what it takes to be a good teacher?
Post on 30-Jan-2023
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
What it takes to be a Good Teacher: Attributes of Effective Teachersaccording to Secondary School Students in Kosova
Erëblir KADRIUErwin SELIMOSJanet TOWER
ABSTRACT
This study explores Kosovar secondary student perceptions ofeffective teachers. It seeks to find out what average Kosovarsecondary students view as the characteristics of an effectiveteacher. Beginning with a discussion and analysis of currentscholarly literature regarding student perceptions of teachereffectiveness, the thesis moves into authentic, qualitativeresearch of Kosovar student perceptions of effective teachersusing interviews and data analysis as a means of data retrieval.Specifically, this research uses a case study approach in whichfour students from a typical local Kosovar secondary school wereinterviewed regarding their perceptions of the characteristics ofeffective teachers. Following the first interview, students wereasked to maintain a study journal for one week in which theynoted insights about effective teaching as they attended school.The notes they took during this week were used as a springboardfor further discussion of effective teachers during the secondround of interviews. All interviews followed a semi-structuredapproach. Following the two rounds of interviews, interviews weretranscribed and interpreted using coding as a data analysistechnique. During this process, student comments were categorizedinto themes regarding characteristics of effective teachers.Ultimately, the thesis concludes that effective teachersaccording to Kosovar secondary students are those that meet boththe affective and cognitive needs of students. The thesis endswith a discussion of these results and the applicability theseresults have toward current education policy and reforms inKosova.
PREFACE
The education system of Kosova has undergone rapid, significant,and continuous change during the last decade. New educationalinitiatives/reforms have been met with acceptance, uncertainty,and in some instances resistance. The initiatives vary andtackle different aspects of education as deemed to be importantby certain educational stakeholders.
One example of educational reform includes professionaldevelopment and training for new and existing secondary schoolteachers. The purpose of this training is a transformation ofthe Kosovar education system in accordance with accepted,
contemporary educational practices. Specifically, teachers havebeen and are being trained in student-centered classrooms whichinclude specific training in group-work pedagogy. It isbelieved that these new methodologies as practiced by trainedteachers will be one of the keys to improving the quality ofeducation in Kosova. Although this is not in doubt, this study“what it takes to be a good teacher,” focuses on the studentresponses to these new practices that their teachers are or arenot implementing in the classroom. In particular, it asksstudents what they consider to be the qualities of an effectiveteacher. The underlying assumption of the research is thatstudent views of the qualities of effective teaching is one ofmany factors that should be considered and incorporated withinthe larger view of stable, democratic ,educational reform.
In addition to contributing to scholarly literature abouteducation reform in Kosovo, this study is significant because itcenters on the views of students. The study emphasizes theimportance of considering student perceptions as a driving forceof curriculum reform. “What it takes to be a good teacher” ismethodologically significant in the way it situates perceptionsof good teaching within the specific Kosovar context, as well ashow that compares to perceptions of good teaching in othercontexts. By doing so, the writers of this study keenly recognizethe highly contextual nature of education and educational reform.
This is the first study published by International ProgressiveEducation (IPE), an educational non-profit organization dedicatedto expanding educational opportunities for Kosovar youth. IPEseeks to do this through both research and practicalapplication. This particular study, which was conducted duringthe 2008-2009 academic year, was the research thesis of EreblirKadriu for the Masters of Philosophy Program in Psychology andEducation at the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. “Whatit takes to be a good teacher” is the first study released by IPEthat aims to examine qualitatively how different people haveexperienced educational reforms in Kosova in the last decade.
This study will show the reader the perceptions that Kosovar highschool students have about effective teachers specifically, as
well as their views toward good education in general. This studywill also show that the perceptions of Kosovar students do notdiffer much from other students in other parts of the world.
Education is one of the pillars of a strong and effectivesociety. Through professional dialogue, scholarly work, andprofessional dedication, interested parties can build a positiveand successful education system in Kosova. We believe “What ittakes to be a good teacher” is a strong addition to thisscholarly research and professional dialogue, and the authors ofthis study are confident that this professional dedication anddynamic will lead the Kosovar educational system to the standardsit envisions.
1.1. BACKGROUND - INTRODUCTION
Kosova is a society in transition. Since 1999, Kosova has been
enveloped in the multifaceted issues of post-war reconstruction.
Repairing infrastructure, reviving an economic system, building
democratic institutions, and establishing a new judicial system
have been some major issues faced by Kosovar society. These
postwar initiatives have been dealt with by a unique partnership
between Kosova and the international community. The United
Nations Mission in Kosova has acted as the guiding institution of
reform, reconstruction, and change in Kosova for ten years. With
the official declaration of independence on February 17, 2008,
Kosova has now entered a new period as an independent nation.
With this has come various challenges as the country still
grapples with many social, political and economic problems.
Similar to other sectors of society, education in Kosova has also
gone through a major transition period. A ten-year period of an
unequal and divisive parallel education system followed by a
destructive war has left the state of education in Kosova in
crisis. The parallel education system in Kosova refers to the
ten-year period before the 1999 war where Kosovar Albanians
attended schools in private houses taught by volunteer teachers
for only a couple of hours a day in very crowded classrooms. This
was a result of the Serbian regime who, under the control of
Slobodan Milosevic, inflamed nationalist tensions by enforcing a
Serbian-only curriculum in Kosova. Kosovar Albanians refused such
measures and the result was a parallel system of education. The
impact of the parallel system can still be felt today. However,
given the scope of this study only a brief overview of this event
will be discussed.
Since the end of the war in 1999 and thus the end of the parallel
system, the major objective of the Ministry of Education, Science
and Technology (MEST) has been to reform education in ways to
meet international standards. Reforms to education in Kosova
involve various initiatives ranging from the development of
infrastructure, implementation of teacher training, and it also
includes such aspects as inter-ethnic reconciliation. This push
to reform Kosova’s education system is illustrated by MEST’s
strategic plan entitled, “The Strategy for the Development of
Pre-University Education in Kosova, 2007-2017.” This plan calls
for widespread changes to education in Kosova. Starting from the
development of physical infrastructure, to curriculum development
and teacher trainings, these strategic reforms are ambitious.
Unfortunately, these reforms are developing at a slow pace. The
destruction caused by war, the lack of public funds and, until
recently, the country’s ambiguous political status are considered
excuses for not clearly implementing an educational action plan.
As the writers of “The Strategy for the Development of Pre-
University Education in Kosovo – 2007-2017” admit, “the good
intentions of the government to prioritize education remained
only a lip service done to education” (p.6). A yearlong study
conducted by Balkan Investigative Report Network (BIRN) during
2008-2009 aimed to identify the problems the education system in
Kosova faces, and the report draws eerily similar conclusions to
those drawn by the MEST expert report. The BIRN report points out
several problems in the current primary and secondary education
system in Kosova. The report points out that ten years after the
end of the war, the education system remains one of the biggest
challenges in Kosova.
Despite all the investments since June 1999 in thedevelopment of educational institutional capacities, [and]implementation of the reforms, the quality of the educationcontinues to be low, and is characterized by severalproblems, such as the lack of adequate school textbooks,lack of physical educational infrastructure, schoolviolence, lack of systematic monitors, lack of inspection ofthe quality of education, drug abuse by a large number ofstudents, etc (p.8).
Reforms have proven to be unsuccessful and unproductive inthe development of educational quality. Many of thesereforms have been done in a centralized way and without theinvolvement of the educational experts. (p.9)
Thus, the BIRN report clearly states that the fundamental needs
for a quality education are far from being completely fulfilled
in Kosova. Despite several initiatives that MEST and various
other groups in civil society have undertaken, Kosova’s education
system still has a deep need for more financial and intellectual
investments and a need for exploring new approaches that ensure
quality teaching and learning.
As mentioned above, one major focus of educational reform has
been on teacher training. Teaching practices have undergone
reforms as Kosovar educators have been encouraged to implement
contemporary classroom strategies such as group-work, friendlier
teacher-student interactions, and differentiated and systematical
assessments for students. In the “Strategy for the Development of
Pre-University Education in Kosovo – 2007-2017,” the MEST Expert
Council stated that, “now, after completion of the curricular
reform, respective policies, programs and projects be developed
which will shift the focus of attention from curricular process
in order to prioritize teaching and teacher trainings” (p.14). In
other words, teacher training has become the primary focus of
educational reform in Kosova.
In conjunction with prioritizing teacher training, MEST has also
started a new process of teacher licensing. According to MEST,
the goal is that by “2017 all active teachers are included in
accredited programs of professional development and until 2010
all teachers must hold at least one license.” (p.35). MEST has
established the Committee for License which designed clear
guidelines for different categories of teachers’ licenses.
Currently, obtaining a teacher’s license is an ongoing process.
There are two types of licenses that teachers are given:
temporary and permanent. Temporary licenses are usually reserved
for those teachers who are still completing their teacher’s
education or are currently teaching but lack substantial
experience in education. A permanent license is given to those
experienced teachers who have gone through teacher’s education,
and pedagogical/educational trainings organized by MEST. This
licensing initiative is a product of MEST’s educational reforms
which envisions up-to-date training and development of effective
teaching skills for all Kosovar teachers.
Major stakeholders in the education system of Kosova realize the
importance of effective teaching to a strong and viable education
system. Thus, teacher training, workshops and licensing continue
to be developed. Two major initiatives to provide teacher
training were undertaken by MEST in conjunction with
international non-Governmental organizations. One such initiative
was delivered by Kosovo Educational Developments Program (KEDP),
which focused on teaching teachers the characteristics of a
student-centered pedagogy. This program was a result of
international cooperation as KEDP was established and implemented
by the University of Calgary in Canada. Another important
partnership with respect to teacher training was Kosovo Education
Center (KEC), a Kosovar NGO that focused on training teacher in
how to teach critical thinking in reading and writing. Overall,
around 11,200 Kosovar teachers have been trained by KEDP and
around 4,895 teachers participated in KEC training (A. Mexhuani,
personal communication, 20 April, 2009). However, despite these
initiatives to ensure teaching effectiveness, no formal
evaluations have been done to assess the impact of these
initiatives.
Knowledge of modern pedagogical practice is one aspect of
producing effective teachers. However, teachers should also be
exposed to the ideas of students, parents and the community in
regards to what they view as good teaching. Flutter and Rudduck
(2004) illustrate that considering student opinions, (called
pupils in this study), significantly enhances learning, teaching
and schooling generally. This research concludes that in order
for a teacher to be effective, the teacher must meet the student,
parent and community halfway. In addition, effective teachers
must navigate between student, parent, and community
expectations, and by being aware of these expectations make
appropriate adjustments to most effectively teach and deliver a
curriculum to a high standard.
In order to deliver a curriculum to a high standard, educators
need to know the effective manner in which to communicate with
students. Thus, consideration of student perceptions of effective
teachers is vital. To date, no research has been conducted with
respect to student perceptions of effective teachers/teaching in
Kosova. This begs the question of what do average Kosovar
secondary school students see as characteristics of an effective
teacher? It should be noted that the notions “good teacher” and
“effective teacher” are used interchangeably throughout this
study. The following research seeks to lucidly explore and answer
this question. It is hoped that the findings of this study will
be taken up by stakeholders of education in Kosova as a basis for
further research and guide the direction toward progressive
educational reforms in Kosova. The thesis will begin with a
comprehensive overview of literature pertaining to student
perceptions of effective teaching, as a way to contextualize this
issue within a larger academic setting. Following the literature
review, a detailed explanation of methodology and research
procedures will be provided. The study will then present and
discuss findings, connecting new insights to existing literature.
The study will conclude with my own personal reflection on the
matter at hand.
2.1. LITERATURE REVIEW
One of the most difficult aspects of identifying teacher
effectiveness is the general ambiguity of the term. A
comprehensive review of literature pertaining to teacher
effectiveness illustrates the complexity of identifying the
characteristics of good teachers. Much of the difficulty in
defining teacher effectiveness results from the lack of agreement
of what exactly entails effective teaching and concretely defines
effective teachers. Due to the difficulties of defining teacher
effectiveness, different methodological approaches have been used
to find exactly what makes a good teacher. Moreover, researchers
tend to stress the superiority of one approach over the others
when identifying the characteristics of effective teachers.
Ultimately, research into teacher effectiveness deals with two
main questions:
1. What is being measured? That is, research attempts toidentify the specific characteristics of effective teachers. Someresearch, for example, attempts to find specific personalitytraits of good teachers, while other research focuses more ongeneral characteristics.
2. How to measure effective teachers? Researchers mustdecide on the most appropriate method to identify thecharacteristics of an effective teacher. Some researchers, forexample, believe the most appropriate way to measure teachereffectiveness is through a quantitative approach, while othersbelieve in qualitative approaches. Some researchers see theimportant of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches,believing that a mix of both forms of inquiry offer the bestpicture of teacher effectiveness.
Despite the lack of agreement on what a good teacher is and how
you measure it, many studies have attempted to identify specific
characteristics of good teaching. A systematic analysis of these
studies reveal that many common characteristics of ‘good
teachers’ exist, but the variations in findings are highly
noticeable, and therefore an exact definition of the
characteristics of effective teaching remains unclear. Generally
speaking, a review of literature with respect to teacher
effectiveness shows that the qualities of effective teachers can
be divided into two major categories: affective qualities and
cognitive qualities. Literature shows that teachers are generally
considered effective if and when they meet the affective needs of
their students. In other words, teachers that are welcoming,
open, compassionate, caring and able to establish good relations
with students are more often than not considered effective
teachers. Additionally, teachers that meet the cognitive needs of
students are also considered effective. This means that student
perceive teachers that deliver a high standard of education as
more effective than those that do not. Some studies have also
tried to define effective teachers as those who prepare students
well for standardized tests. That is to say that some studies
have correlated effective teaching with academic achievement as
measured by standardized tests and grades. Given that this study
seeks to identify what qualities students perceive that effective
teachers possess, this literature review will not consider
studies on teacher effectiveness and academic achievement as
measured by test scores and grades as relevant. However, a sub-
section discussing the relationship between teacher effectiveness
and student academic achievement will be included in this study
because it is a current topic of discussion in educational
research. However, the following literature review will
primarily use the Affective and Cognitive qualities of effective
teachers as an operating framework for discussion and
interpretation.
