Concepedia

Publication | Closed Access

A vision of successful schooling: Ghanaian teachers’ understandings of learning, teaching and assessment

86

Citations

35

References

2006

Year

Abstract

Abstract This article reports on an empirical study exploring Ghanaian teachers' understandings of teaching, learning and assessment. It argues that received views of poorly trained teachers with untheorized and badly reasoned professional practices may mask a more complex situation. In defining learning, teachers in the study reproduced models consistent with transmission or behaviouristic theories. However, when asked to describe their most successful experiences, teachers' understandings were more in accord with social constructivism. Also, their aspiration towards interactive models of classroom assessment was circumscribed by the normal context of assessment discourse and by bureaucratic requirements. The article concludes that, given the right circumstances, teachers can reflect on their experiences and produce a more sophisticated account of teaching and learning. It suggests ways in which in‐service work might make use of these insights, recommending further attention to the discursive frames of teachers' professional reflections within dialogue and active engagement through school‐based coaching. Notes 1. The project was funded by DFID as part of the British Council Higher Education Links programme. 2. Classes 1&2; classes 3&4; and classes 5&6. 3. Sample sizes for the different data vary slightly as the numbers of teachers at the workshop fluctuated. 4. Since each form of average has a tendency to obscure some aspect of the data, mean, mode and median values for each statement were compared, and then placed as an order (order of means, order of modes, etc.). All three orders were then considered in allocating a high (1–5), medium (6–10) or low (11–15) rating for each statement. Thus 'Low' denotes that all three averaging methods gave a low rating, 'Medium/Low' that two were medium and one low. This method avoids statistical over‐interpretation (Gorard, Citation2001). 5. ∗ denotes unclear recording with suggested rendition in brackets.

References

YearCitations

Page 1