A Mixed Method Study on Team Teaching as a Professional Development Model for EFL Lecturers

Yıl 2020, , 1839 - 1850, 20.07.2020

Özlem Canaran İlknur Bayram

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3843

Öz

This mixed method study aims to report how team teaching as a continuing professional development (CPD) practice is viewed by in-service English as a Foreign Language (EFL) lecturers working at a non-profit private university in Turkey. The study took place in the academic year of 2017-2018 with the voluntary participation of 39 lecturers. Data for the study were obtained from a questionnaire and focus group inter-views. Results of the study showed that trust and respect be-tween partners were regarded as essential, and lesson plan-ning constituted the most valuable part of a successful team teaching. The findings also indicated that team teaching ena-bled lecturers to gain different perspectives from each other, providing more opportunities to use new instructional tech-niques as well as improving their problem-solving skills. It was further found that students became more engaged in team-taught lessons and lecturers ended up the process with en-hanced feelings of achievement. With respect to the drawbacks of team teaching, differences in personalities and teaching styles of the lecturers besides lack of time for team teaching meetings were suggested to pose challenges to the participants.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EFL lecturers, mixed-methods study, professional development, team-teaching

İngilizce Öğretim Görevlileri için Bir Mesleki Gelişim Modeli Olarak Takım Öğretimi: Bir Karma Yöntem Çalışması

Öz

Bu karma yöntem çalışması Türkiye’de bir vakıf üniversitesinde çalışan İngilizce öğretim görevlilerinin bir mesleki gelişim modeli olarak takım öğretimi ile ilgili görüşlerini açığa çıkarmayı hedeflemektedir. Çalışma 2017-2018 akademik yılında 39 öğretim görevlisinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veriler anket ve odak grup görüşmesi yoluyla toplanmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları takım öğretiminin başarılı olabilmesi için öğretim görevlileri arasında güven ve saygıya dayalı bir ilişkinin kurulmasının önemli olduğunu ve ders planlama sürecinin modelin en önemli kısmını oluşturduğunu ortaya çıkarmıştır. Takım öğretimi sayesinde öğretim görevlilerinin farklı bakış açıları geliştirdikleri, yeni öğretim yöntemleri deneme fırsatı buldukları ve problem çözme becerilerini geliştirdikleri de araştırmanın bulguları arasındadır. Öğrencilerin takım öğretimi yapılan derslerde daha ilgili oldukları, öğretim görevlilerininse bu derslerin başarılı bir şekilde uygulandığını düşündükleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Öğretim görevlilerinin kişilik özellikleri ve öğretim stillerinde farklılıklar olması, takım öğretimi toplantıları için yeterli zaman bulunamaması modelin uygulanmasında karşılaşılan güçlükler arasında yer almaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İngilizce öğretim görevlileri, karma yöntem çalışması, mesleki gelişim, takım öğretimi

