professional development and training for young teachers in … 2-2016 en.pdf · we use talis...

http://vo.hse.ru/en/

Professional Development and Training for Young Teachers in RussiaMarina Pinskaya, Alena Ponomareva, Sergey Kosaretsky

Marina Pinskaya Candidate of Sciences in Pedagogy, Lead Researcher at the Center of Social and Economic School Development, In-stitute of Education, National Research University — Higher School of Econom-ics. E-mail: [email protected] Ponomareva Master of Psychology, Junior Researcher at the Center of Education Quality Mon-itoring, Institute of Education, Nation-al Research University — Higher School of Economics. E-mail: [email protected] Kosaretsky Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Director of the Center of Social and Eco-nomic School Development, Institute of Education, National Research Universi-ty — Higher School of Economics. E-mail: [email protected]: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation.Abstract. Based on TALIS‑2013 re-sults, we analyze the formal education of young teachers in Russia, their allo-cation, induction, professional develop-ment, the challenges they meet in teach-ing, and their satisfaction with the feed-back they receive from their colleagues

and school administration. We show that Russian teachers are not a homoge-neous whole, as evaluations made by teachers of different ages differ greatly in all areas. Young teachers face chal-lenges in professional communication and barriers to participation in profes-sional development. At the same time, they are not prepared to solve practi-cal teaching tasks and have insufficient knowledge of modern teaching tech-niques. We come to the conclusion that young teachers need more opportuni-ties for professional development, par-ticularly for active learning methods and learning in groups. Their chances of suc-cessful adaptation to school teaching standards could be increased by pro-viding them with a specific induction and adaptation period to support their ba-sic motivation and prevent the flight of young teachers from school due to low job satisfaction.Keywords: school, young teachers, professional development, feedback, job satisfaction, professional compe-tencies. DOI: 10.17323/1814‑9545‑2016‑2‑100‑124

There is a growing ageing population among the school workforce, as discovered by Russian and foreign comparative studies. A major ef-fort has been made over recent years at both national and regional lev-el to support young teachers, increase their salaries, provide mentor-ship and foster the development of their professional competencies.

Received in February 2016


https://vo.hse.ru/en/by_authors/26562439.html

mailto:mpinskaya%40hse.ru?subject=


mailto:aponomareva%40hse.ru?subject=

mailto:aponomareva%40hse.ru?subject=


mailto:skosaretski%40hse.ru?subject=

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies. Moscow. 2016. No 2. P. 100–124

RECRUITMENT, EDUCATION, AND RETENTION OF TEACHERS

We use TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey) to ac-quire information on the problems faced by young teachers, their pro-fessional needs and deficiencies. The TALIS‑2013 data allowed us to analyze the state of the Russian teacher community with due regard to the age of the respondents and to the social context they work in. The analysis revealed that Russian teachers should not be treated as a homogeneous and consolidated group with the same professional attitudes and views on the current situation in education. The teach-ers are differentiated by their social context (workforce characteris-tics) and age, with a number of problems being most overtly report-ed by specific categories of teachers, in particular by young teachers.

The results of TALIS‑2013 allow for a conclusion that the problems faced by young teachers have their roots in formal education or, rath-er, in the lack of some vital components to this education.

Despite the lack of large-scale studies, there is enough evidence of the efficiency of the field experience teacher education compo-nent. Upon four years of research on 28 teacher training schools and departments in the U.S., Arthur Levine describes the most success-ful programs as follows: “These teacher education programs are com-mitted to preparing excellent teachers and have clearly defined what an excellent teacher needs to know and be able to do. The field ex-perience component of the curriculum is sustained, begins early, and provides immediate application of theory to real classroom situations. There is a close connection between the teacher education program and the schools in which students teach, including ongoing collabo-ration between academic and clinical faculties. All have high gradua-tion standards.” [Levine, 2006. P. 81]

This connection between theory and practice, university and school, is what is missing in the formal education that Russian teach-ers have been obtaining.

All researchers admit that clinical preparation during studies is a crucial requirement in making a good teacher. The US National Re-search Council identifies such clinical preparation (or “field experi-ence”) as one of the three “aspects of teacher preparation that are likely to have the highest potential for effects on outcomes for stu-dents” along with content knowledge and the quality of teacher candi-dates [National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2010].

