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.