Search

The academic search for principles of high-quality subject-matter teaching has been informed by different perspectives, in particular normative, epistemological, empirical, and pragmatic perspectives. While these perspectives have sometimes been treated as competing, we emphasize the need of their integration to identify sets of principles that can inform professional development programs for quality development. This paper starts from characterizing the four perspectives, and then shows how they are iteratively intertwined in providing a research base for specifying high-quality principles for teaching, in our case exemplified for the school subject mathematics. For this goal, we present the set of five principles that we have deemed as core principles for a new nationwide, ten-year professional development program in Germany: Conceptual Focus, Cognitive Demand, Student Focus and Adaptivity, Longitudinal Coherence, and Enhanced Communication. We will discuss these five principles against their backgrounds stemming from combing normative, epistemological, empirical, and pragmatic perspectives. This set of principles serves as an exemplary case to substantiate our general argumentation that contemporary educational research and professional development activities should not choose between perspectives but strive for combining them.

Video offers a richer source of data and has been proven to be useful as a primary source of research. A video from Youtube website was used as a primary source for analysis in this paper. This paper is applying a discourse analysis as suggested by Fairclough (2003) about the discourse as a way of representing; how the discourse was used to express and imply the social relation and action, and the belief committed by the user of the discourse. The analysis was aimed to identify teacher’s idea of good teaching by comparing it to relevant theories. The analysis found that cognitive-related terms were consistently appearing in the teacher’s discourses; therefore, cognitive theories were used to elaborate a deeper meaning of the discourses. It was concluded that good teaching for the teacher was to focus on students’ cognitive higher development.

Ideias sobre o que caracteriza um "bom professor" são importantes para se possa refletir a respeito da reforma educacional, e elas têm ganhado destaque recentemente. Essas ideias são controversas e estão abertas a mudanças. A primeira parte deste artigo examina modelos do que é considerado um "bom professor" na Austrália, desde os bons servidores da era colonial, passando pelo ideal do professor erudito autônomo, até as atuais listas de competências dos docentes. A segunda parte examina mais detalhadamente o modo pelo qual as autoridades responsáveis pelo registro e credenciamento de professores, em governos neoliberais, definem um "bom professor". A terceira parte oferece propostas para uma nova compreensão do conceito de "bom professor", baseadas no entendimento do processo de trabalho e da dinâmica ocupacional do ensino, na estrutura intelectual dos estudos sobre a Educação e na própria lógica da educação como um todo.Ideas about what makes a good teacher are important in thinking about educational reform, and have come into focus recently. These ideas are contested and open to change. The first part of this paper traces models of the good teacher in Australia from the colonial-era good servant, through an ideal of the autonomous scholar-teacher, to contemporary lists of teacher competencies. The second part looks more closely at the incoherent but insistent way the good teacher is now defined under neoliberal governance by teacher registration authorities. The third part of the paper makes proposals for a new understanding of good teachers: based on understanding the labour process and occupational dynamics of teaching, the intellectual structure of Education studies, and the overall logic of education itself.

Using the approach of critical discourse analysis this paper presents an examination of the notion of good teaching as constructed in the strategy document Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions. The aim is to draw attention to, and question how the language used in educational policy documents constructs particular meanings and purposes to concepts such as teaching and learning, as well as creating a particular version of the social relations within educational institutions. This in turn positions teachers and students in particular ways, constructing and limiting who they are and what they do. While contradictory discourses are found about the quality of teaching improvements are presented as being necessary for economic improvement. Similarly contradictory discourses are evident in relation to what good teaching is. However the need for reform is argued. Academics are positioned as passively following an institution-led research agenda, hence uninterested in teaching and in need of training, threats, incentives and monitoring to improve their teaching. Students are positioned as having one choice, to gain the knowledge and skills required for employment.

This paper defines and operationalizes definitions of good teaching, scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching and learning in order to measure characteristics of these definitions amongst undergraduate instructors at McMaster University. A total of 2496 instructors, including all part-time instructors, were surveyed in 2007. A total of 339 surveys were returned. Indices of good teaching, scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching and learning were developed. The data illustrated a strong correlation between good teaching and scholarly teaching and between scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching and learning. The perceived value placed upon teaching varied across the different Faculties. New instructors and those engaged in scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching and learning perceived teaching to be more valued than their peers.Le présent article définit et opérationnalise les définitions d’enseignement efficace[1], d’enseignement érudit[2] et de la publication sur l'enseignement supérieur[3] afin de mesurer les caractéristiques de ces définitions chez les enseignants de premier cycle de l’Université McMaster. Au total, 2 496 enseignants, y compris tous ceux qui travaillent à temps partiel, ont été sondés en 2007 et 339 questionnaires ont été retournés. Les chercheurs ont élaboré des indices d’un bon enseignement, d’un très bon enseignement et d’un excellent enseignement. Les données illustrent une forte corrélation entre un bon enseignement et un très bonenseignement, de même qu’entre un très bon enseignement et un excellent enseignement. La valeur perçue accordée à l’enseignement variait selon les différentes facultés. Les nouveaux enseignants pratiquant un très bon enseignement et un excellent enseignement trouvaient l’enseignement plus utile que leurs pairs.