Having acknowledged the role of quality field experience, it is im-portant to identify what builds this quality. Linda Darling-Hammond believes that the most powerful programs require students to spend extensive time in the field throughout the entire program, including at least a full academic year of student teaching under the direct super-vision of one or more teachers who model expert practice with stu-dents who have a wide range of learning needs [Darling-Hammond, 2006]. International experts in teacher education also stress that su-

Formal education of

teachers

https://vo.hse.ru/data/2016/06/28/1115860975/Pinskaya.pdf


Marina Pinskaya, Alena Ponomareva, Sergey Kosaretsky Professional Development and Training for Young Teachers in Russia

pervised clinical experiences should be integrated with more formal coursework [Cooper, Alvarado, 2006]. Such experiences give young teachers the opportunity to learn vital professional competencies re-quired for quality teaching such as classroom management skills, and the ability to use assessment instruments and assessment result anal-ysis techniques.

Young Russian teachers surveyed by TALIS‑2013 reported feel-ing very well prepared much less often than teachers in any other age group (Fig. 1). We compared the answers of teachers aged over 60 and those under 29 to the question on the elements included in their formal education or training (Fig. 2). If what the respondents say is true, the formal education obtained by the oldest teachers differs lit-tle from that of the youngest ones. That is to say, it has little changed over 30 years, and there has been no substantial redistribution of time spent on different education elements.

Meanwhile, international research shows that formal education of today’s young teachers is hugely different from the training received by their senior colleagues in that it offers more field experience. Today,

Figure . The proportion of teachers in different age groups who feel well or very well prepared in specifi c elements of teacher education

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60 Well Very well

Classroom practice in the subject(s) I teach

Pedagogy of the subject(s) I teach

Content of the subject(s) I teach

61,55 33,38

52,2744,09

48,8749,95

41,657,6

67,4320,38

62,52 31,73

54,2543,28

45,5953,11

59,81 24,33

57,135,16

48,74 48,64

42,8956,08




prospective teachers focus less on the content and engage more in pedagogy and clinical practice. However, the field experience element has slightly shrunk in Russian teacher training programs.

The gap in feeling prepared between young and experienced teachers in Russia is much wider than the average in the internation-al sample, particularly in pedagogy (Fig. 3).

What stands out in this figure is the overall higher self‑assess-ment of Russian teachers over 60. Additional research is required to find out the reasons for such overconfidence, but this circumstance does not negate the problem identified regarding the organization of teacher education.

The proportion of teachers with no higher education is greater among the younger workforce (Table 1). Graduates of teacher training

Figure . The proportion of teachers who feel well or very well prepared in specifi c elements of teacher education. Evaluations by Russian teachers as compared to the international means

RF

IM

RF

IM

RF

IM




94,999,2

91,992,4

87,898,7

84,7 88,3

84,199,0

83,888,9

Figure . Elements of teacher education. Evaluations by Russian teachers as compared to the international means

RF

IM

RF

IM

RF

IM

Under 29 Over 60




97,297,0

95,191,1

95,894,6

92,086,3

91,3 93,5

90,082,3




colleges have actively headed to schools over the recent years. Some of them might have been distance students at the time of the survey.

A definitely positive trend is that most young and inexperienced teach-ers in Russia are allocated to advantaged schools, which is rarely true for the other TALIS countries [OECD, 2015]. The OECD report says that new and less experienced teachers are more likely to work in chal-lenging schools, where they cannot cope with the challenges they face. As a result, student performance gets worse and the propor-tion of young teachers in the profession drops [Ingersoll, 2002]. Rus-sian schools, however, are lucky to avoid such allocation patterns. Among teachers under twenty‑five, 50.34% work in the least challeng-ing schools, 39.17% in medium‑challenging schools and only 10.48% in the most challenging schools.

Andreas Schleicher’s report Building a High-Quality Teaching Profes-sion. Lessons From Around the World prepared for the International Summit on the Teaching Profession in 2011 shows that contemporary education programs for new teachers in many countries focus not so much on content but rather on on-site training to combine theory and practice effectively. Apart from an academic course with emphasis on research methods and ultramodern teaching practices, a prospec-tive teacher should undertake over a year of classroom practice in a school that keeps in touch with the university. This classroom practice is designed to help teachers develop and try out innovative methods and techniques and, of course, engage in their own research on learn-ing and teaching practices.

The levels of professional teacher education, induction programs and professional development should be interconnected to provide continuous learning for teachers.

