A Case Study on Teacher Efficacy in Collaborating Teaching of Casino Gaming Class in Taiwan

Transcription

1 A Case Study on Teacher Efficacy in Collaborating Teaching of Casino Gaming Class in Taiwan Dr. Jean Ling Lee, Kainan University, Taiwan ABSTRACT In the past few years, the Taiwanese government had financially support collaborative teaching programs which consists of a professor and a field specialist from specific industry to aid the students to learn not only the theories from the textbooks but also on-hand and on-the-job knowledge of the industry. As a result, this study was designed to investigate the influence that collaborating teaching had on participating educators teacher efficacy through the examination of the development and change of the participating educators sense of efficacy and the reflection of efficacy beliefs in their classroom practices after collaborating teaching. A college professor and a filed specialist participated in this research. It is to investigate the development of efficacy beliefs in casino gaming class during the 8-week out of 18-week of a semester long collaborating teaching. To illuminate more comprehensively the process involved in the formation of teacher efficacy, the research methodologies adopted have moved from quantitative to qualitative. Hence, this study reports on data obtained from classroom observations, the sources of questionnaire survey, and interviews with the two educators. The findings suggest that for collaborating teaching to be beneficial to the teachers sense of efficacy, both educators should seize the co-working opportunities by making good use of their individual knowledge and learn from each other. It also suggests that the college professor can recommend the acquainted field specialist to join the project when teaching heavy pragmatic class and things will be going easier and smoother. In addition, the cultivation of team chemistry in collaborating teaching is also a significant element for building up the teacher s sense of efficacy. Finally, we cannot ignore the present situation that schools paying more attention to do research rather than teaching instruction. Based on the findings, research limitations and suggestion were discussed. Keywords: Collaborating Teaching, Teacher Efficacy, Casino Gaming INTRODUCTION Teacher efficacy is a judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about desire outcomes of student engagement and learning, even among those students who may be difficult or unmotivated (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001, p.783). It is also a powerful teacher distinguishing feature that related to their teaching behaviors and student outcomes such as achievement, motivation, students self-efficacy beliefs, and behavior in the classroom (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001). In addition, higher teacher efficacy is associated with higher student achievement, higher sense of learning efficacy in students, and more positive student attitude toward school and teachers (Woolfolk et al., 1990, as cited in Ho & Hau, 2004, p ). Hence, in the past decades, the interest in teacher efficacy has continued to grow in the academic field. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December

2 In the past few years, the Taiwanese government had asked colleges to increase the qualified professors with industry experience; nevertheless, there s still a shortage. Therefore, the government started to encourage and financially support collaborative teaching programs which consists of a professor and a field specialist from specific industry; it enabled the students to learn not only the theories from the textbooks but also on-hand and on-the-job knowledge of the industry. Furthermore, the Taiwanese government finally revoked a long-standing antigambling law and passed a long-stalled bill to allow the casinos to be developed and operated in the leisure resorts on outlying islands to help stimulate the economies in early 2009 (Lee, 2010). In July 2012, the residents referendum of Matsu allowed to build Taiwan s first casino which raised the demand of the casino gaming class in colleges gradually. As the casino gaming class is a newly developed course in Taiwan colleges, and it rarely applies to the collaborating teaching approach; hence, the availability of qualified participants are limited, and the collaborating teaching educators of casino gaming class are rare. The researcher finally obtained access to one college where both a professor and a field specialist were qualified and agreed to participate in this research. Thus, a case study approach was adopted, and the data was collected from the sources of questionnaire survey, the interviews with the two educators, and classroom observations. The purpose of the study is to investigate the influence that collaborating teaching had on participating educators teacher efficacy through the examination of the development and change of the participating educators sense of efficacy and the reflection of efficacy beliefs in their classroom practices after collaborating teaching. As a result, two questions were formulated to be the analysis of this study: 1. How do the college professor and the field specialist s efficacy beliefs develop in the casino gaming class over the course of 8-week out of 18-week collaborating teaching? 2. How are the college professor and the field specialist s efficacy beliefs reflected in their classroom practices of the casino gaming class over the course of 8-week out of 18-week collaborating teaching? LITERATURE REVIEW Teacher efficacy, by its general definition, means the measure of teacher's own ability to organize and execute courses to complete specific teaching tasks and reach teaching goals (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy, 1998). In recent years, a growing number of educational research have identified teacher efficacy as a significant element underlying the effectiveness of teaching and learning (Ho & Hau, 2004). In fact, the construct of teacher efficacy has obtained a plenty of attention both in its meaning and measure for over 25 years (Labone, 2004). Basically, the three terms of teacher efficacy, teachers sense of efficacy, and teacher self-efficacy have the similar meaning; they have been defined as the beliefs that teachers are able to create positive effects on student performance (Ho & Hau, 2004), the beliefs that teachers can give rise to desirable learning outcomes by students (Soodak & Podell, 1996), and a judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about desire outcomes of student engagement and learning, even among those students who may be difficult or unmotivated (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001, p.783). Even though different researchers made a little bit different definition among these similar terms; the power of teacher efficacy is well established, and the research interest of teacher efficacy from educational researchers will be never-ending. With regard to the teacher efficacy research, the conceptualization of teacher efficacy is based on the theoretical framework of Rotter s Locus of Control theory and Bandura s Social Cognitive Theory 140 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December 2012