In the following literature review, terms such “good teaching”,
“effective teaching”, and “effective teachers” will be used
interchangeably. The reader should note that good teaching is
considered by the writer to be teaching that is effective. For
the sake of clarity, therefore, words such as ‘good’ and
‘effective’ should be treated interchangeably and not too much
should be read into the possible differing meanings of these
words.
The literature review will begin with a discussion of the
difficulties present in defining teacher effectiveness. In
particular, this section will seek to identify the problems
inherent in the idea of defining teacher effectiveness by
identifying the difficulties in clearly identifying good
teaching. Despite this difficulty, the first section will also
suggest that despite the difficulty of defining teacher
effectiveness, a broad idea of effective teaching can be
developed. Following this section, an overview of the
methodological approaches that have been used to define teacher
effectiveness will be provided. Finally, the chapter will
conclude with a detailed analysis of studies that have attempted
to identify the characteristics of effective teachers. Each
study in this final section will be treated systematically using
the affective/cognitive qualities as an operating framework of
analysis. That is, each study will be analyzed by suggesting how
the findings of each study relate to qualities of teaching that
meet the affective and/or cognitive needs of students.
2.1.1. DEFINITION OF AN EFFECTIVE TEACHER
A survey of literature illustrates that coming to a concrete
definition of teacher effectiveness is difficult. The ambiguity
of good/effective teachers is well described by Thomas (1975, as
cited in Naciye, 1998:5) when he says, “a good teacher is one
that teaches well, much as a good surgeon operates with skills.
What makes a good teacher or a bad poet or a good surgeon only
the stars know; and they are not, as yet, willing to tell us the
secret.” Thomas does well to describe the difficulties in
identifying specifically the qualities of good teaching and
introduces the complexity of such a task. However, I disagree
with Thomas’ assertion that ‘only the stars know’ the
characteristics of an effective teacher. Although coming to a
complete definition may be difficult, it is my assertion that
effective teaching is something that is tangible and
identifiable.
One major difficulty in defining effective teachers is that the
qualities of effective teaching have altered over time. For
example, Cruickshank and Haefele (2001) point out that even if we
come to an agreement about the definition of an effective
teacher, the view changes over time. They mention the fact that
in the 1950s an effective teacher was considered to be the “ideal
teacher;” in the1960s it was an “analytic teacher;” in the 1970s
we had “effective teachers,” “dutiful teachers,” and “competent
teachers;” in the1980s “expert teachers,”and “reflective
teachers;” and in the1990s “satisfying teachers,”and “diversity
responsive teachers” (26 – 28). Moreover, a study conducted by
the National Association of Secondary School Principals (1997 as
cited in Wang et al., 2007:2) showed that student perception of
effective teachers yields different results when done in
different time periods. The study compared student evaluations of
teachers in 1983 and 1997 and what was considered as a top
attribute of a good teacher in 1983 was different from the
attribute identified in 1997. In the 1983 study, the top
attributes of a good teacher were: explaining things clearly,
spending time to help students and having a sense a humour.
However, in the 1997 study, the top attributes of a good teacher
were identified to be: a teacher’s sense of humour, the ability
to make the class interesting, and subject/content knowledge.
The changing nature of society further clouds our ability to
define teacher effectiveness precisely. Taking a historical
approach to his analysis of teacher effectiveness, Borich (1996)
states that defining a good/effective teacher was not difficult
to do in the past:
If you had grown up a century ago, you would have been ableto answer “What is an effective teacher? Very simple: A goodteacher was a good person – a role model who met thecommunity ideal for a good citizen, a good parent, and agood employee. At that time teachers were judged primarilyon their goodness as people and only secondarily on theirbehavior in the classroom. They were expected to be honest,hardworking, generous, friendly and considerate, and todemonstrate these qualities in their classroom by beingauthoritative, organized, disciplined, insightful, anddedicated (p. 2)
What has become clear, however, is that defining teacher
effectiveness today is much more difficult. Developments in the
field of education have led to new insights into quality
education and these changes have resulted in new perspectives
with respect to the role and behavior of a teacher in an
educational environment.
Changes in cultural values and expectations have also altered the
definition of effective teaching. In an increasingly
multicultural world, we need to be aware of different cross-
cultural interpretations of good teaching. For example, in China
a good teacher is described as someone who is virtuous, in
England as a superman, in the US as an artist, in Norway as a
caregiver and interpreters of text (Gudmundsdottir & Saabar, 1991
as cited in Naciye, 1998:6). If we do not have clear and widely
acceptable criteria of what it means to be an effective teacher,
how can we utilize any method designed for that purpose? This
question is noted by Tetenbaum (1975) when he states:
In studying the validity of any instrument, one must ask:valid for what purpose? In other words, what is thecriterion against which the instrument is being validated?Regarding students ratings of teachers, the criteria isgenerally expressed as “teacher effectiveness”. This beingthe case, the fundamental issue which must first beaddressed is: What is meant by teacher effectiveness? (p.427)
What Tetenbaum illustrates is that the problem is not only in
defining effective teachers, but also in how we describe those
characteristics and how we agree on the most appropriate way to
measure them (Tuckman, 1995). Thus, a review of literature
suggests that defining teacher effectiveness is a difficult task.
Historical, social and cultural factors influence and change
perceptions of effective teaching. However, it is my contention
that despite the difficulties in identifying effective teachers,
broad strokes or themes of effective teaching are possible to
identify. These broad strokes or themes will be developed in the
section entitled “Some Characteristics of an Effective Teacher.”
2.1.2. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MEASURING AN EFFECTIVE
TEACHER
Two methods of measuring teacher effectiveness were identified by
Cohen and Manion (1981): normative and interpretive. Normative
research utilizes certain criteria as defined by other research
about effective teachers and asks students to rate their
teachers’ effectiveness on those criteria. Meanwhile, the
interpretive research approach gathers information about
students’ perception of effective teachers without a particular
starting-point criteria or assumption, but allows students to
express their opinions on the characteristics of an effective
teacher as they perceive them based on their experiences in and
outside the classroom.
Most of the research conducted on students’ perception of
effective teachers employs a normative approach (Allen, 1959;
Blishen, 1969; Dale, 1976a, Darmon & Rich, 1988; Entwistle, 1987;
Sandford, 1984; Taylor, 1962). This type of research usually
identifies two aspects of good teaching: teachers’ competency to
teach and their relations with students (Kutnick & Jules, 1993).
On the other hand, the interpretive research approach, although
not very common, “shows that good teachers are acknowledged for
their relational qualities….[which] include understanding,
patience, humility, encouragement (of all pupils) to participate,
praise and controlling behaviour democratically” (Kutnick &
Jules, 1993:402).
Wagenaar (1995) supports the interpretive research approach,
arguing against measuring the effectiveness of the teacher
numerically as, according to her, a good teacher is a
multifaceted notion. She says,
“Effective teaching is more than clear outlines written onthe board and good speaking mannerisms….[it] also includesteaching students how to question assumptions, how toconnect the course content with other content in the majorand outside the major, how to learn to discover knowledgefor themselves, how to create a new whole from discreteparts, how to use what is taught in their own lives asstudents and future citizens, how to work with otherscollaboratively, how to think in the manner of a discipline,how to critique established ways of knowing, and the like.This is not an exhaustive list, but it illustrates thatconceptualization of effective teaching should move fromexamining only teaching behaviors” (p. 65).
Wagenaar illustrates that part of teaching is intangible and that
therefore analyzing only numerical data does not provide
researchers with a complete picture of a teacher. A qualitative
approach, according to Wagenaar, is more appropriate in measuring
teacher effectiveness because it allows for these intangible
elements to be considered in research.
Many studies have suggested utilizing a variety of methods in
order to assess student perceptions of teacher effectiveness:
focus group interviews (Forrester-Jones & Hatzidimitriadou,
2006), student diaries (Fazey, 1993), suggestion boxes for
students (Hounsell, 1999), students’ reflective paper (Malikow,
2006), free response – essay-based strategy where students write
about the effectiveness of their teachers (Kutnick & Jules, 1993)
or students descriptive essay (Blishen, 1969; Payne, 1987). It is
believed that measuring teacher effectiveness with the use of
multiple methods and sources of data is more valid than using one
single design (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Webb et al (1969)
argue that relying on single source of data (i.e. method) is,
“biased by the deficiency characteristics of that particular
method” (as cited in Lattuca et al, 2007:82). A clear picture of
an effective teacher, then, would utilize the use of multiple
methods of research in order to yield the clearest picture of an
effective teacher.
An attempt to map out, or explain more fully, the richness and
complexity of human behavior by studying it from more than one
standpoint is known as triangulation (Cohen and Manion,
1986:254). Altrichter et al. (1996) argue that triangulation
“gives a more detailed and balanced picture of the situation” (p.
117), and therefore when applied to studying teacher
effectiveness offers a more complete and holistic view.
A review of different methods of inquiry reveals that a variety
of different methodological techniques can be used to study the
issue of teacher of effectiveness. However, a qualitative
approach combined with triangulation is the most appropriate
method as this enables the researcher to conduct an interpretive
type of research using direct personal information from
participants. This direct personal information is supplemented
with multiple ways of collecting data therefore providing a
diverse perspective on the issue. This is the path that my own
research employed.
2.1.3. SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF AN EFFECTIVE TEACHER
As the last two section of this study illustrate, the issue of
teacher effectiveness is so complex that researchers have tackled
this issue using a variety of methods and perspectives. These
different approaches yielded both similar and different
characteristics with respect to effective teachers. This suggests
that clear and exact definitions of teacher effectiveness may be
difficult to come by. However, I believe that broad, theme-based
categories can be used to identify the qualities of effective
teachers. It is therefore my contention that a review of
literature pertaining to teacher effectiveness will reveal that,
generally speaking, the qualities of effective teachers can be
divided into characteristics or traits that teachers possess that
meet both the affective and cognitive needs of students.
This contention is based on Miron and Segal’s (1978:28) study of
Israeli students where they also reviewed the research literature
on teacher effectiveness and classified teacher effectiveness
into two main categories: cognitive aspect and
emotional/personality of the teachers. On the cognitive aspect,
the effective teacher stimulates interest for knowledge search
and absorption, develops thinking and working skills and provides
encouragement and motivation for academic achievement by
communicating and explaining the subject matter very clearly
(Eble, 1971; French, 1957; Musella & Rusch, 1968). On the other
hand, effective teachers also provide students with emotional
support in response to learning (Mourer, 1960) and demonstrate a
willingness to help those students in need. In addition,
effective teachers are expected to have enthusiastic, friendly
and flexible personality traits in and outside the classroom
(Crawford & Bradshaw, 1968; Grush & Costin, 1975). Miron and
Segal are supported by Brown (1971) who argues that effective
teachers provide what he called confluent education. Brown argued
that in order for a teacher to be effective, he or she needs to
possess skills that tackle both aspects of the student—the
cognitive and affective aspects. To Brown, an effective teacher
instructs in a way that leads to the “integration or flowing
together of the affective and cognitive elements in individual
and group learning” (p. 3). Only this type of education, Brown
argues, is complete and effective.
Assertions made by both Brown (1971) and Miron and Segal (1978)
are supported by a multitude of studies that reinforce the
suggestion that effective teachers meet the cognitive and
affective needs of their students. According to Kratz (1896 as
cited in Musgrove & Taylor, 1969:171) the most important
characteristic of teachers according to students is their
willingness to help students in their studies. Although this is
an old study, it is important to note that a component of this
dual cognitive-affective relationship of effective teachers that
Brown and Miron and Segal argued for has been part of the
effective teachers’ literature for many years. Furthermore, in
his study, Hollis (1935 as cited in Musgrove & Taylor, 1969:171)
was a bit more specific and argued that the teacher
characteristics valued the most by students was the ability to
patiently explain difficult concepts. This is reinforced later by
Michael et al. (1951) who studied American students in their last
years of secondary education and concluded that students see the
methods of teaching that a teacher employs as the most important
attributes of a good teacher while the teachers’ personality and
his/her means of reinforcing discipline were the least important
attributes. These studies are useful for my purposes because they
point to the idea that students view effective as those teachers
that meet the cognitive and affective needs of students.
The line of thinking that effective teachers meet the affective
and academic needs of their students is further supported by
Allen (1959 as cited in Musgrove & Taylor, 1969:172) in a study
with English secondary school students. Allen states that
teaching methods (i.e. pedagogical skills) as well as a teacher’s
sense of humor, friendliness and ability to make a lesson
interesting were the most important attributes of a good teacher
as defined by students. Moreover, Musgrove & Taylor’s (1969)
study with students from junior schools, secondary schools and
grammar schools, found out that secondary students view a
teacher’s personal qualities, especially the teacher’s sense of
humor, being good-tempered and demonstrating cheerfulness, as
important characteristics of a good teacher. Hamacheck (1975)
argued that students view a teacher to be good if s/he is,
“helpful in school work, explained lesson and assignments
clearly….used examples in teaching and….has a sense of humor” (p.
240).
There are some similar findings from more recent research as well
that shows that some of the characteristics that are believed to
symbolize an effective teacher do change over time and cross
historical context, but there are also some that do not. It is
not uncommon for the recently conducted studies to match and/or
support some of the conclusions of previous, somewhat older
studies. To this note, Ogden et al. (1994) characterized
effective teachers as adaptable, caring, collaborative,
committed, confident, creative, dedicated, demanding, energetic,
persistent, knowledgeable, enthusiastic, emotionally stable,
motivated, flexible, friendly, organized, patient, sensitive,
listener, tolerant. (p. 6). McCabe (1995) builds on the
sentiments of Ogden et al. (1994) and points out that according
to students, the best secondary school teachers were those who
showed competency in the subject matter and were able to
enthusiastically convey this competency. Moreover, she states
that, “students perceived the best teachers as those who come
across as very human, yet very professional at the same time,
[teachers who]….were organized and prepared….were subject-
centered as well as student-centered teachers” (p. 125). Thus,
these studies show that effective teachers possess the ability to
meet the cognitive and affective needs of students.
Buckner and Bickel (1991) identified a long list of
characteristics that according to students good teachers should
possess. Students viewed good teachers as those who listen and
respect their students, are kind and warm, friendly and easy to
talk with, are competent in the subject matter, are fair in their
grading, are willing to help those students who might need extra
help. Personal qualities of teachers were also viewed as
important attributes in determining teacher effectiveness by
Naciye (1988) whose survey contained open-ended questions where
Turkish students were able to express their opinions about the
characteristics of an effective teacher. He concluded that
students perceive a good teacher to be someone who respects
students and shows understanding for their needs and concerns.