In many countries, teacher education is not restricted to building a comprehensive subject-related knowledge database and teaching

Allocation

Professional development

Table 1. The highest level of formal education completed by teachers in different age groups (%).

Age

29 or younger 30–39 40–59 60 or older

Secondary or elementary education 0.12 2.00 1.72 0

Secondary vocational education 15.51 4.38 7.94 6.70

Higher education 84.04 92.55 89.94 92.33

Candidate or doctor degree 0.32 1.07 0.39 0.97




pedagogy and related sciences. Instead, it also implies the develop-ment of analytical and research skills to be applied in the classroom. Education systems in Finland and Shanghai illustrate how prospective teachers develop research competencies which are considered to be the foundation of professional training [Schleicher, 2011]. The ability to analyze student learning mechanisms and conditions allows teach-ers to adjust to the needs of students who fall behind, have conflicts with peers or need support in any other way.

Mentoring is widely used in providing clinical practice for teach-ers. According to research, mentoring of new teachers has close to zero effect on performance outcomes [Hattie, 2009]. However, it does have an effect on attitudes, motivation [Ibid.] and the well‑being of new teachers [Totterdell et al., 2004]. Ultimately, mentoring results in growing new teacher retention rates and reduced teacher attrition costs [Darling‑Hammond, 2003].

About one‑third (30.3%) of Russian teachers under 30 report hav-ing mentors, which is a much lower proportion than that accepted by contemporary international teacher training and induction programs. Young teachers believe that they fall behind their senior colleagues in the quality of professional development right from the the beginning of their induction period (Table 2).

Formal induction programs for teachers are quite widespread, covering over 60% of new teachers. The proportion of new teachers engaged in formal induction programs is higher in the countries con-sidered to be exemplary in terms of professional teacher education: over 80% in Canada, over 90% in the Netherlands, Australia and Ja-pan, and nearly 100% in Singapore.

According to the survey results, young teachers have less access to various professional development activities while already working, as compared to other age groups (Fig. 4).

Table 2. The proportions of teachers participating in induction programs by age group (as a percentage of the total population of the relevant cohort)

Age


I participate(d) in an induction program for new teachers

43.67 50.77 64.36 65.39

I participate(d) in informal induction activities for new teachers which are not part of an induction program

38.37 42.67 50.89 49.60

I participate(d) in a general and/or administra-tive introduction to the school for new teachers

58.96 57.68 66.53 61.12




Young teachers confirm participation in professional development programs less often than any other age group in nearly all activities, including those that conform to the Federal State Education Standard and the Occupational Standard in Teaching (Table 3).

70,578,1

82,771,1

43,948,7

53,452,0

43,054,1

53,452,0

7,812,012,6

8,444,7

51,766,1

50,552,0

69,676,0

72,228,729,9

42,340,3

Courses/workshops

Education conferences or seminars

Observation visits to other schools

Qualifi cation programs

Participation in a network of teachers formed specifi cally for the professional development of teachers

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest to you professionally

Mentoring and/or peer observation and coach-ing, as part of a formal school arrangement

Figure . The proportions of teachers in different cohorts who participated in any of the listed professional development activities during the last 12 months

Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60

Table 3. Participation of teachers in professional development programs by age group (as a percentage of the total population of the relevant cohort)

Age


Pedagogical competencies in teaching my subject field(s)

79.74 89.66 88.66 87.85

Student behavior and classroom management 78.63 82.29 78.18 80.35

School management and administration 15.21 25.39 22.13 11.91

Approaches to individualized learning 56.29 66.14 69.93 74.23

Teaching students with special needs 25.79 29.11 29.02 37.79

Approaches to developing cross-occupationalcompetencies for future work or future studies

54.52 62.44 67.81 64.23

Student career guidance and counseling 35.41 46.29 58.05 60.46




Table 4. School administration’s support for the professional development of teachers by age group (as a percentage of the total population of the relevant cohort)

Age


I received scheduled time for activities that took place during regular working hours at this school

52.79 54.04 60.73 51.88

I received a salary supplement for activities outside working hours

34.55 32.22 34.52 32.50

I received non-monetary support for activities outside working hours (reduced teaching, days off, study leave, etc.)

