Teaching conceptions and approaches: do qualitative results support survey data?

Autores/as

  • Fuensanta Monroy University of Murcia
  • José-Luis González-Geraldo Universidad of Castilla-La Mancha
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.35.1.237621
Palabras clave: teaching, teaching styles, teacher education, qualitative research

Resumen

This study examined preservice teachers’ teaching conceptions and approaches measured quantitatively and qualitatively in order to identify any convergence of findings. Additionally, any changes in conceptions and approaches towards a student- or teacher-centred orientation upon completion of a training course were compared. Method: Preservice teachers completed a scale on approaches to teaching and answered open-ended questions on teaching before and after an initial teacher training programme. Results and conclusions: Inconsistencies in the results suggest that research on teaching and learning should use a combination of techniques in order to ensure that phenomena are accurately examined so that appropriate educational decisions are made.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Fuensanta Monroy, University of Murcia

Fuensanta Monroy holds a PhD in Education and teaches educational research methodology at the Faculty of Education, University of Murcia (Spain). Her research interests focus on teacher training, approaches to teaching, approaches to learning, and factors which may play a role in teaching and learning.

 

José-Luis González-Geraldo, Universidad of Castilla-La Mancha

José-Luis González-Geraldo teaches and researches on Theory and History of Education at the University of Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). His PhD involved the SAL theory, approaches to teaching and the emerging European Higher Education Area (EHEA). He is currently interested in what makes higher education higher and any type of postmodern turn regarding historiography.

Citas

Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133-149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research. Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston, Massachussets, USA: Pearson Education Inc.

González Geraldo, J. L., del Rincón Igea, B., & del Rincón Igea, D. (2011). Estructura latente y Consistencia interna del R-SPQ-2F. Reinterpretando los enfoques de aprendizaje en el EEES. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 29(2), 277-294. http://revistas.um.es/rie/article/view/112431/135261

Gow, L., & Kember, D. (1993). Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 20-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01039.x

Harris, L. (2011). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of student engagement: Engagement in learning or in schooling?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 376-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.09.006

Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00028-X

Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28, 469-490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026569608656

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285-298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070600680539

Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 36-55). Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Scottish Academic Press.

McMillan, J. H. (2012). Educational Research. Fundamentals for the consumer. Boston, Massachussets, USA: Pearson.

Monroy, F., González-Geraldo, J. L., & Hernández-Pina, F. (2015). A psychometric analysis of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory (ATI) and a proposal for a Spanish version (S-ATI-20). Anales de Psicología, 31(1), 172-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/analesps.31.1.190261

Monroy, F., Hernández Pina, F., & Martínez Clares, P. (2014). Enfoques de enseñanza de estudiantes en formación pedagógica. Un estudio exploratorio. Revista Española de Orientación y Psicopedagogía, 25(3), 90-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/reop.vol.25.num.3.2014.13860

Olmedo, E. M. (2013). Enfoques de aprendizaje de los estudiantes y metodología docente: Evolución hacia el nuevo sistema de formación e interacción propuesta en el EEES. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 411-430. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.133501

Postareff, L., Katajavuori, N., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Trigwell, K. (2008). Consonance and dissonance in descriptions of teaching of university teachers. Studies in Higher Education, 33(1), 49-61.

Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Nevgi, A. (2007). The effect of pedagogical training on teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(5)3, 557-571. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013

Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2014). Qualitative variation in approaches to university teaching and learning in first-year classes. Higher Education, 67(6), 783-795. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9690-0

Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., & Taylor, P. (1994). A phenomenographic study of academics’ conceptions of science learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 4(3), 217-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90024-8

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in Higher Education. London, UK: Routledge.

Romero, A., Hidalgo, M. D., González Javier, F., Carrillo, E., Pedraja, M. J., García Sevilla, J., & Pérez Sánchez, M. A. (2013). Enfoques de aprendizaje en estudiantes universitarios: comparación de resultados con los cuestionarios ASSIST y R-SPQ-2F. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 31(2), 375-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/rie.31.2.151851

Rosário, P., Núñez, J. C., Ferrando, P. J., Paiva, M. O., Lourenço, A., Cerezo, R., & Valle, A. (2013). The relationship between approaches to teaching and approaches to studying: a two-level structural equation model for biology achievement in high school. Metacognition Learning, 8(1), 47-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11409-013-9095-6

Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers. Higher Education, 24, 93-111.

Serrano, R., & Pontes, A. (2015). Expectativas ante la formación inicial entre el alumnado del Máster de Profesorado de Enseñanza Secundaria. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 33(2), 489-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00138620

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1996). Changing approaches to teaching: A relational perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 275-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079612331381211

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the approaches to teaching inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0007-9

Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37(1), 57-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1003548313194

Virtanen, V., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2010). University students’ and teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning in the biosciences. Instructional Science, 38(4), 355-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9088-z

Publicado
09-02-2017
Cómo citar
Monroy, F., & González-Geraldo, J.-L. (2017). Teaching conceptions and approaches: do qualitative results support survey data?. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 35(1), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.35.1.237621
Número
Vol. 35 Núm. 1 (2017)
Sección
Artículos

Las obras que se publican en esta revista están sujetas a los siguientes términos:

1. El Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia (la editorial) conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright) de las obras publicadas, y favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia de uso indicada en el punto 2.

2. Las obras se publican en la edición electrónica de la revista bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España (texto legal). Se pueden copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente, siempre que: i) se cite la autoría y la fuente original de su publicación (revista, editorial y URL de la obra); ii) no se usen para fines comerciales; iii) se mencione la existencia y especificaciones de esta licencia de uso.

Licencia Creative Commons

3. Condiciones de auto-archivo. Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir electrónicamente las versiones pre-print (versión antes de ser evaluada) y/o post-print (versión evaluada y aceptada para su publicación) de sus obras antes de su publicación, ya que favorece su circulación y difusión más temprana y con ello un posible aumento en su citación y alcance entre la comunidad académica.