Complete thesis - Murdoch University

Teacher characteristicsThe results of the Reeves (1997b) review of ENG260 (discussed in Chapter 6) also suggesteda deeper exploration of teacher characteristics was warranted. Those described below are theresult of an instrument applied late in 2002, placing it at the transition from Cycle 1 to Cycle2 of the Action Research project. The impact of the results will be described a little later inthis chapter, in the context of the implementation of the intervention.Table 7.3: TSI categories (adapted from Dunn and Dunn (1993) by University of Toronto)Category* Number of Questions1 Instructional Planning 122 Teaching Methods 6Teaching environment3 Student Groupings 64 Room Design 65 Environment 76 Evaluation Techniques 87 Teaching Characteristics 88 Educational Philosophy 14*numbering refer to the data labels on the chart (see Figure 7.4) based on this instrumentAt the commencement of Cycle 1, the teacher is described as an Assimilator with the personalitystyle of ‘Teacher’. Strong characteristics of these styles include a tendency to bedirective, assuming expectations will be met and implicit commands obeyed, as well as beingcharacterised as reflective, creative/theoretical and verbal.This is borne out by the Teaching Style Inventory (TSI) developed at University of Torontoand adapted from Dunn and Dunn (1993). This inventory provides a mechanism to comparea teacher’s teaching philosophy with the methods applied in the classroom. It is based on 67questions, categorised into six groups. Each Likert-based response is weighted according tothe relative importance of individual items. Table 7.3 provides a summary of the groupingsand subscales where relevant.The scores obtained can be charted against predictor profiles that identify teachers as HighlyIndividualised, Somewhat Individualised, Transitional, Somewhat Traditional and Traditional.As Figure 7.4 shows, the teacher/researcher of this study has a Transitional approach toteaching.Although the authors suggest that most teachers’ philosophy is far more individualised thantheir methods – these have institutional and social constraints that bind the practices ofteaching and learning in higher education and elsewhere (Smyth, 2003), this profile indicates280