25.22 23.27 24.46 21.99

Figure . Professional development activities that teachers of different ages took part in during the last 12 months

Yes, in most activities

Yes, in all activities

24,579,63

35,3914,05

33,4419,37

25,2721,08

27,266,91

25,677,24

31,2712,07

30,0510,24

15,884,43

15,625,20

23,406,67

15,356,34

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Collaborative learning activities or research with other teachers

Opportunities for active learning methods (not only listening to a lecturer)

Working with a group of colleagues from my school or subject group




Young teachers were the least likely to confirm participation in the most active forms of professional development based on collabora-tion and involving research (Fig. 5).

Meanwhile, no considerable difference was revealed between re-ports of young teachers and teachers from other age groups on in-centives and support for professional development provided by the school administration. Table 4 proves that new teachers are support-ed just as well as their more experienced colleagues.

However, young teachers report more often about barriers to their professional development than their senior colleagues, despite the support received (Fig. 6).

Figure . The proportions of teachers who agree that the listed factors present barriers to their professional development

Strongly agree Agree

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

There is a lack of employer support

Professional development confl icts with my work schedule

I do not have time because of family responsibilities

There is no relevant professional development offered

There are no incentives for participating in such activities

Professional development is too expensive/unaffordable

I do not have the pre-requisites (e. g. qualifi cations, experience, seniority)

3,9 26,07

3,87 12,09

3,8 7,89

3,9 10,33

2,44 22,4

2,71 20,99

3,16 16,08

2,5 15,33

5,83 16,93

3,23 18,93

2,74 14,29

2,1 10,84

7,29 30,38

5,43 32,27

3,94 21,12

1,31 12,3

9,42 40,11

8,18 42,96

4,35 31,81

3,05 16,53

3,88 20,33

1,61 20,81

1,95 15,46

2,57 18,5

5,51 17,94

6,84 19,98

4,44 23,79

6,39 24,57




Figure . High and average demand for advanced teacher training in various elements across different age groups

High Average

Knowledge of the curriculum

Student evaluation and assessment practices

ICT (information and communication technology) skills for teaching

Student behavior and classroom management

School management and administration

Pedagogical competencies in teaching my subject fi eld(s)

Knowledge and understanding of my subject fi eld(s)

Teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting

Teaching cross-curricular skills (e. g. problem solving, learning-to-learn)

New technologies in the workplace

Teaching students with special needs

Approaches to individualized learning

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

17,45 29,57

17,78 28,1

19,97 24,2

18,8 16,09

17,32 37,51

18,43 34,69

19,59 26,01

16,64 21,39

13,71 26,47

17,30 24,96

22,44 15,52

21,77 11,62

11,03 35,12

14,43 32,8

18,09 21,75

18,44 16,2

16,12 33,36

15,16 31,48

16,26 20,95

15,16 16,83

10,32 26,6

8,28 19,87

7,56 16,33

3,78 10,39

9,64 33,76

9,77 31,26

12,36 27,66

10,27 21,98

9,83 26,25

11,52 23,05

8,07 19,94

5,9 13,6

9,48 21,51

13,3 20,47

7,56 13,5

7,55 10,08

11,26 34,48

13,31 37,69

12,91 31,53

9,98 21,12

10,66 35,62

14,53 31,44

13 32,81

8,82 27,29

23,54 34,51

18,8 40,14

21,37 42,58

16,48 40,8




According to young teachers, the lack of time because of family responsibilities and an inconvenient work schedule are the major bar-riers to their professional development. At the same time, they are the least likely to agree that there are no incentives for participating in pro-fessional development activities.

Young teachers have high demands for professional growth and development (Fig. 7). The survey shows that they also assess their professional deficiencies more adequately.

The nature of teachers’ demands measures the efficiency of con-temporary higher education for teachers. The lack of classroom management skills and the advantage in ICT skills are understand-able and natural for new teachers. However, when young teachers who have just completed their formal education lack pedagogical and teaching competencies required by the Federal State Education Standard and the Occupational Standard in Teaching (such as ap-proaches to individualized learning or teaching students with special needs), it is clear that the teacher education system is seriously fail-ing somewhere.

Young teachers are the least satisfied with the feedback they receive about their work from colleagues and school administration. Those who feel less prepared and explicitly demand professional develop-ment are more likely to be unhappy with the lack of specific feedback, which means that they do not receive teaching and pedagogical sup-port in the workplace. Many young teachers have assigned mentors. However, the proportion of those who get feedback from mentors amounts to just 27.8% in one aspect, “ Feedback following direct ob-servation of your classroom teaching”. Feedback from mentors fol-lowing an assessment of content knowledge is provided to 22.3% of young teachers, while other types of feedback, including feedback following analysis of students’ test scores, are only provided to 10–15%.

