Assessing Learning through Teaching in a Pedagogical Laboratory

Laura Onafowora
wkreid@hotmail.com
North Carolina Central University
Winnie K. Reid
wkreid@hotmail.com

Learning through Teaching in a Pedagogical Laboratory [L-TAPL] brings together a master teacher to demonstrate good teaching practices to novice teachers, who in turn, learn and practice in an after-school lab environment. While, the model after-school program provides academic support services to children and monitors the impact of L-TAPL in raising student achievement beyond that expected from the regular academic school programs alone, the professional development component of the program provides novice teachers opportunities to learn and practice best teaching strategies for children in urban environments. Assessments include measures of teacher self-efficacy, reading and mathematics scores, as well as supplemental evidences from teacher narratives and discussion groups to validate L-TAPL as an effective after-school program.

Objective

The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of the Learning through Teaching in an After-School Pedagogical Laboratory (L-TAPL) program on urban student achievement and professional development of novice teachers’ through interactions with and instruction from master teachers.

Perspective

L-TAPL is a unique project with a focus on professional development designed to raise the achievement level of primarily African American students while “grooming great urban teachers” (Foster, Lewis & Onafowora, 2005. The assessments of teachers and students in L-TAPL are structured on the premises that teachers learn to teach best by working under the guidance of skilled practitioners (Foster & Peele, 1999), and students’ achievements are enhanced due to good teaching practices (Foster, 1994; Haberman, 1991; Ladson-Billings, 1994) from efficacious teachers. The pedagogical lab led by a master teacher provides the environment for both ongoing teacher learning and academic support for students after regular school hours. This effort is in partnership with educational researchers who design, study and document the professional development of teachers, as well as the impact of an after-school program for elementary students.

A number of studies (Bandura, 1994; Gibson & Dembo, 1984; Hoy, 2000) on different aspects of teacher efficacy provide the broader lens through which one might understand issues faced by novice teachers regarding their level of self-confidence as they strive to be effective teachers. It is evident from research findings on teaching and learning that “teachers need expertise in both subject matter and in teaching”(Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999). Skill in content or subject matter relates to cognitive capability, and teaching or pedagogy relates to affective capability. In the case of novice teachers, the affective skill may not be in alignment with the cognitive skill. Affective skills are enhanced through practice and experience.

Methods or techniques

The model provides academic support in a nurturing environment for students in grades 1 – 4. Teachers with more than 15 years experience teaching in urban schools serve as master teachers. In order to assess student achievement, data were collected from two sources.  A standardized commercial test, the Diagnostic Achievement Battery [DAB3] was administered to all L-TAPL participants and district level standardized testing data were obtained. Participants came from multiple districts thus, the DAB3 was administered to all students participating in the L-TAPL in order to compare across school districts.  As only the children participating in the L-TAPL program took the DAB3 pre and post assessment, this quasi-experimental design required the inclusion of a control group in order to satisfy the question of whether or not the children’s regular participation in L-TAPL contributed to an increase in their academic achievement. Thus a control group of children with similar characteristics in terms of learning environment, achievement level, and background were selected for comparison with L-TAPL participants.

Twenty L-TAPL students were matched to other students from their school, grade level, and socio-economic status. Both groups of students co-mingled in the same learning environment, received instruction from the same teachers during regular school hours, and took the same district-wide standardize tests. The question the alternative design seeks to answer is: Is there a learning gain difference between the groups, and if so can it be determined that L-TAPL students benefited from additional academic support from the pedagogical lab. The results from the school district standardized test scores were obtained on students in the L-TAPL group and the match group.

L-TAPL is designed with program attributes that likely contribute to student achievement. Novice teachers volunteered for the program at L-TAPL sites and observed the master teachers. On Friday, the cohort met with the master teachers and researchers to hold “teacher talks” regarding their observations and experiences. Pre- and post measures of teacher self-efficacy (Gibson and Demo, 1984; Bandura, 1997) were obtained to document change due to professional development. Using Gibson’s 30 item Likert scale assessment, frequency distributions and comparisons of pre- and post item responses were computed to determine a change in the “typical” L-TAPL teacher’s over-all teacher efficacy. Data were also collected using the unpublished, but widely used, Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (Bandura, 1997). One limitation of the Gibson scale is that it does not address a number of tasks beyond instruction. The Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale provided a more realistic perception of the teacher efficacy construct through the categorization of data into subscales representing tasks such as efficacy to influence: decision making, school resources, instruction, discipline, enlisting parental involvement, enlisting community involvement, and the creation of a positive school climate.

Data sources

Student participants in this investigation were from the Trenton, NJ, Oakland, CA, and Los Angeles, CA school districts.  Test results in reading, writing, and mathematics from the Diagnostic Achievement Battery standardized test were used to compare students from the three participating school districts.  In addition, the locally administered standardized test results from each district were used to compare those students who participated in the L-TAPL program with similar students from their respective school districts.  Other data sources included the Gibson scale and the unpublished Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (Bandura, 1997)to measure the self-efficacy of novice teachers before and after participating in the L-TAPL program.

Results and Conclusions

The results from standardized tests and district assessments provide compelling evidence that the lab has had positive effects on the children’s achievement.  Students who attended L-TAPL demonstrate learning gains, and even significantly higher level of achievement on district-standardized tests than a matched district sample. Comparison of pre- and post reading and mathematics scores show L-TAPL students achieved significant learning gains. Higher levels in reading and mathematics were observed, though sites differed in this respect depending on the subject area in which the master teacher spent more instructional time and effort. Students at one site achieved significant learning gains in reading where the master teacher emphasized language arts and science instructional activities, whereas students in another site achieved significant learning gains in mathematics where the master teacher emphasized mathematics and use of the computer.                                                                                                                                                      
Improving student achievement in urban schools is one of the salient goals of L-TAPL. The program is unique in that after-school, students are taught by a master teacher while novice teachers learn and then practice on the same children. Being able to isolate the uniqueness of the L-TAPL impact may prove to be doubly beneficial given that the master teachers and even novices may actually teach in the same school as the pedagogical lab. Subsequently, many of the L-TAPL teachers teach their own students during regular school hours.
This pedagogical lab concept can also infuse new training approaches for educators and educational researchers as traditional after-school programs expand their goals to use master teachers to instruct children, while novice teachers simultaneously engage in professional develop. All types of partnerships between schools, communities, and universities can operate within the model L-TAPL pedagogical lab context.
In conclusion, this study clearly illustrates the benefits of the L-TAPL after school enrichment program.  The next phase in investigating the merits of the L-TAPL program is two fold: 1) to compare the academic achievement of students who participate in L-TAPL and students who participate in other after school enrichment programs 2) to compare the self-efficacy of novice teachers who have participated in L-TAPL with novice teachers of similar years of teaching experience.