Once again, Buckner and Bickel (1991) and Naciye (1988) confirm
that an effective teacher holds both affective and cognitive
characteristics.
A comprehensive review of literature pertaining to student
perspectives of effective teaching shows that a simple definition
of an effective teacher is difficult to establish. That is, no
definite conclusions can be drawn that directly identify
characteristics of effective teachers. Moreover, White et al.
(1987: 90-91 as cited in Dewar, 2002: 62) reviewed 300 studies of
teacher effectiveness and concluded that no single teaching
behavior has a strong association with student learning. What
seems true, though, is that effective teachers meet the cognitive
and affective needs of their students. How they do this and what
students perceived as meeting these needs depends on the study.
That some similar characteristics have been identified suggests a
certain credibility of these characteristics.
Recognizing the difficulty of identifying exact characteristics
of effective teaching, McBer (2000) proposes a model of teacher
effectiveness that incorporates three critical factors: teaching
skills, professional characteristics, and classroom climate that
ultimately had significant influence on student academic
progress. He argues that all effective teachers have qualities
that encompass these three major categories. He also states that
so called “biometric data,” such as a teacher’s age, experience
and qualification does not necessarily predict teaching
effectiveness. It seems that McBer, like others, realizes the
multi-faceted and intricate nature of teaching, and recognizes
the difficulty of specifically identifying the characteristics of
good teaching.
Although controversial and full of diversity, the issue of
teacher effectiveness has not been left without exploration.
However, the current literature informs us that the more this
issue is investigated, the more questions and ambiguous
definitions and findings are presented. One cannot help but
think that students perceive teachers differently depending on
the cultural context in which a student is found. A review of
literature has shown, however, that one common theme regarding
teacher effectiveness is that the effective teacher is able to
meet the affective and cognitive needs of his or her students,
regardless of the historical and cultural setting.
The above mentioned studies were selected as they were deemed
most appropriate to address the main issues of this study.
However, one should be cautious of the direct applicability of
these studies to a different time period in a different cultural
context. Despite the fact that there are some similarities as
mentioned above that cross some studies from different time
periods and cultural contexts, some differences do remain.
Moreover, those differences seem to continue as new studies are
conducted. In other words, these studies illustrate the
characteristics of effective teachers during a certain period of
time and cultural context. For example, Allen (1959) and Musgrove
and Taylor (1969) studies were conducted with students from
England, Michael et al. (1951) drew conclusions after examining
students from America, Naciye (1988) had Turkish students in a
sample, and Miron and Segal’s (1978) study was done with Israeli
students. These are all different cultural contexts worth
recognizing. Kosova is a much different cultural setting than
most of these studies, which were conducted predominately in the
US or UK with a few exceptions. Therefore, although these studies
may provide certain insights, given that this study deals with
present day Kosovar society, it is safe to assume that complete
and direct applicability is difficult to achieve. The insights
from these studies can be applied to this thesis, but must be
done so with caution.
2.1.4. EFFECTIVE TEACHERS AND STUDENT STANDARDIZED ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
A commonly held belief in defining teacher effectiveness is that
teachers are effective if they produced high achieving students
as measured by standardized test scores and academic results in
general. According to Donald (1997) the “measure of teacher
effectiveness has to be based on long-term pupil gains in
achievement areas recognized as important goals of education” (p.
5). In process-product research, teachers’ effectiveness is
measured by their product—students— student learning and academic
achievement. Research about student ratings of teacher
effectiveness has shown a positive correlation between ratings
and learning. In other words, students rated as more effective
those teachers from whom they learned most (Kulik, 2001:12).
Other studies confirm the relationship that student achievement
is an indicator of effective teachers (Abrami, 2001; d’Apollonia
& Abrami, 1997; Cohen, 1981, 1982; Costin et al., 1971; Feldman,
1989c; Kulik & McKachie, 1975; Marsh & Roche, 1997).
The process-product relationship is perhaps one of the most
commonly used, yet, highly debatable, criteria used for measuring
teacher effectiveness. Studies have examined the relationship
between teaching and students’ learning as measured by academic
achievement (Anderson et al., 1979; Brophy, 1973, Brophy &
Evertson, 1976; Good & Grows, 1975, Soar & Soar, 1972). Many
studies have pointed to the relationship between the
characteristic of effective teachers and student academic
achievement (Demmon-Berger, 1986; Koustsoulis, 2003; Lang et al.,
1993; Lowman, 1995; Witcher et al., 2001). The credibility and
strength of this relationship still remains open to discussions
and further studies.
However, other studies have shown little or no relationship
between an effective teacher and student academic achievement.
Zumwalt (1982) differentiates between two types of research
regarding teacher effectiveness. In addition to the process-
product approach to teacher effectiveness, Zumwalt identifies
another type of research known as descriptive research.
Descriptive research attempts to describe the elements of a good
teacher and does so including other factors besides student
achievement. Descriptive research portrays an effective teacher
as someone who has the ability “to adopt a culturally congruent
teaching style” (Kleinfeld et al., 1983:90). In other words,
according to this approach, a good teacher is s/he who adopts
his/her teaching style and materials to the cultural context s/he
is in.
Other variables beyond the influence and control of teachers
impact test scores and academic achievement (Berk, 1986). Among
variables beyond teacher control include students’
characteristics (Boardman et al., 1974; Cronbarch & Snow, 1977;
Glasman & Biniaminov, 1981; Hanushek, 1972; Levin, 1970; Mayeske
& Beaton, 1975; Medley et al., 1984; Michaelson, 1970; Murnane,
1975; Summers & Wolfe, 1977; Wiley, 1976; Winkler, 1975), school
characteristics (Bridge et al., 1979; Brookover et al., 1979;
Cohn & Millman, 1975; Kiseling, 1969, 1970; Glasman & Biniaminov,
1981; Haertel, 1986), and test characteristics that are meant to
measure students’ academic achievement (Angoff, 1971; Berk, 1986;
Hambleton & Eignor, 1987; Horst et al., 1974; McClung, 1979;
Mehrens & Philips, 1986; Leinhardt, 1983; Linn, 1981; Schmidt et
al., 1983; Soar & Soar, 1983; Popham, 1983; Williams, 1980).
Moreover, some studies have asserted that there is no evidence
that effective teachers as rated by students produce student
academic progress (Crumbley, 1996; Damron, 1996; Greenwald &
Gillmore, 1997a, 1997b; Rodin & Rodin , 1972; Williams & Ceci,
1997). What this literature illustrates is the difficulty in
judging the effectiveness of a teacher based only on standardized
test achievement. We must make clear the distinction between
student performance and teacher effectiveness. These are
fundamentally different things in which no real cause and effect
relationship can exist. A teacher can remain effective even if a
student performs poorly on tests, while a student can perform
well even if he or she has an ineffective teacher. Thus, to judge
the effectiveness of a teacher based only on test scores is to
reduce the issue to simple and unrealistic reasoning.
Literature that examines the relationship between teacher
effectiveness and student standardized academic achievement can
be divided into two groups: those that see a clear relationship
between effective teachers and grades / scores and those that do
not. This continues to be a contentious issue in education.
Another contentious issue in education related to teacher
effectiveness is associated with the fact that some studies have
pointed out additional variables used as indicators of teacher
effectiveness, although sometimes these variables are
inconsistent. These variables include students’ expected and/or
actual grades, student interest in the subject area in relation
to the evaluation of their teachers (Addision et al., 2006,
Aleamoni, 1999; Algozzine et al., 2004; Feldman, 1979; Finegan &
Siegfried, 2000; Howard & Maxwell, 1980; Marsh (1987); Marsh &
Cooper, 1981; Marsh & Dunkin, 1992; Strohkirch & Hargett, 1999;
Prave & Bavril, 1993; Young and Shaw, 1999), teachers personality
characteristics (Anderson & Siegfried, 1997; Feldman, 1986;
Jones, 1989; Renaud & Murray, 1996; Woessner-Kelly & Woessner,
2006 ), teaching styles employed by teachers (Ben-Chaim & Zoller,
2001; Malikow, 2007; Zhang et al., 2005), course context, course
characteristics, classroom/learning environment (Anderson &
Siegfried, 1997; Braskamp & Ory, 1994; Cothran et al., 2002;
Dudley & Shawver, 1991; Fisher & Kent, 1998; Ireson & Hallam,
2005; Koushki & Kuhn, 1982; Marsh & Dunkin, 1992; Moss, 1997;
Whitworth et al., 2002; Wierstra et al., 1999;), and student
characteristics (Anderson & Siegried, 1997; Chen & Hoshower,
1998; Feldman, 1977; Koermer, & Petelle, 1991; Koushki & Kuhn,
1982; Prave & Baril, 1993; Tatro, 1995; Watchtel, 1998).
These studies show that researchers have used investigated
variables to explain teacher effectivess. These studies are
fruitful in that they explain possible factors for teacher
effectiveness, but they ignore the important factor of student
perceptions. Students are the ones who work closely with teachers
and therefore it is their attitudes toward effective teachers
that ultimately illuminate what a good teacher truly is. If the
students view certain characteristics as effective, then one may
conclude that such characteristics make the teacher effective.
Since this thesis considers students’ perceptions of effective
teachers, the research done in the above-mentioned areas of
teacher effectiveness are out of the scope of this study.
However, it is important to recognize that this view of measuring
effective teachers continues to be discussed and it illustrates
other ways the scholarly debate regarding teacher effectiveness
is being viewed.
2.1.5. RESEARCH INTO EFFECTIVE TEACHERS IN KOSOVA
To date no research has been conducted in Kosova with respect to
student perceptions of effective teaching. As such, Kosova is
fertile ground for such intellectual inquiries and explorations.
There is also a lack of research on students’ perceptions of
effective teachers in a context similar to Kosova—that is,
societies that have gone through recent societal changes in the
same way or similar to Kosova. Although this study could have
been enriched with such previous research, the scholarly
situation did not provide this luxury. Therefore, when reviewing
literature about this topic, we were always cognizant of the
cultural and historical differences between previous research and
research that we conducted.
Therefore, this study provides beginning investigations into an
area relatively new to this type of research in this part of the
world. More specifically, the study will examine what do average
Kosovar secondary school students see as characteristics of an
effective teacher? The aim of this research is two-fold. First,
it is hoped that results of this study will provide valuable
insights regarding the notion of effective teacher/teaching and
serve as a catalyst for future, large-scale, research in this
area of education. Moreover, this will be among the first studies
ever conducted in Kosova that explore a significant educational
issue such as teacher effectiveness. Ultimately, the results of
this study will have 1) micro-level and, 2) macro-level
educational, and social, implications. In a micro-level, the
results will provide insights for teacher-student relationships
within the classroom and school settings. Secondary school
teachers will be informed about the perceptions and opinions of
average students regarding a good teacher. As a teacher, this is
important to know as it might guide daily academic plans,
behavior and activities in directions that are seen as
appropriate and effective for your audience—students. On a macro-
level, the findings and analysis derived from this study can be
included in different teacher training courses, workshops and
professional development activities. At the same time, these
findings and analysis of teacher effectiveness can be utilized in
one way or another by school administration, personnel
departments as well as in recruitment, promotional and
developmental activities provided for teachers by directors or
other administrators.
In the following chapter, a detailed explanation of the
methodology employed in this study will be provided. Data
analysis will then be used to interpret interviews with students.
Finally, the implications of the findings of this study will be
further developed and connections to academic/educational
research as well their potential educational implications will be
drawn. The notion of “teaching intelligence” will also be
introduced and elaborated on. In addition, the conclusion of
this study will also provide beginning insights into possible
suggestions for educational reforms in Kosova.
3.1. METHODOLOGY
The following section will examine the methodological aspects of
my inquiry into Kosovar student perceptions of effective
teachers. This examination will begin with a discussion of the
knowledge claim used in my research and why such a claim is
appropriate for this study. The second major section of this
chapter will justify why qualitative research provides the best
method of inquiry for this topic. Furthermore, this section will
elaborate on the research design used, case study and participant
selection method employed and methods used to obtain data.
Additionally, the procedural setup of the study will be outlined
and a description of how data was analyzed will be discussed.
This chapter will conclude with an explanation of the
trustworthiness and credibility of the data analysis and the
ethical issues relevant to this inquiry.
Every research makes “certain assumptions about how they will
learn and what they will learn during their inquiry” (Creswell,
2003:6). This is known as the research paradigm (Lincoln and
Guba, 2000). Due to the descriptive and exploratory nature of
this study, a Constructivism perspective was deemed to be the
most appropriate for the design, implementation and analysis of
this study. The basic assumption of Constructivisim, according
to Creswell (2003), is the view that, people, in order to
understand the world in which they live, develop subjective
meanings towards different things they might have experienced.
Employing a Constructivist’s point of view means acknowledging
that, “each one’s way of making sense of the world is as valid
and worthy of respect as any other” (Crotty, 2003:58). The
Constructivist’s emphasis on an individual’s perspective
(Schwandt, 1994) is aligned with the fundamental assumption of
this study in that students’ perceptions of effective teachers
are important, although they might be diverse and even
contradictory with each other at times. The central question of
Constructionism/Constructivism1 is: What are their [individuals]
reported perceptions, “truths”, explanations, beliefs, and
worldview? (Patton, 2002:132).
1 “Constructivism is also used, often interchangeably with
constructionism” (Crotty, 2003:217)
Furthermore, it is believed that these perceptions are also
highly influenced by the context in which they were created and
developed. The impact of context, whether that is social,
economical or political, can not be ignored in the development of
students’ perceptions towards effective teaching and education in
general. To determine the impact of that context and to
investigate the attributes of good teachers according to
students, students’ involvement is more than necessary. Exploring
students personal, subjective and collective experiences and
opinions regarding effective teachers, and school in general, can
identify potential common characteristics of effective teachers
for further studies and developments in education. In order to
get rich information from the students about effective teachers,
an interaction-style approach is more than necessary. By
interacting and discussing with students, the characteristics of
effective teachers can be learned. This is a qualitative approach
to studying students’ perceptions of effective teachers. A
Qualitative approach makes it possible “to document the world
from the point of view of the people studied” (Hammersley,
1992:165). A Qualitative approach enables data to occur naturally
without forcing it in one or another direction. Moreover, this
approach focuses more on the “meanings rather than behaviors”
(Silverman, 2000:8) of the data collected from the participants
and relies as much as possible on their views (Creswell, 2003:8).