Young teachers rate the emphasis placed on various aspects of their professional activities by their colleagues and school adminis-tration much lower than teachers in other age groups. In particular, 28% of young teachers report that “collaboration or working with oth-er teachers” was considered as low importance or not considered at all. Only 10.6% of middle‑aged teachers provided the same answer. We can clearly see the lack of professional communication suffered by a large proportion of young teachers.

In addition, the effect of feedback on motivation is much more crit-ical for young teachers than for their senior colleagues. Young teach-ers are more likely to believe that the feedback they have received has led to moderate or large positive changes in their motivation and job satisfaction. They are also a trifle more likely to see positive changes in their teaching practices (Fig. 8).

Teacher feedback




A we can see, young teachers are the most likely to show an inter-est in teacher feedback, and aswith professional development, they are the least satisfied with how their demands are met.

Young teachers are more critical about the quality and productivity of teacher appraisals in their schools. For instance, they are less like-ly to agree that the best performing teachers receive the greatest rec-ognition and are more likely to report that teacher appraisal and feed-back are largely done to fulfill administrative requirements and have little impact upon the way teachers teach in the classroom. Besides, they believe less often, as compared to their senior colleagues, that feedback is provided to teachers based on a thorough assessment of their teaching or helps improve their teaching, e. g. by serving as the basis for a development or training plan.

Young teachers are apparently not satisfied with the organization of professional communication in teaching, just as in any other aspects of school life, choosing “Never” to the question “How often do teach-ers in your school work in close collaboration?” more often than their senior colleagues (Fig. 9). The proportion of those who never take part in collaborative professional learning is much higher among young teachers, even though this is what they need the most. The most pos-itive answers were provided by middle-aged teachers.

Young teachers assess their teaching skills to be lower in all as-pects than their colleagues in other age groups (Fig. 10).

Teaching

Figure . The proportions of teachers in different age groups who see positive changes caused by the feedback they have received

83,18

80,24

78,99

74,47

77,47

64,85

72,2

65,75

78,03

72,02

73,38

69,67

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Your motivation

Your job satisfaction

Your teaching practices




Managing student behavior and classroom time presents difficul-ties for young teachers, who spend more time on administrative tasks and keeping order in the classroom than on actual teaching (Table 5).

Figure 11 demonstrates that young teachers find student behav-ior and classroom management more challenging than their more ex-perienced colleagues.

Young teachers possess a restricted repertoire of teaching skills, so their students have fewer opportunities for independent active work in the classroom. At least this is the feedback from the answers of young teachers to the question about the classroom activities that happen throughout the school year (Fig. 12).

Figure . The proportions of respondents who chose “Never” to the question on participating in various professional communication activities by age group

46,3716,3

23,0910,85

2,578,08

17,6913,24

38,786,92

13,067,04

3,214,79

9,457,26

32,674,14

9,452,2

1,042,74

5,213,9

36,173,87

15,74,72

0,722,81

4,924,87

Teach jointly as a team in the same class

Observe other teachers’ classes and provide feedback

Engage in joint activities across different classes and age groups (e.g. projects)

Exchange teaching materials with colleagues

Engage in discussions about the learning development of specifi c students

Work with other teachers in my school to ensure common standards in evaluations for assessing student progress

Attend team conferences

Take part in collaborative professional learning

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60




Figure . The proportions of teachers who report having specifi c classroom skills by age group