3 (Soodak & Poodell, 1996; Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001; Labone, 2004). According to Bandura (1997), there are two motivation of human behavior: self-efficacy expectations and outcome expectations (Soodak & Poodell, 1996; Ho & Hau, 2004). Gibson and Dembo (1984) later developed a teacher efficacy scale to measure the two dimensions of teacher efficacy: teaching efficacy (TE) and personal efficacy (PE). Even though the power of teacher efficacy is well established successfully via such research; it is in a better position to expand and enrich conceptions of teacher efficacy to include other perspectives and the methodologies appropriate for the investigation (Tschannen-Moran, Hoy, & Hoy, 1998, p.203). As there were a variety of controversies with the measures of teacher efficacy, Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) tried to develop a new teacher efficacy instrument. The new measure was examined in three separate studies and analyses, called Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES). The OSTES consists of three dimensions labeled Efficacy of Student Engagement, Efficacy of Classroom Management, and Efficacy of Instructional Strategies that encompass twenty-four statements representative of frequent and significant teaching activities that make up a teacher s work. Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) adopted a 9-point Likert scale for each item, ranging from 1 nothing, 3 very little, 5 some influence, 7 quite a bit, and 9 a great deal. Sample items from each dimension include How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in school work?, How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught?, To what extent can you do to use a variety of assessment strategies?, To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior?, and To what extent are you able to tailor your lessons to the academic level of your students?. Collaborating teaching, is generally defined as a service delivery system in which two educators share instructional responsibility for a single group of students to teach required curriculum with mutual ownership, pooled resources, and joint accountability. When reviewing the literatures, the researcher found the definitions of the term collaborating teaching were defined by various researchers. Robinson & Schaible (1995) specified collaborative teaching as any academic experience in which two professors work together in designing and teaching a course that itself uses group learning techniques (as cited in Nevin, Thousand & Villa, 2009, p.569). Villa, Thousand, and Nevin (2008) defined it simply as two or more people sharing responsibility for educating some or all of the students in a classroom (as cited in Nevin, Thousand & Villa, 2009, p.569). Collaborating teaching can be arranged via many forms. Friend and Cook (2004) mentioned six types of collaborating teaching approaches: one teach, one observe approach; one teach, one drift approach; alternative teaching approach; parallel teaching approach; station teaching approach; and team teaching approach. In team teaching approach, both educators are delivering the same instructions at the same time. It is used to demonstrate certain type of interaction to students. In a heavy pragmatic class, for example, one educator has to explain the method while the other demonstrates how to do it. Hence, it is the most interpersonally complex collaborating teaching approach. Collaborating teaching is complex and by no means an easy task. A lot of challenges might occur when two educators from different background work together. Good practices are not easy to accomplish when considering all the subjective and objective conditions involved. In addition, although the college courses are designed to build knowledge such as subject matter, subject matter pedagogy, teaching skills, educational theories etc.; some novice or new to the field educators sometimes are unprepared for classroom teaching setting due to their inexperience. This method of teaching will be overwhelming for novice educators, and they will be very unconfident in teaching at university level. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December