Kaynakça

• Al Nassir, M.N. (2017). Current practices of co-teaching in an elementary inclusive school: Moving toward effective co-teaching relationship. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Northern Iowa, Iowa, US.
• Anderson, R. S., & Speck, B. W. (1998). Oh what a difference a team makes: Why team teaching makes a difference. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(7), 671-686. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00021-3
• Bailey, K., Curtis, A. & Nunan D. (2001). Pursuing professional development: The self as source. Ontario, Canada: Heinle and Heinle.
• Bailey, K. M., Dale, T., & Squire, B. (1992). Some reflections on collaborative language teaching. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching, 162-178. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Benoit, R., & Haugh, B. (2001). Team teaching tips for foreign language teachers. The Internet TESL Journal, 7(10), 1-8.
• Buckley, F. J. (2000). Team teaching: What, why and how? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Burns, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2014). Teaching around the world: what can TALIS tell us? California: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education. Retrieved from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/teaching-around-world-what-can-talis-tell-us_3.pdf
• Carless, D., & Walker, E. (2006). Effective team teaching between local and native speaking English teachers. Language and Education, 20(6), 463-477.
• Chadbourne, R. (2004). A typology of teacher collaboration in middle schools. Australian Journal of Middle Schooling, 4(1) 9–16.
• Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1995). Co-Teaching: Guidelines for Creating Effective Practices. Focus on Exceptional Children, 26, 3.
• Cook, L., & Friend, M. (2004). Co-Teaching: Principles, Practices, and Pragmatics. Participants Guide. Paper presented at New Mexico Public Education Department Quarterly Special Education Meeting, Albuquerque. Santa Fe, NM: New Mexico Public Educa-tion Department.
• Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Rundell, B. & Evans, D. (2003a). The impact of collaborative CPD on classroom teaching and learning. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.
• Creswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. Los Angeles.
• Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary Course and Team Teaching: New Arrangement for Learning. Phoenix: ACE/Oryx.
• Davis, J. R. (1997). Interdisciplinary Courses and Team Teaching. Phoenix: American Council on Education / Oryx Press Series on Higher Education.
• Friend, M. (2008). Co-teaching: a simple solution that isn’t simple after all. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 2(2), 9-19.
• Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley- Chamberlain, D.A, & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co- Teaching: An Illustration of the Complexity of Col-laboration in Special Education, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20 (1), 9-27.
• Gately, S. E., & Gately, F. I. (2001). Understanding co-teaching components. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33, 40-47.
• Goetz, K. (2000). Perspectives on team teaching. E-Gallery: A Peer Reviewed Journal, 1(4). Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/~egallery/ goetz.html.
• Hanover Research. (2012). The effectiveness of the co-teaching model. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED563448.pdf.
• Hanusch, F., Obijiofor, L., & Volcic, Z. (2009). Theoretical and practical issues in team teaching a large undergraduate class. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 66-74.
• Harland, J. & Kinder, K. (1997) Teachers’ continuing professional development: Framing a model of outcomes. British Journal of In-Service Education, 23(1), 71 – 84.
• Hawley, W., & Valli, L. (1999). The Essentials of Effective Professional Development: A New Consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond, & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice, 127-150. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Horwich, J. (1999). Cracks widen in team teaching of English. Asahi Evening News, 24 October: Life Section.
• Krammer, M., Rossmann, P., Gastager, A. & Gasteiger, Klicpera, B. (2018) Ways of composing teaching teams and their impact on teachers’ perceptions about collaboration, European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 463-478.
• Lantolf J.P. & Pavlenko A. (1995) Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review Applied Linguist, 15,108- 124.
• Luckner, J. L. (1999). An examination of two co-teaching classrooms. American Annals of the Deaf, 144, 24-34. Retrieved from http:// gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/
• McKeon, F. (2006). Partnerships within a paired teaching placement and support for the trainee teachers’ professional development. Paper presented at 131 Association of Teacher Education in Europe, 31st Annual Conference, Portoroz, Slovenia.
• Meirink, J., Meijer, P., & Verloop, N. (2007). A closer look at teachers’ individual learning in collaborative settings. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 145-164.
• Özsoy, K. (2017). EFL teachers’ engagement in reflective practice via team teaching for professional development. (Unpublished master’s thesis) Bilkent University, Ankara.
• Pugach, M. C, & Johnson, L. J. (2002). Collaborative practitioners, collaborative schools (2nd ed.). Denver: Love Publishing.
• Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers: Strategies for teacher learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• OECD TALIS (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris: OECD Publications. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/berlin/43541636.pdf.
• Owen, S. M. (2015). Teacher professional learning communities in innovative contexts: ‘Ah-hah moments,’ ‘passion’ and ‘making a difference’ for student learning. Professional Development in Education, 41(1), 57–74.
• Rabb, R. (2009). Team Teaching. Retrieved from http://www.usma.edu/cfe/Literature/Rabb_09.pdf.
• Rose, J., & Reynolds, D. (2009). Teachers continuing professional development: A new approach. 20th Annual World ICSEI, U.K. Retrieved from www.fm- kp.si/zalozba/ISBN/978-961-6573-65-8/219-240.pdf
• Schmoker, M. (2005). Here and now: Improving teaching and learning. In R. DuFour, R. Eaker, & R. DuFour (Eds.), On common ground: The power of professional learning communities, 137–138, Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
• Shabani, K. (2016). Applications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach for teachers’ professional development. Cogent Education, 3(1). doi:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1252177
• Shannon, N. B., & Meath-Lang, B. (1992). Collaborative language teaching: A coinvestigation. In D. Nunan (Ed.). Collaborative language learning and teaching, 120-140. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Sobolev, S. E., & Güven, Y. (2009). Would you like to teach with me? Paper presented at the 10th METU ELT Convention, Ankara, Turkey. Retrieved from http://dbe.metu.edu.tr/convention/proceedingsweb/Teach.pdf
• Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2008). A guide to co-teaching: Practical tips for facilitating student learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Walsh,T. (2020). ‘Promoted widely but not valued’: Teachers’ perceptions of team teaching as a form of professional development in post-primary schools in Ireland, Professional Development in Education.
• White, S.C., Henley, J. A. & Brabston M. E. (1998) To team teach or not to team teach—that is the question: a faculty perspective, Marketing Education Review, 8(3), 13- 23. doi: 10.1080/10528008.1998.11488640
• Whipp, J. L., Eckman, E. W., & van den Kieboom, L. (2005). Using sociocultural theory to guide teacher use and integration of instructional technology in two professional development schools. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 22(1), 37-43.
• Williams, M.L. (2010). Teacher collaboration as professional development in a large, suburban high school. College of Education and Human Sciences. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1094&context=cehsdiss
• Yoshida, T. (2016). A sociocultural analysis of effective team teaching in a Japanese language classroom. In A. Tajino, T. Stewart, & D. Dalsky, (Eds.), Team Teaching and Team Learning in the Language Classroom: Collaboration for innovation in ELT (pp.31-50). Abingdon: Routledge.
• York-Barr, J., Ghere, G., & Sommerness, J. (2007). Collaborative teaching to increase ELL student learning: A three-year urban elementary case study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(3), 301-335.