Quite a bit To some extent

Craft good questions for my students

Control disruptive behavior in the classroom

Motivate students who show low interest in school work

Make my expectations about student behavior clear

Help students think critically

Help my students value learning

Get students to believe they can do well in school work

Use a variety of assessment strategies

Provide an alternative explanation, for example when students are confused

Implement alternative instructional strategies in my classroom

Calm a student who is disruptive or noisy

Get students to follow classroom rules

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

Under 2930–3940–59

Over 60

40,89 53,11 41,47 56,08 51,25 46,78 46,55 50,45

27,12 62,71 30,79 62,84 38,09 56,91 36,11 54,86

42,02 48,93 49,57 44,93 58,72 37,9 56,43 36,96

24,38 60,04 35,21 59,93 40,93 52,53 42,23 48,96

26,64 56,05 26,68 63,09 32,01 59,76 27,34 62,26

35,41 55,56 41,56 52,7 45,86 48,99 41,29 51,76

22,17 59,6 28,62 59,5 36,82 55,79 35,95 57,54

44,01 48,1 58,56 38,37 65,43 31,96 65,76 30,65

42,31 48,68 53,7 42,73 60,15 36,17 58,86 32,97

34,17 58,79 48,23 49,42 58,76 38,18 57,14 41,46

48,58 46,02 57,2 39,38 62,94 35,2 56,43 40,74

32,1 55,76 37,3 54,99 43,15 49,3 47,6 48,09




Paradoxically, the survey reveals that young teachers report not only less opportunity for their students to work in small groups and practice tasks independently but also a lower level of ICT use, the paradox being that at their age they should enjoy an obvious advan-tage in ICT skills.

Young teachers do not feel confident using assessment instru-ments other than conventional marking: Figure 13 compares how of-ten they use such instruments as compared to the average Russian sample frequency and the international mean. Young teachers are more likely to say “Never” to the questions on using their own assess-ment system, providing written feedback on student work in addition to a mark, and encouraging students to evaluate their own progress.

Table 5. Distribution of classroom time by teachers of different age groups

Age


Administrative tasks (e. g. recording attend-ance, handing out school information/forms

9.35 7.79 6.10 5.64

Keeping order in the classroom (maintaining discipline)

12.35 7.23 4.96 5.18

Actual teaching and learning 77.65 84.79 87.63 88.66

When the lesson begins, I have to wait quite a long time for students to quiet down

Students in this class take care to create a pleasant learning atmosphere

I lose quite a lot of time because of students interrupting the lesson

There is much disruptive noise in this classroom

Figure . Assessment of challenges in student behavior and classroom management by teachers of different age groups

60,34,8

69,510,0

69,512,6

65,712,4


20,75,2

12,7

10,5

8,4

1,5

1,0

2,0

37,16,3

21,7

16,0

16,8

1,5

1,0

2,0

19,56,5

9,5

12,62,2

12,21,6

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60




On average, young teachers find the school climate in more favorable than their senior colleagues (Fig. 14). As for their job satisfaction, the data is conflicting. On the one hand, young teachers tend to value the prestige of the teaching profession higher than older teachers: 58.7% of young teachers believe that the teaching profession has a high so-cial value, as compared to only 41% of middle‑aged teachers. On the other hand, 32–33% of all teachers under 40 wonder if it would have been better to choose another profession, while the proportion is only 18% among middle‑aged teachers (Fig. 15).

Job satisfaction

Figure . Frequency of various classroom activities undertaken by teachers of different ages

In all or nearly all lessons

Frequently

I present a summary of recently learned content

Students work in small groups to come up with a joint solution to a problem or task

I give different work to the students who have diffi culties learning and/or to those who can advance faster

I refer to a problem from everyday life or work to demonstrate why new knowledge is useful

I let students practice similar tasks until I know that every student has understood the subject matter

I check my students’ exercise books or homework

Students work on projects that require at least one week to complete

Students use ICT (information and communication technology) for projects or class work

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

20,04 35,27

23,54 36,54

31,91 33,48

30,29 30,37

2,18 27,96

3,53 36,83

5,71 41,76

4,76 33,49

9,73 44,3

16,86 45,73

14,85 54,26

17,14 47,4

21,17 49,23

25,92 53,49

27,18 53,89

31,11 49,96

16,78 48,22

16,29 60,68

25,72 51,39

33,25 49,46

50,39 29,02

44,9 29,79

51,25 25,96

51,22 22,33

3,44 14,15

2,91 21,34

4,98 16,88

7,79 17,4

11,84 28,22

11,23 36,49

13,08 37,47

11,94 25,64




The survey results make it clear that the Russian teachers cannot be regarded as a monolithic and homogeneous whole. There is obvi-ous differentiation between the attitudes and assessments of teachers in different age groups, the youngest teachers being the most critical. Hence the question: what if this critical attitude is a typical feature of young teachers who do not depend on the peculiarities of the nation-al education system and policies? To answer this question, we com-pared the answering patterns of TALIS respondents of different ages in the Russian and international samples.