A Qualitative approach is appropriate in exploring
characteristics of teacher effectiveness according to secondary
school students in Kosova, as the academic global literature is
unable to provide us with a clear definition of teacher
effectiveness, and in the context of Kosova no previous research
exists regarding this issues. According to Singleton et al
(1988), the qualitative methods are employed “when one knows
relatively little about the subject under investigation” (p. 298-
299). Strauss and Corbin (1990) agree and also advocate
qualitative methods for issues where not much clear and
comprehensive information is available.
Attempting to study this issue from the quantitative approach
will result in something that would lack substantial meaning. We
cannot present students with lists of characteristics of
effective teachers and ask them to rate those because the
literature has not been successful in providing a credible and
comprehensive list of identified characteristics of effective
teachers in the Kosovar context. In addition, presenting students
with an existing list of characteristics of an effective teacher
and asking them their opinions yields the risk of the lack of
credibility of those findings as we are faced with suggestive
bias. For example, “a good teacher gives us homework” can be one
of the statements that may supposedly identify a characteristic
of a good teacher. We would ask this to the students by
presenting it in a questionnaire and it is very likely that most
of the students would agree with it. However, this answer would
be obtained by a suggestive factor because we are suggesting to
the students that homework assignments are associated with good
teachers.
This study did not take this approach. In this study, students
were asked about their perceptions and opinions of an effective
teacher and during an interaction – semi-structured interview –
students would elaborate on their insights, perceptions and
examples about effective teachers. This will be further explained
in the data collection sections of this study.
In a qualitative approach, “a good teacher gives us homework”
will come directly and naturally from the students comments as
they describe and explain an effective teacher. A Qualitative
approach provides student-induced responses and not study-induced
responses. This is an approach that provides “a “deeper”
understanding of social phenomena” (Sliverman, 2000:89). A
qualitative approach, according to Bogdan and Biklen (1982),
follows a path with very specific guidelines. To them,
qualitative studies begin by “working with data, organizing it,
breaking it into manageable units, synthesizing it, searching for
patterns, discovering what is important and what is to be
learned, and deciding what you will tell others" (p. 145).
Subjective experiences play an important role in understanding
human perceptions. Subsequently, Constructivism offers a window
to understanding the multiple factors that influence an
individual’s beliefs and attitudes. A qualitative approach is the
means to collecting these personal beliefs. Thus, semi-structured
interviews were most suitable in determining student perceptions
of effective teachers. A quantitative approach would not provide
the nuances and richness of these personal perceptions, and thus
would be unable to provide a substantial understanding of the
characteristics of effective teachers.
3.1.1. RESEARCH DESIGN – CASE STUDY
The case study approach to qualitative analysis constitutesa specific way of collecting, organizing, and analyzingdata; in that sense it represents an analyzing data; in thatsense it represents an analysis process. The purpose is togather comprehensive, systematic, and in-depth informationabout each case of interest. The analysis process results ina product; a case study. Thus, the term case study can refer toeither the process of analysis or the product of analysis,or both.
(Patton, 2002:447)
To obtain detailed information about secondary school students’
perceptions on effective teachers, a case study approach was
utilized. The case study enables the researcher to attain
comprehensive and rich information about the issue being studied
by focusing on one case and studying it in details. For the
purpose of this study, an instrumental case study was used.
According to Stake (1994 cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1998:237)an
instrumental case study is when “a particular case is examined to
provide insight into an issue.” Although case studies can provide
us with very specific information about a particular issue, it
also enables us to come to some broad generalizations some of the
time2. Case studies can provide suggestions and recommendations
for future, large-scale research, and, if the qualitative
standards are followed systematically, we can extrapolate our
findings to other cases and/or broader context. Campbell (1975)
argues that case study data should be viewed as the initial and
minor steps towards a bigger generalization.
The case study of this research was a typical secondary school
gymnasium in Prishtina, Kosova. More specifically, through
interviews students of this school were asked to identify the
characteristics of an effective teacher. Secondary students were
used in this study for three reasons. First, secondary education
meets my own professional interests and experiences. The second
reason why we have chosen to investigate secondary school student
perception of effective teachers is because secondary school is
an integral period in the development of students. It is in
secondary school where students develop the higher cognitive
skills and attributes to make them successful in post-secondary
education. Additionally, currently in Kosova, educational reforms
are focused primarily on secondary education. This provides the
needed bridge between the scholarly work of this study to actual
and educational reform.
2 Advantages and disadvantages of the case study will be elaborated on inthe Conclusion section where the study’s limitations are mentioned.
3.1.2. DATA COLLECTION – METHODS
Semi-structured, face-to-face, interviews were conducted to
collect the data for this study. The interview is an appropriate
method “to generate detailed accounts rather than brief answers
or general statements” (Riessman, 2008:23) that suits the
philosophical and methodological assumption of the study. The
interview is a qualitative data collection strategy that enables
the researcher to “capture direct quotations about people’s
personal perspectives and experiences” (Patton, 2002:40). With an
interview it is possible to “enter into the other person’s
perspective. Qualitative interviewing begins with the assumption
that the perspective of others is meaningful…We interview to find
out what is in and on someone else’s mind…” (Patton, 2002:341).
Thus, the interview was deemed the best method to extract the
data needed for this study. Since this study pertains to student
perceptions of effective teachers, the interview is the best
method to directly address the scope of this study.
3.1.2.1. INTERVIEWS
The interviews were semi-structured or, as Patton (2002:342)
calls it, used a General Interview Approach. Before interviews,
we analyzed scholarly literature pertaining to effective
teachers. Then, we developed an operating framework using
affective and cognitive characteristics of effective teachers
according to students as guiding concepts for my interview
schedule. During the interview, the participants were asked to 1)
identify and elaborate on the characteristics of an effective
teacher and 2) identify and describe the characteristics of an
effective teacher they currently have or had throughout their
educational experience. ‘Elaboration probes’ were used to
encourage participants to further explain a particular issue or
notion mentioned during the interview. On average, one interview
lasted for 20 minutes. After a week of maintaining study-journals
(see below section 3.1.3.2 “Study-Journals”), a second set of
individual interviews was held to further discuss the students’
impressions of effective teachers as noted in their study
journals.
3.1.2.2. STUDY-JOURNALS
Following initial interviews, each participant was asked to
maintain a study-journal for one week. In this journal,
participants noted examples of behaviors and/or characteristics
that any of their teachers demonstrated that they thought was an
element of effective teaching. Impressions and comments made in
their study-journal were used as discussion items in their second
interview. Students also wrote about the activities teachers did
in classroom that they thought were effective. Because of
ethical implications, in this case confidentiality, participants
kept their study-journals.
3.1.3. PARTICIPANTS
As a design strategy, this study employed purposeful sampling of
a typical Kosovar secondary school/Gymnasium. More specifically,
participants, students from this school, were selected for
interview by employing typical-case sampling. This is a sampling
technique that includes participants that possess “average-like”
characteristics. According to Patton (2002), “the purpose of a
qualitative profile of one or more typical case is to describe
and illustrate what is typical” (p. 236). Overall, four secondary
school students from one case-site school were interviewed for
this study.
3.1.3.1. SCHOOL
SFG in Prishtina, Kosova was the school/case site selected from
where the participants were interviewed. This school has 453
students total. Tenth grade contains 121 students (48 males and
73 females) and the 13th grade contains 123 students (59 males
and 69 females). SFG was founded between the years 1941 to 1945.
SFG has 25 teachers, all of which are trained in critical
thinking in reading and writing. Each class contains a range of
30 to 40 students. SFG is a typical gymnasium in Kosova because
it shares similar demographics with other gymnasiums in Kosova.
SFG was selected as a case/site study for this research due to
its characteristics in terms of size, student population and
curriculum with other gymnasiums in Kosova. SFG fits Patton’s
(2002) criteria for a typical-case sampling that a site should
not be “in any major way atypical, extreme, deviant, or intensely
unusual” (p. 236). In other words, SFG is a typical Secondary
Gymnasium in Kosova.
3.1.3.2. STUDENTS
With the help of a senior homeroom teacher3 at SFG, participants
were chosen to interview. The teacher was instructed to select
four students, two, one male and one female, from grade 10 and
two, one male and one female, from grade 13. Grades 10 and 13
were chosen because they provide the range of schooling
experience of secondary students in Kosova. That is, grade 10
students are new to secondary school while grade 13 students are
finishing. This provides a range of potential experiences and
possible perceptions regarding the characteristics of effective
teachers. Two males and two females were selected to participate
in this study to explore the possibility that gender plays a role
in determining student perceptions of effective teachers. All
3 Homeroom Teacher – a teacher who is in charge of a particular classregarding its students’ academic and behavior development. This teacher meetswith his/her homeroom at least once a week and discusses any academic andbehavioral issues that they might have. The homeroom teacher organizes parentmeetings at least twice per semester and updates parents about their child’sacademic and behavioral progress. The homeroom teacher’s duties are inaddition to any academic teaching that a teacher may have.
students were from the Upper Secondary Education level (age range
15-19 years old)4. The teacher was asked to select four average
students. Average was defined as someone whose cumulative grade
point average falls in 3.0 to 4.0 categories, out of 5.0.
Table 3.1. Demographic information of students interviewed for
this study
Initials Grade
level
Age Gender CumulativeGrade PointAverage
1 A.Sh. 10th 16 Male 4.02 M.Zh. 10th 16 Female 3.93 Sh.C. 13th 18 Male 3.54 K.J. 13th5 18 Female 3.8
3.1.4. PROCEDURAL SETUP
Once the participants were identified, a pre-interview group
session with them was organized. This was to give informed
4 The current pre-university education system in Kosova is structured inthree levels: Level 0: Pre-primary Education (normally ages 3-6), Level 1:Primary Education (first stage of basic education) for 5 years (normally ages6-12), Level 2: Lower Secondary Education (second stage of basic education)for 4 years (normally ages 12-15), Level 3: Upper Secondary Education(normally ages 15 to 19) - vocational/professional schools or programs withinschools that last 3 years or more general secondary school education providedby some programs and schools, gymnasiums, that last 4 years. Students are freeto choose the program/school they want to enroll in the upper secondaryeducation provided that they fulfill the entrance requirements.
5 In Kosova’s education system the following grades are used forassessments: 5 – excellent, 4 – very good, 3 – good, 2 – satisfactory, 1 –unsatisfactory, poor, fail.
details to the participants about the goals of the study and what
is expected from them. This was done to also establish a rapport
between the researcher and the participants. Very shortly after
the pre-interview session, the individual interviews took place.
Interviews took place in one of the classrooms in SFG and they
were all audio-recorded. The interviews were conducted in the
Albanian Language. The interviews were individual and each lasted
approximately 20-30 minutes. Each participant was interviewed
twice. During the first interview, the participants were asked
about the characteristics of effective teachers. During the first
interview, participants were also asked to identify and describe
the most effective teacher they had had throughout their
educational experience up to that time. Upon the conclusion of
the first interview, each participant was equipped with the
“study-journals” and given instructions for observing
characteristics of effective teachers. The participants were
instructed that for one week, they should observe and note down
in a study journal the behaviors, actions, comments, etc. that
teachers might demonstrate in their school, in and outside the
class, which they thought demonstrated effective teaching. The
participants were asked to keep the notes confidential and they
were to discuss them in the second interview. Seven days after
the first interview, a second interview was organized,
individually, with all the participants. During the second
interview, the participants elaborated on the examples they
observed and noted of effective teaching. A comprehensive
explanation as to why that particular action/behavior/comment was
noted was asked to be provided by the participants.
Once both of the interviews were completed, they were transcribed
and translated into English. Parts of each interview, selected
randomly, were translated by another Albanian/English speaker.
Translations of the researcher and the other translator were
compared. No major differences appeared in the comparison. Please
see part of the interview transcript in English in Appendix B for
further details regarding transcription and translation of
interviews.
Following data collection, a post-interview session with all
participants was organized. In this session, participants were
given the interview transcripts and initial comments for analysis
to check for the content in order to avoid possible
misinterpretations. This is known as member validation, where we
take the analysis back to the participants “to enable them to
check or comment upon the interpretation” (Richardson, 1996:194).
Diagram 3.1. Study’s procedural setup
Case Study/Site Selected↓
Participants/Students Selected↓
Meeting/Informed Consent fromStudents
↓First Individual Student
Interviews↓
Students’ observations – Study-journals
Interview transcription ↓
Second Individual StudentInterviews
↓Interview transcription and post-
interview session ↓
Transcript translations and check↓
Data Analysis
3.1.5. DATA ANALYSIS
The content of the interviews was carefully analyzed for the
purpose of this study. After multiple readings and re-readings,
the notions and issues that were mentioned by the participants
were identified and grouped together. The interviews were
analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. According to Aronson
(1994), “thematic analysis focuses on identifiable themes and
patterns of living and/or behavior” (p. 1), while Braun and
Clarke (2006) define thematic analysis as “a method for
identifying, analyzing and reporting patterns (themes).” (p.79).
The primary attention of the analysis was on the content and
themes participants mentioned in the interviews as that was a way
to obtain direct insights and perceptions of the characteristics
of an effective teacher. As Riessman states, thematic analysis
focuses on “what” participants say (Riessman, 2008:53-54). In
addition to the lead researcher;s analysis, professional
colleagues6 performed an independent analysis of the interviews.
My analysis was then compared to his. This technique of analysis
was performed to ensure the trustworthiness and credibility of
the data analysis. This is known as inter-rater reliability. Both
analyses reached similar conclusions and insights.
An open coding approach was employed during the thematic
analysis. The identified themes were then grouped into different
categories and reported. The analysis focused on patterns—
patterns of codes made a theme, patterns of themes made a
category. The logic behind this form of analysis is something
known as inductive reasoning, a bottom-up approach, where one
builds upon the data collected—begin with a specific example or
issue mentioned by participants and go to something more general
and broader. Thematic analysis and inductive reasoning are not
mutually exclusive. Janesick (1998 cited in Denzin & Lincoln,
1998:47) points out that, “the qualitative researcher uses
inductive analysis, which means that categories, themes, and
6 Ereblir Kadriu was the lead researcher of the study – assistance providedby Erwin Selimos and Janet Tower, co-author of this book.
patterns come from the data.” Glasser and Strauss (1967) clearly
mentioned their preferences for inductive analysis as it enables
the generation of a hypothesis for further study. Patton (2002)
concurs with Janesick and Glasser and Strauss when he says,
“Qualitative inquiry is particularly oriented toward exploration,
discovery and inductive logic. Inductive analysis begins with
specific observations and builds towards general patterns” (p.