4 Through collaborating teaching, the experienced educators could contribute to the development of novice educators in these respects (Roth, Masciotra & Boyd, 1999). Collaborating teaching is socially constructivist in nature (Jang, 2008). Since both teachers teach together, interactions occur continuously. Collaborating teaching showed the teachers having experienced professional learning (Rytivaara, 2012). Roth et al. (2002) also considered collaborating teaching as a good means of achieving learning alternative ways to teach the same subject matter (as cited in Jang, 2008, p.649). However, problems have been found in some examples of collaborating teaching, such as inequality of experiences of teachers, confliction between teaching styles, and the lack of balance in teacher s roles (Rytivaara & Kershner, 2012). Educators have to notice that in advance and find some ways to overcome the obstacles when implementing collaborating teaching. METHODOLOGY The majority number of the quantitative teacher efficacy research is done in the past decades; however, more qualitative studies turned up in recent year to understand the development of efficacy beliefs (Labone, 2004). The research applied a case study approach that investigated the development of efficacy beliefs of collaborating teaching educators. Over the semester, a college professor and a filed specialist co-taught 3-hour of a casino gaming class per week, with a total of eight collaborating teaching sessions over 18-week period. The design of this research used qualitative techniques. Due to the research employed a case study approach, the non-probability sampling is best suited for this specific researcher purpose. Qualitative data were acquired through questionnaire survey technique, semi-structured interviews, and field notes from classroom observations, to understand the development in participating educators efficacy beliefs. Participants The participants for this research are Dr. Huang and Ms. Reed; they have participated on a voluntary basis. To keep the confidentiality of the educators and the college, aliases were used in this research. The two educators background information and a description of the setting are as follow: Dr. Huang earned her PhD degree in hospitality administration, she has been a college professor for over ten years; she has taught in NIT College for seven years. Ms. Reed is the field specialist; she is a certified casino table game instructor from Las Vegas, U.S.A. This is her fourth time in joining the collaborating teaching program to teach casino gaming class in NIT College. We have chosen NIT College as the targeted college in this research. It was founded in 1969, a mid-size technology college located on the suburban of Taoyuan City. It accommodates approximately 8,000 students and 400 faculty members. The participating educators co-taught 3-hour of a class per week, with a total of eight collaborating teaching sessions over 18-week period. Data Collection The study used three types of data collection approaches, namely questionnaire survey, interviews, and field notes from classroom observations. The fieldwork was conducted in May to June, 2011, the 8-week out of 18-week long semester. To see how teacher efficacy might develop, the two participating educators respectively filled out the modified Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale both at the beginning and the end of 8-week collaborating teaching. Then it followed by semi-structured interviews to obtain 142 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December 2012