Figure . The proportions of teachers using specifi c student assessment methods (Russian sample mean, international mean, mean for Russian teachers aged under )

RFIM

RF Under 30

RFIM

RF Under 30

RFIM

RF Under 30

RFIM

РФ Under 30

In all or nearly all lessons Frequently Occasionally Never or almost never

I develop and administer my own assessment

I administer a standardized test

I provide written feedback on student work in addition to a mark

I let students evaluate their own progress

4,46 22,68 45,13 27,73

17,54 49,45 26,71 6,31

2,84 18,74 48,35 30,07

10,16 53,76 32,15 3,93

5,46 33,24 37,39 23,91

6,28 48,66 38,26 6,79

2,71 15,99 39,72 41,59

11,73 42,12 32,58 13,57

2,38 12,37 35,1 50,14

5,71 36,49 50,36 7,44

6,33 33,31 47,26 13,1

2,4 24,88 56,95 15,77

In this school, teachers and students usually get on well with each other

Most teachers in this school believe that the students’ well-being is important

Most teachers in this school are interested in what students have to say

If a student from this school needs extra assistance, the school provides it

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Figure . Assessment of school climate by teachers of different age

96,497,697,4

98,7

86,892,1

94,492,3

85,590,2

94,194,7

94,593,5

95,897,1




We compared the indicators for different age groups in the Russian and international samples measured on complex TALIS scales that integrate answers to specific questions in the major survey units. The diagrams below show the average results on the scales with a 95% confidence interval.

Young teachers in Russia display much lower job satisfaction than their foreign peers, whereas assessments in the other age groups are pretty close to the international mean values. On the whole, age-spe-cific satisfaction patterns in Russia are obviously different from the av-erage TALIS ones (Fig. 16).

Differences are also found in the age‑specific patterns of assess-ing the opportunities for professional collaboration and profession-al development as well as one’s classroom management skills. Con-versely, evaluations of young teachers in Russia are close to those of their international peers, while more experienced teachers evalu-ate professional collaboration, opportunities for professional devel-opment and discipline in the classroom considerably higher than the average international indicators in their age groups (Fig. 17, 18, 19).

In all of the cases, the curves of the international means look much smoother than those of the Russian sample, which means that the dif-ferentiation of opinions across the age groups is less pronounced and the evaluations of young teachers are not starkly different from those of their experienced colleagues.

The curves showing how teachers evaluate their self‑efficacy and their demand for professional development look slightly less differ-ent (Fig. 20, 21).

Comparing the results in the

Russian sample to the international

means

If I could decide again, I would still choose to work as a teacher

I would like to change to another school if that were possible

I wonder whether it would have been better to choose another profession

I would recommend my school as a good place to work

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Under 29

30–39

40–59

Over 60

Figure . Job satisfaction of teachers in different age groups

54,319,5

51,517,5

51,826,5

58,033,3

60,020,0

67,616,3

65,322,3

70,621,9

21,0

12,7

8,3

6,5

8,4

30,0

29,1

17,8


2,4

2,5

1,6

1,0

2,7

2,9

1,8




Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60

Figure . Job satisfaction of school teachers by age group in the Russian sample as compared to the international mean values

РФМС

11,97

12,43

12,10 11,97

11,58 11,53

11,95

12,37

Figure . Evaluation of professional collaboration by teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as compared to the international means

Figure . Evaluation of the quality of professional de-velopment by teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as com-pared to the internation-al means

Figure . Evaluation of discipline in the classroom by teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as compared to the international means

Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60 Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60 Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60

10,4

10,2

10,0

10,2

10,0

10,0

10,0

9,8

8,8

8,7

9,1

8,810,9

11,2

11,8

11,3

12,0

11,4

11,99,5

9,3

8,9

8,7

Figure . Self-effi cacy evaluated by teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as compared to the international means

Figure . Demand for professional development evaluated by teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as compared to the international means

Figure . Constructivist orientation of teachers in different age groups in the Russian sample as compared to the international means

Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60 Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60 Under 29 30–39 40–59 Over 60

13,413,3

12,2

12,6

12,4

13,1

12,5

11,4

10,0

9,8

10,19,6

12,3

12,6

12,912,9

13,013,013,0

13,3

9,8

9,19,3

8,8




For these two parameters, the evaluations of Russian teachers are higher than the international means in all age groups, the pat-terns being quite similar. Therefore, young teachers in Russia as well as in other TALIS countries assess their performance lower than their senior colleagues and express a higher demand for professional de-velopment.

