Workshop 4.4: Friday afternoon

Self –evaluation in initial teacher training

Roque MANCHADO

.University of Malaga
SPAIN

Some years ago, a friend asked me to help his daughter with her maths. I was very surprised to discover the girl showed no interest whatsoever in the processes of analysis and reflection. Instead she only wanted to know how to arrive at the results of the problems. Did this mean the girl was not very intelligent or did it reflect the attitude of her teacher regarding the evaluation tests set at the end of the course?

What and how students learn is closely related to the evaluation system which is expected of the teacher. Also, when the teacher’s methods in class bear no relation to his or her system of evaluation, the student, in the majority of cases, processes a new system of acquiring the learning which will lead to them passing the exam. The problem we have raised so far is what is the ability of the student with regard to the position of the teacher. Nevertheless, the subject which brings us here is if the self-evaluation of the staff is possible, how it should be brought about and what benefits will be gained in the processes of learning by the students.

Through evaluation, we aim to detect if the student has acquired the knowledge which have previously designed by means of a process known as teaching. But when we evaluate we establish certain instruments of measurement (cognitive, of process, of result) with the object of influencing the process or modifying them, in such way that the results of the teaching improve from the cognitive and effective point of view.

Therefore, evaluation which is not implanted from a formative point of view is meaningless because it is no more than information or analysis of something that has occurred.

Self-evaluation of the staff is understood from the formative point of view. That is to say, by means of this process, we try to improve the processes of teaching that will lead him o her to improve the learning of the students.

If we accept the necessity of evaluating the teachers as a means to improve the quality of their teaching, we are implying that the teacher constantly needs to analyse and consider if his or her teaching work responds to the formative necessities of each individual student at a particular moment in time. In order to do this, the teacher will have to adapt the curriculum to the student, in consideration of his or her level of comprehension, if one is of the opinion that teaching is nothing more than facilitating the necessary support to the student to achieve the anticipated objectives. When confronted with this situation, we can ask the following questions:

  • What has actually happened in the schools where teachers who were considered ‘good’ now have difficulty in controlling their classes and completing the teaching aimed at the students in order that they learn? What changes have occurred in the society and in which people?
  • What educational models are the most suitable to attain a better quality of teaching and do they exist?
  • Are these models static, or on the contrary, are they subject to changes in society?
  • Is the crisis in education which exists at present due to the accelerated changes occurring in our society, or has it always been there, hidden under the surface?
  • Are the teachers the fundamental factor, or one of the most important factors causing failure in school?
  • With the self-evaluation of the teacher, can we erradicate to some extent failure in schools and thereby improve the quality of education?

In Spain, compulsory education (for children between 6 and 14 years of age) began with the General Basic Law of Education in 1970 and this law had reached the whole country by the mid-eighties. When the students reached the ages of 14-16 and completed the Basic Compulsory Education, they could choose to continue their academic studies (if they had good results) or do technical training, or go home. Problems in the classroom were non-existent given that the Dictatorship of General Franco, even if it came to an end with his death in 1975, continued some 10 years more until Democracy was consolidated.

During this period, discipline was strong, not only in the family but also in public centres. Therefore, the student, whether on obligatory or optional level, accepted the authority of the teacher without question. There were no bad teachers only good or bad students.

In 1990, a new Educational Law was passed. Then education became obligatory and free till the age of 16-18. Primary Education for those from 6 to 12 and Secondary Education for those from 12 to 16. We were living in a Democracy and the students had rights. Beside this, there was a restructuring of schools and as a result of this, teachers who for many years had only taught Bachillerato to selected students now found that they had to teach students who had not been selected, with different levels in comprehension and knowledge, where the only curriculum had to be adapted to the problematic of each student or group of students. At this point, we find schools of integration where all the students had to acquire the same curriculum till the age of 16 before being able to opt for Bachillerato or technical training centre. As a result of this situation, the teachers who were used to the magesterial classes, thinking that all their students possessed the same level of comprehension now found that their teaching was directed to a minority and that the level of the conflict had notably increased, as had student failure. On the other hand, the students demanded a kind of teaching where theory and practice had a relationship with reality because they found that they were receiving knowledge that they did not consider useful.

That situation created a social crisis nourished by evermore conservative teachers and private schools or Church schools where the conservative Government has based itself in order to bring out a new Law of Education known as the Quality of Teaching. The aim of this new Law is to select students at the earlier age of 13 assuring that a smaller percentage of Spanish students will have access to Universities and educational opportunities.

There has never existed training for teachers which takes into consideration the rapid changes in society. It has been easier for the Government to limit the opportunities offered to the students.

I do not think that there are any educational models in existence which can resolve the problems found in the classroom. In as much as the class is formed by a group of human beings, they all differ, not only as regards their levels of comprehension, but also in the way they acquire knowledge, cultural values, etc. Therefore, I believe the most suitable solution would be to create a paradigm which is broad enough to provide solutions to the majority of the problems originating in the classroom. It is for that reason we need well-trained teachers, who have a great capacity for analysis and reflection and who are open to being able to understand and apply measures which are linked to a better quality of teaching in the classroom.