56). This study, therefore, followed the insights of Glasser and
Straus by beginning with the words of the participants and
drawing from their words patterns and themes regarding student
perceptions of effective teaching. This will be elaborated on in
the section entitled “Findings”.
3.1.6. PILOT STUDY
Prior to interviews, pilot-interviews were organized with four
secondary school students from the ASK in Prishtina, Kosova.
Convenience sampling was used to select the school and four of
its students for piloting. ASK is a private secondary school in
Prishtina, Kosova, established in 2003 and during this academic
year its student population was 317. For the demographic
information of the students please see Table 3.1. The pilot
study’s student demographic information is similar to those of
the participants of this study. The purpose of these pilot-
interviews was to ensure that no ambiguity in the interview
structure and schedule existed. All students reported that the
questions were clear and understandable. Thus, the interview
structure and schedule were not modified. Pilot study interviews
indicated that the approach I designed to tackle this issue with
secondary students would give me the appropriate information for
this study. The pilot study allowed me to make any needed
adjustments for the actual interviews in order to ensure the best
quality of results. The pilot interviews findings were not
included in the data analysis and interpretations of this study.
Table 3.2. Demographic information of students interviewed in the
pilot study
Initials Grade
level
Age Gender CumulativeGradePointAverage
1 F. Sh. 10th 16 Male 3.52 M. K. 10th 16 Female 3.93 G. M. 13th 18 Male 3.74 F. R. 13th 17 Female 4.0
3.1.7. TRUSTWORTHINESS/CREDIBILITY
The findings of this study are authentic because data was
obtained directly from secondary school students. Additionally,
the credibility of this data is further reinforced because of the
systematic application of the steps for qualitative research.
From the very beginning of research design to data analysis,
standards of research protocol were followed. Being cognizant of
the importance of the researcher-participants relationship during
the interviews and in the accuracy of information they
(participants) provided, I have paid particular attention to
developing an open and honest relationship with these students
throughout the data collection and analysis stages. The fact that
we were introduced to them as teachers, but not their teacher nor
a teacher in their school, helped in ensuring openness from their
side and confidentiality from my side. In addition, the use of
triangulation (interview and study journals), member validation,
translation checks and an inter-rater ensured the trustworthiness
of the data analysis.
3.1.8. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The study fully upholds professional and research ethical
guidelines. It is aligned with the Ethical Principles for
conducting Research with Human Participants set out by the
British Psychological Society. Prior to data collection, ethical
approval for this study was granted by the University of
Cambridge. During the piloting session, although the students
were of the same school of the researcher, their confidentiality
was maintained. Students were also asked not to mention teacher
names. The results of these interviews were also not discussed
with anyone from the students’ school. During the pre-interview
session of the actual interviews, participants were informed
about the aims of the study and their confidentiality was
ensured. They were informed about their right to withdraw at any
point during the interviews. No psychological or physical harm or
tension was ever caused to them by this study. These participants
were selected from a different school from mine meaning that any
fear of me reporting results to colleagues and thereby
jeopardizing their relation with teachers was eliminated. In any
case, participants were asked not to mention the names of
teachers. Study journals were not collected to maintain the
confidentiality of the students. During the post-interview
sessions, participants were given the interview transcripts and
preliminary analysis and interpretation for commenting. This was
done to ensure that statements made by participants were correct,
authentic and representative of their perceptions. It should be
noted that in the initial phase of the study, descriptions of
ineffective teachers in addition to effective ones were to be
included. However, during supervision it was decided that due to
the sensitivity of identifying a teacher as ineffective, research
would focus only on identifying those characteristics of
effective teachers.
4.1. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
So what, according to Kosovar secondary school students, are
the characteristics of an effective teacher? The answer to this
fundamental question is anything but simple. Since teaching is a
complex act, it is no wonder that the characteristics identified
by Kosovar secondary school students as the characteristics of an
effective teacher are multifaceted and myriad. An effective
teacher cannot be broken down into separate parts because each
facet of an effective teacher (personality, methodology, etc.)
‘plays off’ and is compounded by the other characteristics.
Similar to how the effectiveness of an automobile cannot be
judged solely by examining independently the separate parts that
make it up, nor can a teacher be identified as effective by
looking at only one facet of his or her practice or personality
independently from other characteristics. The effective teacher,
in other words, is a complex interaction of a variety of
characteristics, none independent of each other. This is to say
that despite attempts to identify specific characteristics of
effective teachers for further research, there is an intangible
element of teaching that is immeasurable. In attempts to
understand effective teaching, one must recognize this
intangibility, and admit to some extent the inability of the
researcher to fully and completely answer this question. It is
important to note that such small-scale research does not enable
deep insights due to the constraints mentioned above. However,
small-scale research does provide insights that may allow
researchers to move in a certain direction of scholarly
introspection.
Despite this important limitation, an analysis of the
interviews completed in this study brings to surface certain
identifiable ‘themes’ that Kosovar students see as the
characteristics of good teachers. Although each student
articulated differently their views of good teachers, what
emerged were certain broad thematic criteria each student
believed effective teachers possessed. After analyzing
transcripts of each interview, comments made by participants were
in alignment with the general framework discussed in the
literature. That is, students describe effective teachers as
those who possessed skills that met the affective and cognitive
needs of their students. When asked to describe characteristics
of an effective teacher, each participant painted a picture of a
good teacher by describing two basic themes. These were
1. Affective Traits of Teachers
2. Effective Teaching Practices (Cognitive Aspect)
In the following, each broad theme will be explained in detail.
It is my hope that after a detailed explanation of each of these
two broad themes, the picture of an effective teacher in the
minds of average Kosovar secondary school students will emerge
clearly and effectively. 4.1.1. THEME 1: Affective Traits of Teachers
As interviews progressed, it became clear that one
critically important feature of an effective teacher was the
relationships he or she built with students. The capacity to
build meaningful relationships with students and to meet the
emotional needs of students required for learning were viewed by
students as integral to an effective teacher. In other words,
teachers who possess affective traits are those who have the
skills and ability to address the emotional/social needs of the
student. Affective traits do not refer to academic or pedagogical
skills (i.e. the ability to lecture well) but refer to the
ability to maintain and engage in meaningful relationships.
Although these skills are not pedagogical in the sense of the
word, affective traits do have an educational implication. A
teacher who can meet the affective needs of students can create
classroom environments that are safe and friendly and therefore
conducive to learning. With this said, the affective traits of a
teacher can be considered a keystone of teaching.
Those interviewed believed that an effective teacher was one
who developed close relationships with students based around the
ability of the teacher to communicate effectively with students
inside and outside of the classroom. As K. J. explained, good
teachers “know how to communicate with students even outside the
classroom.” But those interviewed also saw it as necessary that
teachers maintain “distance in student-teacher rapport. The
teacher should not be mean to his or her students…they should
talk, be friendly, but also the student needs to listen to him or
her when he or she lectures” (M. Zh.). Students sought a close
relationship with teachers based on ideas of respect and open
communication, but saw the necessity of maintaining distance from
students as a way of ensuring classroom management. In other
words, those interviewed perceived an effective teacher as one
who built close (friendly, respectful) relationships with
students that did not interfere with the effective functioning of
the learning environment.
Given that teaching is a profession that involves human
interaction, it is no wonder that discussion of the personality
of effective teachers became an important focus of all the
interviews. All those interviewed described certain personality
traits/dispositions of teachers that made them more effective
because it enabled teachers to establish closer, more personal
relationships with students.. The most often mentioned
personality traits of effective teachers were those who were
helpful, humourous/funny, serious, possessed personal discipline,
were respectful to students, and were friendly, open, tolerant,
and cooperative. These characteristics will now be explained more
completely.
The idea of an effective teacher as one that was helpful
came up in discussion on more than one occasion. When asked to
describe an effective teacher A. SH used his English teacher as
an example:
I would also mention an example of our English Language teacher whohelps students in pronunciation, spelling and everything else by advisingthem how to use different words. She especially helps students who arenot good in English and there is a considerable number of them. Sheworks with them during the class time, gives them other books to read,something that is easier for them.
It is clear from A. SH’s words that when he talks about an
effective teacher as one who is helpful he means that an
effective teacher is one that helps in many ways to ensure the
educational success of his or her students. This helpfulness is
demonstrated by A. SH’s English teacher’s outreach to weaker
students, her individual work with each student, and her
dedication to providing each student with instructional material
to meet their specific needs.
Similar to A. SH, K. J. also described an effective teacher
as one that is always willing to help. When describing her most
effective teacher, K.J. explained how her teacher was “willing to
help at any time. I would give her essay drafts, she read them
and gave some comments. I did what she suggested and I was
successful.” The sentiment that an effective teacher is helpful
was echoed by Sh. C. She described how her teacher took time out
of his schedule to help students prepare for an important
national exam:
On Monday after regular school time we had extra physics classes. Eventhough we don’t have this year physics, the physics teacher was ready tohelp us practice for the National exam. The teacher started to explain thepossible things that could be on the exam. Also the teacher cameprepared with some National exams from previous years.
Besides helpfulness, interviewees saw ‘seriousness’,
‘personal discipline’ and ‘being strict’ as essential personality
traits of good teachers. As K.J. expressed,
I would say that the first one is the personal discipline that every teachershould have. Other than that, the teacher should not be late for theclasses and be good in managing the class and the students. There arealways some problematic students and the teacher should find a way todeal with them and gain their respect. The first thing a teacher should dois gain the respect of his/her students because then it is easier for him/herto teach them.
When asked how a teacher can gain the respect of
students, K.J. correlated respect and seriousness with a teacher
who had a sense of strictness:
The teacher should be serious because people respect you only when you respect yourself. Especially in public, the teachers should be serious inorder for the students to be a little bit afraid of him/her and that way thestudents will respect the teacher more. It doesn’t mean that the teachershould be aggressive or something like that but he or she needs to be a bitstrict just to show to everyone who is the teacher and who is the student.
K.J.’s notion of strictness was echoed by M. Zh. who
thought that for teachers “it’s good to be strict, because you
will have the respect of your students and everyone knows where
the jokes end and where the lecturing starts.” M.Zh. went on to
elaborate that a teacher
needs to be strict. Students can be out of control sometimes and if it wasup to us we would never learn anything in class. So yes a teacher that isstrict and punishes students is better.
Sh. C. added that the strictness of a teacher,however, should have limitations, that
The teacher should not allow the students to be noisy, but also he or sheshould not expect them to be totally quiet. Not extremely strict. We arehumans. The teacher can control the class in many different ways. Forexample if the teacher knows the subject very well, students are going torespect him and they will listen to him and learn from him.
It seems that what all interviewees saw as an
important characteristic of an effective teacher was strictness.
To those interviewed, an effective teacher was one who was
serious, who held students to a high standard of behavior, who
knew when it was time to joke and when it was time to work. This
strictness was limited and reasonable, as the effective teacher
recognized that students, as Sh.C. expressed, ‘are humans.’
Perhaps it is this recognition of the humanity of students
that make students perceive an effective teacher as one who has a
sense of humour. Next to ‘strictness’, those interviewed saw a
sense of humour as an important characteristic of an effective
teacher. A. Sh. voiced the need for a teacher to have a sense of
humour because “students shouldn’t be bored in his or her class.”
K.J. appreciated a teacher who took time out of instruction to
relax and allow students and teachers to enjoy each other. When
describing an effective teacher she mentioned that
in the beginning of classes and sometimes in the middle when we all feeltired or bored, we tell each other interesting facts that we read on theinternet. We talk to each other about these facts and the teacher talks tous as well. She is funny sometimes (laughs). It is a good way to tell jokesand not be serious all the time.
In her second interview, K.J. explained that,
a good teacher should tell jokes in class when it’s appropriate and create agood atmosphere in class…..you know, an atmosphere where students canlearn, laugh sometimes, but never get bored. A teacher should be able tonotice when his or her students are bored and should avoid that by tellinga joke, play a game or stop lecturing.
Like K.J. who connected humour with creating an atmosphere
of learning in the class, M.Zh. explained the pedagological
importance of humour. When teachers
tell jokes sometimes…it will make teaching more exciting. In this way alsothe students are more concentrated to what the teacher is saying.Students listen if the class is interesting and the teacher can make theclass interesting by telling jokes and having a sense of humour.
As Sh. C. expressed, “humour is really important. It is not
the end of the world to lose two minutes of his class sharing a
joke or anything. Students need to be relaxed in order to learn
something.”
Participants also identified effective teachers as those who
are friendly and cooperative. M. Zh said that
It’s important [for a teacher] to be friendly with students, and in this waythe students also would feel better about their teacher. It is very nice totalk to your teachers if you have any problem. I think a good teacher isthat one who makes student work hard, but also has an open door toeveryone anytime.
K.J. correlated friendliness to a teacher who was
cooperative and understanding of students: “to be an effective
the teacher needs to cooperate with students and he or she should
be able to understand what they really like about the lesson.” To
those interviewed, an effective teacher was one who is “friendly
about academic things” (M.Zh) and cooperative with students.
Comments made by Kosovar students in this study show that
their affective needs are something they value and appreciate
teachers who address these needs. Thus, an effective teacher in
their perception is one who is able to connect with them as a
human being. However, students also saw the need for teachers to
be strict, which suggests that students in this study desire a
limitation on the closeness of their relationship with teachers.
The idea that a teacher must be an authoritarian in class,
according to these students, is not true. In addition to a strict
teacher, students also wanted to see a ‘human’ teacher.
The insights provided by Kosovar students in this study
connect clearly with previous research on the topic of student
perceptions of effective teachers. Like Mourer (1960) who found
that students liked teachers who provided emotional support, so
did these Kosovar students. Similar to Buckner and Bickel (1991)
who concluded that students like teachers who were kind, warm,
friendly and approachable, Kosovar students like teachers who
were “Friendly about academic things.” In 1994 Ogden et al. found
that students appreciated creative, energetic, friendly, and
sensitive teachers; so did Kosovar students in this study. Thus,
based on the past literature and comments made by students in
this study, the personal side of teachers remains an integral
characteristic of an effective teacher.
4.1.2. THEME 2: Effective Teaching Practice (Cognitive Aspect)
In addition to the types of relationships teachers
create with their students and certain personality traits of
teachers, interviewees saw effective teachers as those who
engaged in effective teaching practices. Generally, effective
teaching practices can be described as pedagogical activities
teachers employ that students see as effective in improving their
academic success. Effective teaching practices thus includes such
things as how a teacher assesses students, the content knowledge
of the teacher, the teaching and methodological strategies
employed by the teacher, the clarity of expression when
delivering lessons, and the amount of homework or workload
expected by teachers.
