked. The sample comprised over 1500 teachers from 45 schools divided into three groups based on their ability grouping practices in years 7-9. The sample included all the lower school teachers of mathematics, science and English and a random sample of teachers from other subjects in each school. Teachers responded to a questionnaire which explored their practices in teaching classes of homogenous or mixed ability through the use of rating scales and open-ended questions. The findings showed that the curriculum was differentiated more in ability grouped classes by content, depth, the activities undertaken and the resources used. The less able were given more opportunities for rehearsal and repetition, more structured work, more practical work, less opportunities for discussion, less access to the curriculum, less homework with less detailed feedback, while work proceeded at a slower pace and was easier. Differences in pedagogy were evident in the responses of teachers who taught both mixed ability and ability grouped classes. This suggests that it is the structures themselves which lead teachers to change their teaching practices rather than their own personal teaching styles. The power of the grouping structures is further confirmed by the similarities in responses from teachers working in schools where the predominant grouping practices differed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Raising standards of literacy has become a key issue for education policy in many countries. A critical factor in any attempt to improve education is the quality and consistency of teaching: thus there has been an increasing interest in teachers themselves. This has included not only what teachers do, but also what they know and believe; and how teachers' knowledge and beliefs relate to classroom practice. This paper reports an exploratory study of the theoretical beliefs of a sample of 225 British primary school teachers who were identified as successful in teaching literacy. The research took place in England between 1996 and 1998. Its main aim was to examine the characteristics of effective teachers of literacy – in particular their background, experience, professional development, knowledge, beliefs and classroom practice – and to compare them with a sample of 71 primary teachers who represented the range of effectiveness in literacy teaching. The findings of this study indicated differences in theoretical orientation to literacy within the effective teacher sample, according to the type of teacher training course taken, the number of years' experience of teaching gained after qualifying, and the highest level of professional qualification. There were also differences in theoretical orientation between the effective teachers and the comparison sample. The paper concludes that these differences in beliefs about literacy and its teaching have implications for policy and professional development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]