We live in a world where Governments justify the changes in social aspect fundamentally based on the control of the mass media and the frequent manipulation of statistics. So much so that if the change is not justified, statistics are manipulated (see How to Lie with Statistics, Darrell Huffy) and the public in general end up accepting the change as a good one, although it does not always necessarily mean an improvement.

One example in this respect, based on what has been previously stated, has occurred with the change in the Law of Education, known as, to the Law of Quality (Loce). For several years the Government has been manipulating the data concerning failure in the classroom as a consequence of the Logse in order to thereby be socially justified in bringing about a law which benefits private education and educational centres belonging to the Church. The Government has explained the crisis caused by failure in the classroom giving the following reasons:

  • In Secondary Education, students with different educational levels cannot be taught in the same classroom.
  • Failure in the classroom stems from the fact that the students are not motivated to study. On the contrary, it is believed that knowledge encourages motivation.

It is strange that whenever people speak about failure in the classroom or the crisis in education, the teacher is never mentioned as though he or she is not an important factor in the teaching learning process. Neither do people say if the teaching carried out in the schools stimulates the students´ interest or motivates them or if it is given at a level which can be easily assimilated by the students, etc.

On the other hand, we have not discussed with our students what they wish to learn, why they have to acquire knowledge about certain subjects and not others, which methods they think we should apply, etc.

If I ask the students in my class who are training to be teachers in the future about the way their parents behave towards their younger brothers and sisters, the answer is overwhelming. The latter have experienced much greater freedom in every aspect and they add that the teachers in the schools have scarcely changed. They also say there is no comparison between their behaviour and that of their brothers and sisters when they were the same age.

Formative self-evaluation improves the quality of teaching given by the teacher and consequently, there is a decrease in failure in the classroom. We do not make use of the information obtained through the formative evaluation of the student to modify the teaching learning process carried out by the teacher. Sadler (1989) conceptualises formative assessment as being concerned with how judgements about the quality of students’ responses can be used to shape and improve their competence by short-circuiting the randomness and inefficiency of trial- and-error learning. Assessment is not an exact science.

Self-evaluation of teachers is fundamental if we wish to permanently improve their methodology in the classroom as well as help them to understand the generational changes which are occurring and are caused by social influences.

Bibliography

Aylett R. and Kenneth G. (editors) Evaluating Teacher Quality in Higher Education, published by Falmer Press, 1996.

Biggs J. Teaching for Quality Learning at University, published by Srhe & Open University Press. 1999

Dunkin, M. & Precians, R. A Handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education Enhancing Academic (1992) Award-wining University Teachers´ Concepts of Teaching, Higher Education, 24, 483-502.

Gellert Claudius (edited) Innovation and Adaptation in Higher Education.. published by Jessica kingsley published ltd, 1999.

Fry Heather, Ketteridge Steve and Marshall Stephanie, A Handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education enhancing academic practice, published by Kogan Page, 1999

De Miguel, M. (1997). Evaluación y Reforma Pedagógica de la Enseñanza Universitaria. In P. Apodaca & C. Lobato (Eds.) Calidad en la Universidad: Orientación y Evaluación. (pp. 53-67). Barcelona: Laertes.

Manchado, R. (1997). Necesidad de una Formación Permanente del Profesorado Universitario . In J. C. Tójar. & R. Manchado. (Eds.) Innovación Educativa y Formación del Profesorado. (pp. 19-20). Málaga: ICE/SPICUM.

Nieto Gil J. M. La Autoevaluación del Profesor (1996)Editorial Praxis, S.A.

Tójar, J. C. (1997a) Introducción. Innovación Educativa y Desarrollo Profesional Docente en la Universidad. In J. C. Tójar. & R. Manchado. (Eds.) Innovación Educativa y Formación del Profesorado. (pp. 9-18). Málaga: ICE/SPICUM.

Tójar, J. C. (1997b). Cuestionario para la Formación del Profesorado. Resumen de resultados. Cuadernos de Información, 9, 14-15.

Tójar, J. C. y Manchado, R. (1997a). Diseño y evalución de un programa de formación del profesorado universitario. En A.I.D.I.PE. (Comp.) Actas del VIII Congreso Nacional de Modelos de Investigación educativa. (pp. 455-459). Sevilla: AIDIPE/ ICE Universidad de Sevilla.

Tójar, J. C. y Manchado, R. (1997b). Evaluación de las actividades de Formación (Talleres) para el Profesorado Universitario. Cuadernos de Información, 10, 16-17.

Schön, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner:How Professsional Thinck in Action,London: TempleSmith.

Scott Peter (edited) Higher Education Re-formed. Published by Farmer Press, 2000