Search

Purpose: To date very few studies have explored how second and foreign language (SL/FL) teachers’ attitudes affect their grammar teaching expertise acquisition. To shed light on this question, this study looked at what teachers’ grammar teaching attitudes are and how these attitudes impact the frequency of explicit goals which are an integral component of expertise development through informal problem-solving. The effect of experience on explicit goal-setting was also investigated. Design/methodology/approach: Teachers’ attitudes were explored through behavioral aggregation in a sample of 15 Bulgarian public school and university SL/FL teachers, who were divided into three experience groups. The behavioral aggregation was conducted on the basis of grammar teaching activities which the teachers performed, and then post-actively reported and elaborated upon. Explicit goals were uncovered through a planning task. Both descriptive and statistical analyses were conducted for an exhaustive picture. Findings and originality/value: Two attitudes dubbed wholesale grammar teaching referring to a holistic approach to grammar teaching and high complexity task attitude involving student assignments of higher difficulty tasks significantly predicted the teachers’ explicit goal frequencies. The others did not. In contrast to previous findings, experience was not a significant factor which determined explicit goal frequencies, underscoring the fact that the grammar teaching attitude orientation played a key role in the effectiveness of grammar teaching knowledge acquisition. Although further studies with larger samples need to be conducted, these results provide direct evidence of the relationships between some groups of SL/FL teachers’ beliefs and expertise development.

Purpose: Second and foreign language (SL/FL) teachers’ informal problem-solving has received little explicit research attention while it is widely acknowledged that problem-solving is crucial to expertise development in any complex knowledge domain. To develop a clearer understanding of the role of informal problem-solving in SL/FL teachers’ expertise development, this study investigated how experience (i.e. time on the job) affects the level of problem-solving schemata development. Design/methodology/approach: This situational analysis of teaching practices was conducted with 15 SL/FL teachers divided into three experience groups. Through qualitative coding of verbal reflections on teachers’ own lessons, the structural components of problem-solving schemata development were explored at two levels. The first or basic level represents the broader knowledge base which problem-solving utilizes in understanding and recognizing classroom situations. The second is the expert-level problem-solving knowledge level. Qualitative codes were quantified to enable descriptive statistics and t-tests for the analysis regarding the basic level. A descriptive analysis was performed to uncover expert-level knowledge. Findings and Originality/value: The results show that experience affects problem-solving schemata development in qualitatively different ways at different levels. At the first or basic level, most teachers develop extensive and numerous domain-specific problem-solving schemata with experience. Few experienced teachers develop expert-level schemata. At this level, experience mostly affects the type of domain-specific knowledge and quality of feedback on effective strategies incorporated in these schemata. The findings suggest that future studies need to adopt a multi-level analysis of problem-solving schemata development.

There is a considerable gap between many of the findings from educational psychology research and educational practice. This gap is especially notable in the field of science education. In this article, the implications of three categories of research and their findings for science educational policy in the USA and other jurisdictions were reviewed. We indicate that a particular category of research that we call “Program-Based Studies,” has dominated the formulation of educational standards while a large number of critical findings from randomized, controlled studies and correlational studies that overwhelmingly show minimal support for the suggested policy have been marked as irrelevant and excluded. The current blanket-emphasis on program-based studies at the expense of the other types of research is misplaced. Educational standards should represent a balanced view of the available data including findings from controlled and correlational studies. Finally, we indicate how these different forms of research might inform each other and provide coherent and consistent implications for educational procedures.

Academic self-efficacy, self-esteem, and grit (i.e., perseverance of effort and consistency of interests) have all separately shown to predict academic success within traditional education. In higher online education, information on these relationships is lacking, while this group of learners is growing in size and importance. We therefore investigated the total as well as the unique predictive value of academic self-efficacy, self-esteem, and grit on academic success in higher online education. Moreover, mediation effects were investigated. Students of a higher online education university in the Netherlands participated (N = 2027, age 18–80 years) in this observational study. Participants filled out online questionnaires on the variables of interest and potential confounding variables at baseline. Academic success was measured objectively through information provided by the exam registration office and operationalized in three variables: exam attempt, study progress, and academic performance. Logistic regression analyses showed that consistency of interests significantly predicted exam attempt (B = .43, p B = .16, p ps > .06). The fact that of our three predictors solely consistency of interests was found to be predictive for academic success indicates that online educational institutes should pay attention to consistency of interests of their students to improve the academic success rates.

To learn mathematics, historically students had no choice but to memorize fundamental facts and apply memorized algorithms. Since 1995 in the US, all states have adopted standards to govern K-12 mathematics instruction, and in most, standards have de-emphasized memorization and emphasized reasoning based on concepts. This change assumed the brain could reason in mathematics without relying on memorized knowledge. Scientists who study the brain have recently verified this assumption was mistaken. Due to stringent limitations in working memory (where the brain solves problems), mathematical problem-solving of any complexity requires applying well-memorized facts and procedures. A decade after the implementation of standards in most states, US young adults ranked last in testing in mathematics among 22 nations. Changes are proposed to state K-12 standards, which recent scientific research suggests would substantially improve student mathematics achievement.