An effective teacher, according to the participants, was one
who assessed fairly and gave more than one opportunity for
students to demonstrate their understanding of course content.
A.Sh. described the assessment practices of a physic teacher and
correlated this practice to the effectiveness of that teacher:
First, our Physics teacher…to get a grade in that class, she gives everystudent three chances – she tests them three times. She does not put thefirst grade in the grade book….she writes it somewhere else and she givesyou two more chances after that to get a better grade before she writesthe final grade in her grade book.
A. Sh. went on to explain why he believed this wasan effective and fair way of assessing students:
I believe this is good because physics is not like other subjects. It has manyformulas that you need to memorize, many definitions that you also needto know. If you want to have a good grade then you need more than onechance. When you are first tested you might get confused with the formulaor the definition and therefore receive a low grade. But that does notmean that you do not know physics and that is why you deserve a highergrade. This is the reason that you need to be tested more than one time tosee how well prepared you are. This technique is especially good for thestudents who are failing a subject because it gives them more than onechance to pass the subject.
According to the participants, especially A.Sh., effective
teachers fairly assesses students and provide students with many
opportunities to demonstrate their learning.
The clarity in which a teacher explained a lesson was seen
as a very important feature of an effective teacher. Effective
teachers, in other words, were those who were clear and precise
in their explanations. A. Sh said that a teacher “should be a
good pedagogue, meaning he should know how to lecture.” A. Sh.
went on to provide an example of a teacher who was clear teacher
and knew how to lecture:
For this reason I think that my math teacher was effective. First he wouldexplain some definitions, write formulas and explain the main points. Withthose formulas he would solve the first problem in order for us to see theprocedure, and then he would ask students to solve the rest of theproblems and share it with everyone. I think I learned a lot from himbecause of the way he taught us. I think he was a very effective teacher.
The notion that an effective teacher is one who
presents materials and ideas clearly was supported by K.J. She
describes a technique used by an English teacher that helped her
understand deeply Shakespeare’s Macbeth:
We read a book for that class and we also watched the movie that wasmade from the book, so we were able to compare and contrast bothstories. We also critically analyzed them by seeing how different they maylook, but also how similar they are. This teaches us how to go to the depthof the stories not just look at them superficially. The movie was great,because it helped us understand the book better. And it was also fun towatch a movie in class. We watched movies together in the class and afterthat we talked about it. We watched it for a whole period and commentedon it for about 5 to 10 minutes so that we know what was happening inthe movie. At the end we had one day where we only commented on themovie. Every student gives her/ his opinion on how much they liked ordisliked the movie, the interesting details that he/she noticed and criticalthoughts on the movie in general.
In addition to this teaching technique, K.J. believes thatlecture style is also important:
The last thing that makes an effective teacher is the way he or shelectures. It has to be very clear so everyone can understand. In myopinion, these are the characteristics of a good teacher.
Similar to A.Sh., K.J. appreciated teachers who
explained content material clearly, making complex materials
accessible to all students.
An effective teacher is also one who used a variety of
teaching strategies to facilitate student learning. K.J.
described various activities that effective teachers used such as
“brainstorming activities and warm-ups.” She went on to explain
one effective, non lecture-based activity, employed by her
Albanian literature teacher:
Something else that happened was in Albanian where our teacher askedus to read each other’s essays and annotate them. In this way whileannotating them and making comments on our friends’ essays we saw theadvantages and the disadvantages of our essay; meanwhile we alsohelped our friends realize what is wrong and what is right with theiressays. The teacher provided us with the instructions in the beginning ofthe class. She told us what to look for in a good essay and then we justfollowed her instructions. I learned a lot.
Brainstorming and warm-ups, clear explanations, and
meaningful activities were used by teachers who students
perceived as effective. These activities worked together to
facilitate learning and academic performance.
Effective teachers were also identified as those who had
strong content knowledge. An effective teacher “knows the subject
he or she lectures” (A.Sh 2). When asked what she would do if she
were a teacher, Sh. C. mentioned that she should first “know the
subject” (15). Having strong content knowledge meant that
teachers were able to use concrete examples when lecturing and
therefore enhance learning and “make them [lessons] more
attractive to students.” Ultimately, having strong content
knowledge was believed to make a teacher more effective because
“students might ask extended questions about the lesson, and if
the teacher does not have the required information he can’t give
an answer so the student won’t be able to learn” (A. Sh). Having
strong content knowledge, thus, adds credibility to the teacher
in the view of students, allowing the teacher to provide more
detailed and clear explanations, make lessons more attractive,
which ultimately determined the effectiveness of that teacher.
All participants interviewed appreciated teachers who
demonstrated competency in their profession. In other words,
students saw effective teachers as those who employed useful
teaching strategies, delivered content material well, and
assessed student fairly. This is to say that the students
interviewed appreciated a teacher who met their intellectual and
academic needs through classroom practice. This study shows that,
similar to McCabe (1995), students liked teachers who were both
subject and student-centered. The cognitive aspect of an
effective teacher is not a new idea. Hollis (1935, as cited in
Musgrove and Taylor, 1969: 171) a long time ago, illustrated that
like Kosovar students in this study, students value a teacher’s
ability to patiently and clearly explain content material. His
study was conducted with students from both mixed and single-sex
schools and students were of different age ranges. Thus, in
addition to the affective component of a teacher, students value
teachers who can contribute to the development of their
intellectual development.
An important point to note in the findings of this study is
that student’s gender and age did not produce different
evaluations or identifiable characteristics of an effective
teacher. There was no difference, in both of the above-mentioned
themes, between male-female and young (10th grade) and older (13th
grade) participants’ comments in this study. The research is
diverse regarding the impact of students’ gender in evaluating
what a good teacher is. Feldman (1993) in a meta-analysis of
different studies that examined the relationship between teacher
and student gender and what is an effective teacher showed that
gender has very little to no influence in determining
characteristics of a good teacher. Aleamoni (1999) echoed
Feldman and argued that there is no relationship between
teachers’ gender, students’ gender and evaluation of teaching.
However, Sprague and Massoni (2004) in a cumulative review of
studies pertaining to gender and teacher evaluation conclude that
student’s gender as well as teachers’ gender does have influence
on how teacher evaluations turn out. More specifically, Basow
(1995) pointed out that male and female students evaluate
relatively the same male teachers, but are quite different with
female teachers. She points out that male students usually rate
lower their teachers than female students. However, the findings
of this study tend to align with those of Aleamoni (1999) and
Feldman (1993) as there has been no reported difference of male
and female participants about the characteristics of an effective
teacher.
The issue whether a student’s ages influences perceptions of
what it is to be an effective teacher was tackled by Young et al.
(1998) who studies students of different age ranges. According
to this study, most of the identifiable characteristics of an
effective teacher are similar. However, some differences exist as
well. This study points out that, for example, a teacher’s
enthusiasm, a teacher’s knowledge of the subject matter and a
teacher’s friendliness were something that were important
characteristics of an effective teacher according to older
students. However, these characteristics were not deemed as
important for some, although a small, number of younger students
participated in this study.
Similar to gender, this study showed little relationship
between the age of students and their perception of effective
teachers. However, considering that participates were taken from
grade 10 and 12, one may conclude that there was not much
difference in age to begin with. Differing student perception of
effective teacher may be more evident between a 12 year old and
an 18 year than between a 15 year old and an 18 year old. Thus,
with the data provided by this study it is difficult to come to a
concrete conclusions with respect to the impact the age of a
student has on his or her perceptions of effective teachers. With
this limitation in mind, what can be said is that this study
showed that age had little to no impact on student perceptions of
effective teachers.
4.2. TOWARD A DEFINITION OF TEACHER INTELLIGENCE
As research into effective teaching continues to be
explored, what becomes increasingly evident is that an effective
teacher must meet the affective and cognitive needs of his or her
students. To be viewed as effective, a teacher must possess the
interpersonal skills necessary to make meaningful relationships
with students, but at the same time have the content and
pedagogical knowledge to deliver high quality education. A
teacher who possesses both these qualities will be more likely to
be considered effective.
It follows from this that teachers desiring to be effective
must be intelligent in their practice. By ‘intelligent’ we mean
the ability to recognize the multi-faceted nature of teaching.
Education is the business of developing human beings through
intellectual and academic advancement. As such, teachers must be
systematic and thoughtful in their approach to education. The
intelligent teacher must develop a certain type of “teacher
intelligence”—that is the ability to connect with students
through interpersonal activities, while at the same time
delivering instruction that develops the intellectual features of
students. Intelligent teachers are able to adapt instruction and
activities based on recognizing the current cognitive and
affective needs of his or her students. For example, a teacher
who is teaching a difficult lesson about the Enlightenment in
England may recognize that students are distracted and
unfocussed. The teacher must choose to deal with the cause of the
distraction or change the lesson of the day based on the feedback
the teacher is receiving from the students. In other words, an
intelligent teacher is always negotiating a balance between the
affective health of students and their cognitive development. A
teacher who has developed “teacher intelligence” recognizes the
important balance between the affective and cognitive features of
education.
5.1. CONCLUSION
It becomes the imperative of the researcher when presenting
the conclusions of his or her research to paint a succinct
picture of the important concepts or ideas that emerge from his
or her study. Similar to a driver who requires directions through
a large and unknown city, the reader of this study does not want
to be overburdened by its mundane details, but rather wants to be
informed of the important signposts leading to the destination.
It is these ‘signposts’ that represent the enduring
understandings of this study, the ‘big ideas’ that one should
take away and ponder. What, then, are the ‘big ideas’ that emerge
from this study? What are the enduring understandings that can be
gained from Kosovar secondary student perceptions of effective
teachers? What implications do these findings have to the current
educational atmosphere in Kosova? What limitations do these
finding have?
In the following section, the most important conclusions
emerging from this study will be outlined, the possible
limitations of these conclusions will be contemplated, the
particular implications of these findings will be examined, and
connections will be made between what has been learned here to a
wider scholarly tradition. Furthermore, a personal reflection
will be included and further recommendations and suggestions will
be elaborated.
Generally speaking, it is safe to conclude that average
Kosovar secondary school students participated in this study see
effective teachers as those who possess two broad categories of
qualities. In effect, these broad categories include affective
and cognitive themes. The affective theme deals with
characteristics that teachers possess that deal with establishing
meaningful relationships with students. These may refer to
personality traits such as a sense of humour and friendliness.
Although not pedagogical, these characteristics are important
because they establish a friendly, humane and safe environment
that allow students to learn. The cognitive theme deals with
traits and characteristics directly related to pedagogy. These
traits might include knowledge of content material or the range
of useful teaching strategies a teacher employs. These skills are
the things of academics, the “teaching” part of teaching.
Generally, as mentioned before, teachers who possessed both
affective and cognitive traits were considered effective teachers
by the participants of this study.
The average Kosovar secondary school student, according to
this study, viewed the relationships that a teacher builds with
students as a critical element of an effective teacher.
Throughout the interviewing process, a common refrain was that an
effective teacher was one who could establish good, caring,
supportive and close relationship with students. Of those
interviewed, students wanted to see teachers who cared for the
affective (emotional, interpersonal) needs of students.
Participants qualified the notion of a close relationship by
saying that a teacher still needed to be the authority in the
classroom, that a close relationship with students should not
disrupt the ‘authority’ of the teacher in the classroom. This is
an important qualification because it suggests that Kosovar
students of this study want to see a teacher that is caring,
close and supportive but is so within a defined boundary. In
other words, Kosovar students desire caring teachers who set
limits to student-teacher interaction. As shown in the literature
review and then discussed in the section entitled “Findings,”
several studies (Buckner and Bickel, 1991; Crawford and Bradshaw,
1968; Grush and Costin, 1975; Kratz, 1896 as cited in Musegrove
and Taylor, 1969; Miron and Segal, 1979; Naciye, 1988; Ogden et
al., 1994) have pointed to the importance of caring and close
teacher-student relations—similar to what the participants of
this study desired in their teachers. It is fair, then, to
suggest that teachers that meet the affective needs of students
are more effective in the eyes of Kosovar students of this study.
Kosovar secondary school students that participated in this
study also looked to specific personality qualities that they
viewed effective teachers possessed. The two most commonly
mentioned personality characteristics that participants
identified that effective teachers had were ‘strictness’ and
‘sense of humor’. All participants identified the strictness of a
teacher as a required element of an effective teacher. The strict
teacher was believed to have the capacity to set clear
expectations in the class regarding student behaviour. Non-strict
teachers had noisy classes and therefore clear explanations of
content material were difficult. In other words, the strict
teacher was believed to be the teacher able to create the
classroom environment for productive learning. The strictness of
the teacher, however, was qualified with the notion that an
effective teacher should also be funny or humorous. At first,
these two qualities (strictness versus humor) seem contradictory,
but a deeper analysis may suggest the compatibility of both
traits. As mentioned before, students desired teachers who set
limits to student-teacher relationships. That is, students wanted
close relationships with their teachers but also desired a set
limit to that relationship. In other words, students wanted to
see the clear division between teacher and student. If this logic
is applied to the idea that students want strict and humorous
teachers then the truth of the “strict but funny” paradox is
revealed. Strictness creates a clear and set division between
teacher and student. It establishes the distance that students
believe is necessary for a properly functioning class. Humour, on
the other hand, reveals the humanity of both the teacher and the
student. In one way humour works to bond the student to the
teacher and strictness works to maintain the necessary distance
of the teacher so that he/she can maintain what is believed to be
the appropriate authority in the classroom. This need for
boundaries is not unexpected. It is not uncommon for adolescents
to desire ‘fun’ teachers, but as students develop they come to
recognize the need for clearly defined roles and boundaries in a
student-teacher relationship.
In some respects the findings that show the importance of
affective qualities of teachers are not surprising. From my
experience, teaching is an intricate act that is both academic
and interpersonal. In other words, through our own experience we
have recognized the importance of creating a classroom that is
safe, fun and supportive. The brain is more receptive to learning
if it feels safe, thus it is not surprising that students who see
caring and supportive teachers as more effective. Students seem
to realize the fundamental truth that learning happens only when
students feel safe and secure. Thus teachers who through their
affective traits provide safe and caring environments in their
classroom are considered by students as more effective, and by
extension one might argue most probably are more effective as a
result.