Constructivism scale measures teachers’ orientation to using ac-tivity-based approaches to classwork to encourage student involve-ment. According to the international indicators, such orientation is equally typical of teachers in all age groups in TALIS countries (Fig. 22). As for the Russian sample, commitment to advanced teaching methods grows in tandem with the age of teachers, the youngest teachers being the least committed.

The credibility of the survey data on age‑specific differences be-tween teachers’ evaluations and attitudes should be verified by testing a reasonable hypothesis: could it be that Russian teachers are likely to overestimate themselves with age, indulging in wishful thinking? This question provides a starting point for further research.

Summing up the major TALIS results describing the status of young teachers in Russian schools:

• of teachers aged under 30 claim that they did not take part in activities with a group of colleagues from their school or subject group during the last 12 months, as compared to only 3% of teach-ers aged 40–59;

• of teachers aged under 30 report that the professional develop-ment activities they took part in did not include opportunities for active learning methods, as compared to only 9% of teachers aged 40–59;

• of teachers aged under 30 believe that they do not have the pre‑requisites for professional development (e. g. qualifications, experience, seniority), as compared to only 15% of teachers aged 30–39 and 10% of teachers aged 40–59;

• young teachers experience difficulties in classroom management; they are not prepared to use advanced teaching methods, holding a more traditional orientation than their senior colleagues;

• of young teachers do not agree that students learn best by find-ing solutions to problems on their own, as compared to only 9% of teachers aged 40–59;

• of young teachers say that their students never use ICT for pro-jects or class work, as compared to only 10% of teachers in the oldest age group;

• only 25% of young teachers report that their students often ana-lyze and evaluate their own progress, as compared to 40% of teachers aged 40–59.

Conclusion




Thus, as we can see, young teachers face challenges in profession-al communication and barriers to participation in professional devel-opment. At the same time, they are not prepared to solve practical teaching tasks and have insufficient knowledge of modern teaching techniques. The education that they complete does not enable them to teach in compliance with the present-day active learning require-ments, neither does it provide them with the teaching skills required by the Federal State Education Standard and the Occupational Stand-ard in Teaching.

Young teachers need more opportunities for professional develop-ment, particularly in active learning methods and learning in groups. Their chances of a successful adaptation to school teaching standards, especially with challenging classrooms, could be increased by provid-ing a specific induction and adaptation period to support their basic motivation and prevent the flight of young teachers from schools due to low job satisfaction.

Of course, these measures do not exclude the need to modernize teacher education and increase the field experience element. Quite naturally, the synchronization of training and advanced training pro-grams for teachers with the occupational standard requirements will affect all groups of teachers, not only the youngest.

Cooper J., Alvarado A. (2006) Preparation, Recruitment, and Retention of Teach-ers. Paris: UNESCO.

Darling‑Hammond L. (2006) Constructing 21st Century Teacher Education. Jour-nal of Teacher Education, vol. 57, no 3, pp. 300–314.

Darling‑Hammond L. (2003) Keeping Good Teachers: Why it Matters, What Leaders Can do. Educational Leadership, vol. 60, no 8, pp. 6–13.

Hattie О. (2009) Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. London & New York: Routledge, Taylor& Francis.

Ingersoll R. (2002) Out-of-Field Teaching, Educational Inequality, and the Organ-ization of Schools: An Exploratory Analysis. A Research Report. Document R-02–1. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.

Levine A. (2006) Educating School Teachers. Washington DC: The Education Schools Project.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2010) Transforming Teacher Education through Clinical Practice: A National Strategy to Pre-pare Effective Teachers. http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/CAEP/Stand-ard%202/NCATE%20report%20.pdf

OECD (2015) Teaching in Focus — 2015/11. http://www.oecd‑ilibrary.org/doc-ser ver/download/5js1p1r88lg5.pdf?expires=1460989779&id=id&ac-cname=guest&checksum=B003A9EDD4BBB3AA4DD24D311FF6E08F

Totterdell M., Woodroffe L., Bubb S., Hanrahan K. (2004) The Impact of NQT In-duction Programmes on the Enhancement of Teacher Expertise, Profession-al Development, Job Satisfaction or Retention Rates: A Systematic Review of Research Literature on Induction. London: EPPI–Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.

References


http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/CAEP/Standard%202/NCATE%20report%20.pdf

http://www.uccs.edu/Documents/CAEP/Standard%202/NCATE%20report%20.pdf

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5js1p1r88lg5.pdf?expires=1460989779&id=id&accname=gu