5 a better understanding of the questionnaire survey results. The researcher also conducted on-site visits to collaborating teaching class periodically and to take field notes from classroom observation. The quantitative data on each subjects level of efficacy was obtained through the use of a modified Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES) (see Appendix A) developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001). The OSTES consists of three dimensions labeled Efficacy of Student Engagement, Efficacy of Classroom Management, and Efficacy of Instructional Strategies that include twenty-four questions representative of significant teaching activities. However, the items are not fit into any specific subject. Hence, after a close examination of the items, certain modifications were made in order to tap into the context of the current research. Some of the twenty-four items were reworded slightly so that they can reflect the teaching of casino gaming context. A 9-point Likert scale is adopted for each item, ranging from 1 nothing, 3 very little, 5 some influence, 7 quite a bit, and 9 a great deal. Sample questions from each dimension include: How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in learning casino gaming? How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught in your casino gaming class? How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies to access students'ability? To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior in your class? How much can you do to get through the most difficult students in your casino gaming class? To better understand the questionnaire survey results and to provide the idea of the relationship between their efficacy beliefs and classroom behaviors, a set of interview questions were developed to understand participants efficacy beliefs in regard to the areas of classroom management, student engagement, and instructional strategies. The major questions included: What classroom management techniques do you perform? What are the difficulties or frustrations of this collaborating teaching brings to you? What are the strategies that you apply to strengthen the student engagement in casino gaming class? What are the teaching methods and assessment strategies that you apply in your casino gaming class? What instructional strategies do you implement in your casino gaming class? Generally speaking, the educators tended to talk with fervor and assurance, often produced wide-ranging answers. Data Analysis To answer the first question of this study, the scores of Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale were performed by calculating the entire scores as well as the individual scores for each dimension. The lowest score of each dimension is 8, and the highest score of each dimension is 72. The higher the score represents the higher the teachers sense of efficacy. To answer the second question of this study, the researcher video-recorded and then did word-by-word transcription of the interview. In addition, the researcher s field notes from classroom observations, interview transcripts, and videotapes can facilitate to understand the teachers efficacy beliefs in participating educators classroom performance. FINDINGS The participants scores on the Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale, the interview results, and their classroom performances from the researcher s field notes will show positive or negative development of their teacher efficacy. Each educator will show if their sense of teacher efficacy increased, dropped or remained the same after collaborating teaching. In addition, it will show the reflections of efficacy beliefs in classroom practices for both educators. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December

6 The results of the research show that the entire scores as well as the individual scores for each dimension of teacher efficacy for both of the participants increased after collaborating teaching. It suggests that for collaborating teaching to be beneficial to the teachers sense of efficacy, both educators should seize the co-working opportunities by making good use of their individual knowledge and learn from each other. A good collaborating teaching can lead not only did the students benefit from teaching, but the two educators become beneficiaries of this cooperation. Thus, the college professor can recommend the acquainted field specialist to join the project when teaching heavy pragmatic class; by doing so, this will enable the class to run smoother at its full potential. In addition, the cultivation of team chemistry in collaborating teaching is also a significant element for building up the teacher s sense of efficacy. Sufficient preparation time of communication should take place not only before the class, but also after the class. Appropriate duty allocation of the two educators can improve the efficacy in classroom management. That is the beauty of teamwork. Finally, it is related to the school policy. Due to Taiwan s educational policy and the liberalization of the education market have increased the number of higher-education organizations; hence, the performance of universities has become an important topic for the public. Most of colleges and universities were trying hard to pass the evaluation from the Ministry of Education or elevated to the status of a general university. It caused the schools to pay more attention to the research statistic results rather than teaching instruction. Hence, it is uncertain whether the school policy of recruiting field specialists to co-teach with college professors will continue. For this reason, we cannot ignore this topical issue. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH This research has some limitations. Due to the availability of qualified participants from casino gaming collaborating teaching is very limited in Taiwan, there is only two participants were involved; hence, the results of this research may not representing all of the other teachers who are also engaged in collaborating teaching. In addition, because the limited time and supporting funds from the government, the collaborating teaching implement only 3-hour per week, with a total 8 weeks out of 18-week of a semester long. The short-term effects of collaborating teaching on teacher self-efficacy needs more time to follow up to see whether the collaborating teaching has an enduring effect on bringing positive influences to teacher self-efficacy. Future research could be conducted of an 18-week of a full semester long collaborating teaching research. Furthermore, future research could explore similar collaborating teaching issues at other tourism or hospitality related classes and make comparisons to the findings in this research. CONCLUSION In the past few years, the Taiwanese government started and financially support collaborative teaching programs in college which consists of a professor and a field specialist from specific industry; it enabled the students to learn not only the theories from the textbooks but also on-hand and on-the-job knowledge of the industry. However, it remains unclear as to how long the government policy of recruiting field specialists to co-teach with our college professors will last. Although collaborating teaching might benefit the college professors in many ways such as enhancing their practical proficiency and varying instructional strategies, it is recommended that our college professors to advance and sharpen their professional knowledge and skills by attending workshops, seminars, forums, teacher refresher courses, and training courses during summer and winter break. 144 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December 2012