Besides the affective qualities of teachers, participants
also saw the types of teaching practices a teacher employed as
critical in defining an effective teacher. In general,
participants sought teachers who employed helpful, interesting,
and useful teaching practices and techniques that ensured the
academic success of students. Methodologically, students saw
teachers with deep content knowledge and an ability to explain
lessons clearly as a prerequisite of an effective teacher.
Additionally, teachers that employed useful strategies to their
classrooms and who demonstrated flexibility in assessment were
also seen as more effective teachers.
It is interesting to note the synchronicity between what
students viewed as effective teachers and initiatives being
undertaken by MEST. As mentioned earlier in this study, Kosova’s
MEST has begun intensive initiatives that seek to reform and
advance teacher pedagogy in Kosova. Many different practical
initiatives have been undertaken to reform teacher quality in
Kosova—most notably teacher training initiatives undertaken (as
mentioned earlier) by KEDP and KEC. What is important to note
here is that students thought effective those teachers who showed
to be competent and professional in the knowledge, delivery and
assessment of content material. In other words, it seems that
MEST initiatives to improve teacher quality are directly related
to the wishes and desires of students. This insight echoes McBer
(2000) who states that ‘teaching skills’ are a critical factor in
effective teaching. Other studies (Allen, 1959 as cited in
Musgrove and Taylor, 1969; Hamacheck, 1975; Ogden et al., 1994)
point to the importance of good teaching skills as a prerequisite
to be considered an effective teacher by students. Teachers that
presented material in a clear manner and who provided activities
to expound on learning made it easier for students to learn, and
thus were considered more effective.
Ultimately then, an effective teacher in the minds of
Kosovar secondary school students, according to this study, are
those who develop close relationships with students, possess a
clear balance between strictness and humor, and employ effective
teaching practices such as clear explanations, useful learning
activities, and multiple assessment strategies. These are
important and rich findings that emerge from a small scale
investigation with average students from a typical secondary
school in Kosova. A larger-scaled investigation may confirm these
themes and even identify other patterns and themes that did not
emerge from the interviews of this study. The current study was
small-scale and this inevitably prohibits form statements and
conclusion with respect to the general population within Kosova.
Another important limitation of this study was time. Given the
short period over which this study was conducted, deep
exploration of the issue was made difficult. A longer period for
the study would allow for more interviews and ultimately more
information about student perceptions of effective teachers.
These limitations, however, are off-set by the trustworthiness of
the findings that emerged from the systematic application of
qualitative methodology. The procedural setup of this experiment,
the sample selection, and data analysis all followed closely to
the standards of good research practice and thus one can have
confidence in the credibility of these findings.
The findings of these studies have significant implications,
particularly within the context of Kosova. Educationally
speaking, ideas developed within this study can be used to
improve teaching and learning. Based on extensive research into
student perspectives on schools, teaching, learning and other
educational dimensions, Flutter and Rudduck (2004) argue that
student voice is very important for sustainable educational
development. For them, student perspectives can provide important
information for the improvement of learning, teaching and school
in general (p. 21). Moreover, Rudduck et al. (1996) states that,
“what pupils say about teaching, learning and schooling is not
only worth listening to but provides an important – perhaps the
most important – foundation of thinking about ways of improving
schools.” (p. 1). This view is echoed by several other studies
(Lang, 1985; Phelan et al., 1992). Information gained from this
study can be easily used to design teacher training programs that
can focus on identifiable characteristics of an effective teacher
according to students. If a teacher applies these ideas then it
may follow that interaction between teacher and student will
improve, resulting in the overall improvement of learning in the
class. School administration may use insights drawn by this
research to inform and guide hiring practices for new teachers
and promotional guidelines for existing teachers. School
leadership may also take insights from this research to guide
general school improvement plans. The logic follows that if, for
example, effective teachers develop caring and close
relationships with students, then school-wide initiatives to
promote caring and close (community-driven) schools will result
in more effective learning generally. Although too widespread for
the scope of this study, there is the possibility for academic
inquiry into whether or not caring community-driven schools
improve student learning. In fact, many places, including the UK
and Kosova, are performance-driven cultures, meaning that teacher
effectiveness is judged based on academic achievement as measured
by standardized tests and grades. Often, this means that teachers
sacrifice interpersonal relationships for content coverage. What
is at stake here is that performance cultures ignore the
importance of affective elements of teaching and learning, as
emphasis is place on ‘number measured achievement’ and not the
development of social and interpersonal relationships. What
emerges, essentially, is a value conflict between empiricism and
humanism and the application of these ideas to education.
Individual teachers can take these ideas and apply them directly
to their classroom practice to enhance teaching and learning. For
example, a teacher may recognize that multiple assessments is
viewed as effective teaching practice amongst his or her student,
and implement such a strategy.
However, Flutter and Rudduck (2004) also caution that these
perspectives should not be the only ones that are considered;
instead, educational stakeholders should consider students
perceptions as one of many important factors in education. They
state, “We are not proposing that pupils should dictate how
schools are run but our research leads us to believe that
practitioners and schools can benefit from tuning into pupils’
perspectives” (p. 3). Student perceptions of effective teachers
are one of many things to consider when guiding educational
practice, but the proper application of the results of this study
can significantly enhance teaching and learning in schools.
This study has further implications applicable to Kosova
specifically. As the education system in Kosova is undergoing
significant reforms, the findings of this study are increasingly
applicable. The conclusions drawn from this study with respect to
student perceptions of effective teachers can be used to guide
effective teacher training programs. Part of a training program
may include discussion about what students view as effective
teachers, and how such views are important to the promotion of
effective teaching practice and the creation of democratic school
institutions. Trainings such as these can be included in the
recently begun and currently undergoing process of teacher-
licensing. Moreover, this study can provide initial steps for
MEST to promote further local scholarship on topics of
educational issues. Developing a professional and academic
community of educational scholars is one important step in
informing the general improvement of the education system in
Kosova. In fact, it is recommended that the MEST support large-
scale studies similar to this in order to get a comprehensive
picture of student educational experience. From these larger
studies, more accurate decisions can be made regarding general
educational improvements. Furthermore, this study can serve as an
initial step in setting ‘foundational stones’ for a professional
academic culture where educational research is stimulated and the
research findings are implemented. This will contribute to the
establishment of a progressive education system in Kosova, and
ultimately the sustainable development of the post-war country.
6.1. REFERENCE
Abrami, P. (2001). Improving Judgments About TeachingEffectiveness Using Teacher Rating Forms. New Direction for InstitutionalResearch, 109, 59-71.
d’Apollonia, S., & Abrami, P.C. (1997). Navigating studentratings of instruction. American Psychologist, 52, 1198-1208.
Anderson, L., Evertson, C., & Brophy, J. E. (1979). Anexperimental study of effective teaching in first-grade readinggroups. Elementary School Journal, 79, 193-223.
Angoff, W.H. (1971). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. In R.I. Thorndike (Ed.) Educational Measurement ( 2nd ed., pp.508-600).Washington, D.C.: American Council of Education.
Aleamoni, L.M. (1999). Student rating myths versus research factsfrom 1924 to 1998. Journal of Personal Evaluation in Education, 13, 153-166.
Allen, E.A. (1959). Attitudes to school and teachers in a Secondary Modernschool. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of London.
Altrichter, H., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (1996). Teachers investigatetheir work; An introduction to the methods of action research. London:Routledge.
Aronson, J. (1994). A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis. TheQualitative Report, 2, 1.
Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN). (June 2009).Monitor of Education System . Prishtina, Kosova.
Basow, S. A. (1995). Student Evaluations of College Professors:When Gender Matters. Journal of Educational Psychology 87, 656–665.
Ben-Chaim, D. & Zoller, U. (2001). Self-perception versusstudents’ perception of teachers’ personal style in collegescience and mathematics courses. Research in Science Education, 31,437-454.
Berk, R.A. (1986). Minimum competency testing: Status andpotential. In B. S. Plake and J. C. Witt (Eds.) The Future of Testing(p. 89-144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Blishen, E. (1969). The School that I’d Like. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Boardman, A.E., Davis, O.A., & Sanday, P.R. (1974). Asimultaneous equations model of the educational process: TheColemann data received with an emphasis upon achievement. In 1973Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, social
statistics section. Washington, D.C.: American StatisticalAssociation.
Borich, G.D. (1996). Effective Teaching Methods. Prentice-Hall Inc.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education:An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc
Braskamp, L.A. & Ory, J.C. (1994). Assessing Faculty Work. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis inpsychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-/101.
Bridge, R.G., Judd, C.M., & Moock, P.R. (1979). The Determinants ofEducational Outcomes. Cambridge. MA: Ballinger.
Brookover, W., Beady, C., Flood, P., Schweitzer, J., &Wisenbaker, J. (1979). School Social Systems and Student Achievement: SchoolsCan Make a Difference. New York: Praeger.
Brophy, J. E. (1973). Stability of teacher effectiveness. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 10, 245-252.
Brophy, L. E & Evertson, C. (1976). Learning from Teaching: ADevelopmental Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Brown, G.I. (1971). Human teaching for human learning. New York: TheViking Press.
Buckner, J.H. & Bickel, F. (1991). If you want to know abouteffective teaching, why not ask your middle school kids? MiddleSchool Journal, 22, 26-29.
Campbell, D.T. (1975). Degrees of freedom and case study.Comparative Political Studies, 8, 178-193.
Chen, Y. & Hoshower, L.B. (1998). Assessing student motivationsto participate in teaching evaluations: an application ofexpectancy theory. Issues in Accounting Education, 13(3), 531-549.
Cohn, D.K. & Millman, S.D. (1978). Input-Output-Analysis inPublic Education. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Cohen, P.A. (1981). Student Ratings of Instruction and StudentAchievement: A Meta-Analysis of Multisection Valdity Studies.Review of Educational Research, 51, 281-309.
Cohen, P.A. (1982). Validity of Student Ratings in PsychologyCourse: A Research Synthesis. Teaching of Psychology, 1982, 9, 78-82.
Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1981). Perspectives on Classrooms and schools.London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1986). Research methods in education.London: Croom Helm.
Costin, F., Greenought, W.T., & Menges, R.J. (1971). StudentRatings of College Teaching: Reliability, Validity, andUsefulness. Review of Educational Research, 41, 511-536.
Cothran, D.J., Kulinnab, P.H., & Garrahy, D.A. (2002). “This iskind of giving a secret away…”: students’ perspectives oneffective class management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 435-444.
Crawford, P. L. & Bradshaw, H.L. (1968). Perception ofcharacteristics of effective university teachers. Journal ofEducational and Psychological Measurement, 28, 1079-1085.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and MixedMethods Approaches. London: Sage.
Cronbarch, L.J. & Snow, R.E. (1977). Aptitudes and Instructional Methods:A Handbook for Research on Interactions. New York: Irvington.
Crotty, M. (2003) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspectivesin the Research Process, London: Sage.
Cruickshank, D.R. & Haefele, D. (2001). Good teachers, plural.Educational Leadership, 58(5), 26-30.
Crumbley, L. (1996). Society for a Return to Academic StandardsWeb Site. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 28, 2009fromhttp://www.bus.lsu.edu/accounting/faculty/lcrumbley/sfrtas.html].
Dale, R.R. (1967a). Teachers who have had a good influence: ananalysis of opinion. Education for Teaching, 72, 35-42.
Damron, J.C. (1996). Politics of the Classroom. Retrieved fromthe World Wide Web on February 28, 2009 fromhttp://vax1.mankato.msus.edu/~pkbrando/damron_politics.html].
Demmon-Berger, D. (1986). Effective teaching: Observations fromresearch. Arlington: VA: American Association of School Administrators. (ERIC EricDocument ReproductionService No. 274087).
Denzin, N.K & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dewar, K. (2002). On Being a Good Teacher. Journal of Hospitality,Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 1(1), 61-67.
Donald, M. M. (1977). Teacher Competence and TeacherEffectiveness. A Review of Process-Product Research. AmericanAssociation of Colleges for Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.
Dudley, S., & Shawver, D.L. (1991). The Effect of Homework onStudents’ Perceptions of Teaching Effectiveness, Journal of Education for Business, 21-25.
Eble, D.E. (1971). The Recognition and Evaluating of Teaching.Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Professors.
Fazey, D.M.A. (1993). Self-assessment as a generic skill forenterprising students: the learning process. Assessment andEvaluation in Higher Edcuation, 18(3), 235-250.
Feldman, K. (1993). College students’ views of male and femalecollege teachers: Part II – Evidence from students’ evaluationsof their classroom teachers. Research in Higher Learning 34, 151-211.
Feldman, K.A. (1977). Consistency and reliability among collegestudents’ ratings their teachers and courses: a review andanalysis. Research in Higher Education, 6(2), 223-274.
Feldman, K.A. (1979). The significance of circumstance of collegestudents ratings of their teachers and courses. Research in HigherEducation, 10(2), 149-172.
Feldman, K.A. (1986). The perceived instructional effectivenessof college teachers as related to their personality andattitudinal characteristics: A review and synthesis. Research inHigher Education, 24, 139-213.
Feldman, K.A. (1989c). Instructional Effectiveness of CollegeTeachers as Judged by Teachers Themselves, Current and FormerStudents, Colleagues, Administrators and External (Neutral)Observers. Research in Higher Education, 30, 137-194.
Finegan, T.A., & Siegfried, J.J. (2000). Are student ratings ofteaching effectiveness influenced by instructors’ Englishlanguage proficiency? The American Economist, 44, 17-29.
Fisher, D.L., & Kent, B.K. (1998). Associations between teacherpersonality and classroom environment. Journal of Classroom Interaction,33, 5-13.
Forrester-Jones, R. & Hatzidimitriadou, E. (2006) Learning in thereal world? Exploring widening participation student viewsconcerning the 'fit' between knowledge learnt and work practices.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(6), 611-624.
French, G.N. (1957). College students concepts of effectiveteaching. Dissertation Abstracts, 17, 1380-1381.
Glasman, N.S. & Biniaminov, I. (1981). Input-output analysis ofschools. Review of Educational Research, 51, 509-539.
Glasser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory,Chicago: Aldine.
Good, T.L. & Grows, D.A. (1975). Process-Product Relationship in FourthGrade Mathematics Classes. Columbia, MI: College of Education,University of Missouri.