7 REFERENCES Bessette, H. (2008). Using students drawings to elicit general and special educators perceptions of co-teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, Friend, M., & Hurley-Chamberlain, D. (2010). Is Co-teaching effective? Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=7504 Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2004). Co-teaching: principles, practices, and pragmatics. Retrieved July 2, 2012 from Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. Journal of Educaitonal Psychology, 76, Ho, I. T., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Australian and Chinese teacher efficacy: Similarities and differences in personal instruction, discipline, guidance efficacy and beliefs in external determinants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, Jang, S. J. (2008). Innovations in science teacher education: Effects of integrating technology and team-teaching strategies. Computers & Education, 51, Labone, E. (2004). Teacher efficacy: Maturing the construct through research in alternative paradigms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, Lin, L. Y. (2007). A case study on teacher efficacy in intercultural team teaching between a native English speaking teacher (NEST) and a non-nest. Unpublished Thesis, Thunghai University. Lee, J. L. (2010). The gaming industry developing concept in Taiwan-from the U.S. experience. Unpublished Thesis. University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Ministry of Education (2009). Laws and regulations retrieving system. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from LawContent.aspx?id=FL050603&KeyWord MOE Regional Industry University Cooperation Center (2010). Government news. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Nevin, A. I., Thousand, J. S., & Villa R. A. (2009). Collaborative teaching for teacher educators-what does the research say? Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, Protheroe, N. (2008, May/June), Teacher Efficacy: What is it and does it matter? Principal. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Roth, W. M., Masciotra, D., & Boyd N. (1999). Becoming-in-the-classroom: a case study of teacher development through coteaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, Rytivaara, A. (2012). Collaborative classroom management in a co-taught primary school classroom. International Journal of Educational Research, 53, Rytivaara, A., & Kershner, R. (2012). Co-teaching as a context for teachers professional learning and joint knowledge construction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, Soodak, L., & Podell, D. (1996). Teacher efficacy: Toward the understanding of a multifaceted construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2010). Business research methods (8 th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December

8 Appendix A Questionnaire: Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale Directions: Please circle your answer on the questions below. Thank you. Nothing Very Little To Some Extent Quite A Bit A Great Deal Before(After) you are engaged in this collaborating teaching,. 1. How much can you use a variety of assessment strategies to access students ability? 2. To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students are confused in your casino gaming class? 3. To what extent can you craft good questions for the students in your casino gaming class? 4. How well can you implement alternative strategies in your casino gaming class? 5. How well can you respond to difficult questions from your students in your casino gaming class? 6. How much can you do to adjust your casino gaming lessons to the proper level for individual students? 7. How much can you gauge student comprehension of what you have taught in your casino gaming class? 8. How well can you provide appropriate challenges for very capable students in your casino gaming class? 9. How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in your casino gaming class? 10. How much can you do to get students to follow classroom rules in your casino gaming class? 11. How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy in your casino gaming class? 12. How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of students in your casino gaming class? 13. How well can you keep a few problem students from ruining an entire lesson? 14. How well can you respond to defiant students in your casino gaming class? 15. To what extent can you make your expectations clear about student behavior in your class? 16. How can you establish routines to keep activities running smoothly in your casino gaming class? 17. How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in casino gaming class? 18. How much can you do to help your students value casino gaming learning? 19. How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in learning casino gaming? 20. How much can you assist families in helping their sons/daughters do well in college? 21. How much can you do to improve the understanding of a student who is failing? 22. How much can you do to help the students think critically in your casino gaming class? 23. How much can you do to foster student creativity in your casino gaming class? 24. How much can you do to get through the most difficult students in your casino gaming class? 146 The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 8, Num. 2, December 2012