Greenwald, A.G., & Gillmore, G.M. (1997a). Grading Leniency Is aRemovable Contaminantof Student Ratings. American Psychologist, 52, 1209–1217.Greenwald, A.G., & Gillmore, G.M. (1997b). “No Pain, No Gain? TheImportance of Measuring Course Workload in Student Ratings ofInstruction.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 743–751.
Grush, J.E. & Costin, F. (1975). The student as consumer ofteaching process. American Educational Research Journal, 12, 55-66.
Gudmundsdottir, S. & Saabar, N. (1991). Cultural dimensions ofthe good teachers. Surrey England (ERIC Document ReproductionService No. ED 343 848).
Haertel, E. (1986). Tha valid use of student performance measuresof teacher evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 8, 45-60.
Hambleton, R.K., & Eignor, D.R. (1987). Guidelines for evaluatingcriterion-referenced tests and test manuals. Journal of EducationalMeasurement, 15, 321-327.
Hammersley, M. (1992) What’s Wrong with Ethnography? MethodologicalExplorations, London: Routledge.
Hanushek, E.A. (1972). Education and Race: An Analysis of the EducationalProduction Process. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Hollis, A.W. (1935). The personal relationship in teaching. Unpublishedmaster thesis, University of Birmingham.
Horst, D.P., Tallmadge, G.K., & Wood, C.T. (1974). MeasuringAchievement Gains in Educational Projects. RMC Report UR-243. Los Altos,CA: RMC Research Corporation.
Hounsell, D. (1999). The evaluation of teaching. In H. Fry, S.Ketteridge, & S. Marshall (Eds.) A Handbook for Teaching and Learning inHigher Education. London, UK: Kogan Page.
Howard, G.S. & Maxwell, S.E. (1980) Correlation between studentssatisfaction and grades: a case of mistaken education?. Journal ofEducational Philosophy, 72(4), 810–820.
Ireson, J. & Hallam, S. (2005). Pupils’ liking for school:Ability grouping, self-concept and perceptions of teaching. BritishJournal of Educational Psychology, 75, 297-311.
Janesick, V. J. (1998). The Dance of Qualitative Research Design:Metaphor, Methodolatry and Meaning. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S.Lincoln (Eds.) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (pp.35-55). ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.
Johnson, R.B. & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed Method Research:A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. American EducationalResearch, 33(7), 14-26.
Jones, J. (1989). Students’ ratings of teacher personality andteaching competence. Higher Education, 18, 551-558.
Kiseling, H.J. (1969). The Relationship of School Input to PublicSchool Performance in New York State. Washington, D.C.: Office ofEducation, U.S Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Kiseling, H.J. (1970). The Stud of Cost and Quality of New ofSchool Districts: Final Report. Washington, D.C.: Office ofEducation, U.S Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Kleinfeld, J., McDiarmid, G.W., Grubis, S., & Parrett, W. (1983).Doing Research on Effective Cross-Cultural Teaching: The TeacherTale. Peabody Journal of Education, 61(1), 86-108.
Kratz, H.E. (1896). Characteristics of the teacher as recognizedby children. Pedagogic Seminar, 3.
Koermer, C.D. & Petelle, J.L. (1991). Expectancy violation andstudent rating of instruction. Communication Education, 39(4), 341-350.
Koushki, P.A., & Kuhn, H.A.J. (1982). How reliable are studentevaluations of teachers?, Engineering Education, 72(3), 362–367.
Kulik, J.A. (2001). Student Ratings: Validity, Utility andControversy. New Directions for Institutional Research, 109, 9-25.
Kulik, J.A. & McKachie, W.J. (1975). The Evaluation of Teachersin Higher Education. In F.N. Kerlinger (Ed.) Review of Research inEducation, 3. Itasca, Ill.: Peacock.
Kutnick, P. & Jules, V. (1993). Pupils’ perceptions of a goodteacher: a developmental perspectives from Trinidad and Tobago.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 400-413.
Lang, M. (1996). The role of the linguistics environment insecond language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.),Handbook of second language acquisition. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lattuca, L.R., & Domagal-Goldman, J.M. (2007). Using QualitativeMethods to Assess Teaching Effectiveness. New Directions forInstitutional Research, 136, 81-93.
Law on Primary and Secondary Education. (2003). Ministry ofEducation, Science and Technology. Prishtina: Kosova
Leinhardt, G. (1983). Overlap: Testing whether it is taught. InG.F. Madaus (Ed.) The Courts, Validity, and Minimum Competency Testing(pp.153-170). Hingham, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
Levin, H.M. (1970). A new model of school effectiveness. In A.Mood (Ed.) Do Teachers Make a Difference?. Washington D.C.: Office ofEducation, U.S. Department of Heath, Education, and Welfare.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba. E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies,contradictions and emerging confluences. In N.K. Denzin, Y.S.Lincoln & E. G. Guba (Eds.) Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.,pp.163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Linn, R.L. (1981). Measuring pretest-postest performance changes.In R.A. Berk (Ed.) Educational Evaluation Methodology: The State of the Art (p.84-142). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lowman, J. (1996). Characteristics of exemplary teachers. NewDirections for Teaching and Learning, 65, 33-40.
Malikow, M. (2006). Effective Teacher Study. National Form of TeacherEducation Journal – Electronic, 16(3E), 1-9.
Malikow, M. (2007). Professors’ Irritating Behavior Study. CollegeStudent Journal, 41(1), 25-33.
Marsh, H.W. (1987). Students’ evaluations of university teaching:research findings, methodological issues, and directions forfuture research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 253-388.
Marsh, H.W. & Cooper, T.L. (1981). Prior subject interest,students’ evaluations, and instructor effectiveness. MultivariateBehavior Research, 16(1), 82-104.
Marsh, H.W. & Dunkin, M.J. (1992). Students evaluations’ ofuniversity teaching: a multidimensional perspective. In J.C.Smart (Ed.) Higher Education Handbook of Theory and Research (p. 143-223).New York: Agathon Press.
Marsh, H.W. & Roche, L.A. (1997). Making students’ evaluation ofteaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues ofvalidity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist, 52, 1187-1197.
Mayeske, G.W. & Beaton, A.E. (1975). Special Studies of OurNation’s Students. Office of Education, U.S. Department of Heath,Education, and Welfare.
McBer, H. (2000). Research into Teacher Effectiveness – A Modelof Teacher Effectiveness. Department of Education and Employment,UK. Research Report, 216, 1-70.
McCabe, N. (1995). Twelve High School 11th Grade Students ExamineTheir Best Teachers. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(2), 117-126.
McClung, M.S. (1979) Competency testing programs: Legal andeducational issues. Fordham Law Review, 47, 651-712.
Medley, D.M., Coker, H., & Soar, R.S. (1984). Measurement-BasedEvaluation of Teacher Performance: An Empirical Approach. NewYork: Langman.
Mehrens, W.A., & Philips, S.E. (1986). Detecting impacts ofcurricular differences in achievement test data. Journal ofEducational Measurement, 23, 185-196.
Michael, W.B, Herrold, E.E., & Cryan, E.W. (1951). Survey ofstudent-teacher relationship, Journal of Educational Research, 44, 657-673. Michaelson, S. (1970). The association of the teacherresourceness with children’s characteristics. In A. Mood (Ed.)Do Teachers Make a Difference?. Washington D.C.: Office of Education,U.S. Department of Heath, Education, and Welfare.
Miron, M. & Segal, E. (1978). “The Good University Teacher” asPerceived by the Students. Higher Education, 7(1), 27-34.
Moss, R.H. (1997). Evaluating educational environments:Procedures, measures, findings and policy implications. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mourer, O.H. (1960). Learning Theory and Behavior. New York, NY: JohnWiley & Sons.
Murnane, R.J. (1975). The Impact of School Resources on the Learning of InnerCity Children. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Musella, D. & Rush, R. (1968). Student opinion on collegeteaching. Improving College and University Teaching, 16, 137-140.
Musgrove, F. & Taylor, P.H. (1969). Pupils’ Expectations ofTeachers. In A. Morrison & D. McIntyre (1977) The Social Psychology ofTeaching (p. 171–182). Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd.
Naciye, A. (1998). Opinions of Upper Elementary Students about a“Good Teacher”. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of theNorthwestern Educational Research Association (29th, Ellenville,NY, October 28 – 30, 1998)
National Association of Secondary School Principals. (1997).Student say: What makes a good teacher? Schools in the Middle, 6(5),15-17.
Ogden, D.H., Chappmen, A.D., and Doak,L. (1994). Characteristicsof good/effective teachers: Gender differences in studentdescriptors. Nashwille, Tennessee. (ERIC Document ReproductionService No: 383 657).
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods(3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Payne, M. (1987). Determinants of teacher popularity andunpopularity: a West Indian perspective. Journal of Education forTeaching, 3, 139-148.
Prave, R.S. & Baril, G.L. (1993). Instructor ratings: Controllingfor bias from initial student interest. Journal of Education for Business68, 362–366.
Popham, W.J. (1983). Issues in determining adequacy-of-preparation. Symposium paper presented at the annual meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April. Renaud, R.D., and Murray, H. G. (1996). Aging, personality, andteaching effectiveness in academic psychologists. Research in HigherEducation, 37, 323-340.
Richardson, J. (1996). Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods forPsychology and Social Science, Leicester, UK: The British PsychologicalSociety.
Riessman, C.K. (2008). Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. ThousandOak, CA: Sage.
Rodin, M & Rodin, B. (1972). Student Evaluation of Teachers.Science, 177, 1164-1166.
Sandford, J.P. (1984). Management and organization in scienceclassroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 575-587.
Schmidt, W.H., Porter, A.C., Schwille, J.R., Floden, R.E., andFreeman, D.J. (1983). Validity as a variable: Can the samecertification test be valid for all students? The Courts, Validity, andMinimum Competency Testing (p. 133-151). Hingham, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff,Soar & Soar.
Schwandt, T.A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approachesto human inquiry. In N.K.Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbookof Qualitative Research (pp 118-137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research: A PracticalHandbook, London: Sage.
Singleton, R., Straits, B., Straits, M. &McAllister, R. (1988).Approaches to Social Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Soar, R.S., & Soar, R.N. (1972). An Empirical Analysis ofSelected Follow-Through Programs: An Example of a Process
Approach to Evaluation. In I. J. Gordon (Ed.) Early ChildhoodEducation. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Evaluation.
Sprague, J. & Massoni, K. (2004). Student Evaluations and GenderedExpectations: What We Can’t Count Can Hurt Us. Unpublished manuscript,University of Kansas.
Stake, R.E. (1994). Case Studies. In N.K.Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln(Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.236-247). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Strategy for the Development of Preuniversity Education inKosovo – 2007 – 2017 (2006). Ministry of Education, Science andTechnology. Prishtina: Kosova
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Groundedtheory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.
Strohkirch, C.S. & Hargett, J. G. (1999). Student perceptions ofmale and female instructor immediacy and teacher credibility.Paper presented at the annual Organization for the Study ofCommunication, Language, and Gender Conference, Wichita, KS,October, 1999.
Summers, A.A. & Wolfe, B.L. (1977). Do schools make a difference?American Economic Review, 67, 639-652.
Tatro, C.N. (1995). Gender effects on students’ evaluation offaculty. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28(3), 169-173.
Taylor, P. (1962). Children’s evaluations of the characteristicsof a good teacher. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 32, 258-266.
Tetenbaum, T. (1975). The Role of Student Needs and TeacherOrientations in Student Ratings of Teachers. American EducationalResearch Journal, 12(4), 417-429.
Thomas, D. (1975). Education’s seven deadly myths. NASSP Bulleting,59.
Tuckman, B. (1995). Assessing Effective Teaching. Peabody Journal ofEducation, 70(2), 127-138.
Young, B. N., Whitley, M.E., & Helton, C. (1998). Students;perceptions of Characteristics of Effective Teachers. Paperpresented at the annual Meeting of the Mid-South EducationalResearch Association, New Orleans, LA, November, 1998.
Wagenaar, Th.C. (1995). Student Evaluation of Teaching: SomeCautions and Suggestions. Teaching Sociology, 23(1), 64-68.
Wang, J., Gibson, A.M. & Slate, J.R. (2007). Effective teachersas viewed by students at a 2 year college: A multistage mixedanalysis. Issues in Educational Research, 17, 1-23.
Watchtel, H.K. (1998). Student evaluation of college teachingeffectiveness: a brief review Assessment and Evaluation in HigherEducation, 23(2), 191-211.
Webb, E.J., Campbell, D.T., Schwartz, R.D. & Sechrest, L. (1969).Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Science. Skokie, Ill:Rand McNally.
White, L., Wyne, M., Stuck, G. & Coop, R.H. (1987). AssessingTeacher Performance Using an Observational Instrument Based onResearch Findings. NASSP Buletin, March, 89-95.
Whitworth, J.E., Price, B.A., & Randall. C.H. (2002). FactorsThat Affect College ofBusiness Student Opinion of Teaching and Learning. Journal ofEducation for Business, 282-89.
Wierstra, R.A., & Shaw, D.G. (1999). Profiles of effectivecollege and university teachers. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(6),670-686.
Wiley, D.E. (1976). Another hour, another day: Quantity ofschooling, a potent path for policy. In W.H. Sewell, D.I.
Featherman, & R.M. Hauser (Eds.) Schooling and Achievement in AmericanSociety. New York: Academic Press.
Williams, T.B. (1980). The distributions of NCE, percentile, andgrade equivalent scores among twelve nationally standardizedtests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, Boston, April.
Williams, W.M., & Ceci, S J. (1997). How’m I Doing? Problemswith Student Ratings of Instructors and Courses. Change, 29(5),13–23.
Winkler, D.R. (1975). Educational achievement and school peergroup composition. Journal of Human Resources, 10, 189-205.
Witcher, A.E., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Minor, L. (2001).Characteristics of effective teachers: Perceptions of preserviceteachers. Research in the Schools, 8, 45-57.
Woessner-Kelly, A. & Woessner, M.C. (2006). My Professor is aPartisan Hack: How Perceptions of a Professor’s Political ViewAffect Student Course Evaluations. The Teacher, 495 – 501.
Zhang, L F., Huang, J., & Zhang, L. (2005). Preferences inteaching styles among Hong Kong and US university students.Journal of Psychology, 39, 1319-1331.
Zumwalt, K. (1982). Research on teaching: Policy implications forteacher education. In A. Liberman and M. McLaughling (Eds.)Policymaking in education: Eighty-first yearbook of the national society for the study ofeducation, Part 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
top related