Bridging the Gap
Running Head: BRIDGING THE GAP
BRIDGING THE GAP:
CONSIDERING THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF
“GOOD TEACHING”
Carole Smith
California State University, Northridge
1
Bridging the Gap
2
Abstract
Members of the educational community may differ in their place of reference but are
looking for the same goal: a “good teacher”. This paper examines what it means to be a
good teacher, and how ones point of reference influences how one describes good
teaching. With the goal of finding a common ground between educators, students, and
their parents, I researched what good teaching means to the before mentioned
participants. Using three primary research methods: a questionnaire, a Likert scale rating
form , and interview format questioning, I determined the answer to my research
question. All participants place the most value on a teacher’s ability to be empathetic and
caring with students. That is the “common ground” that I was looking for. The
importance of developing strong relationships between teachers and students cannot be
overstated. Additionally, students value highly a teaches content knowledge and their
ability to deliver it effectively, whereas parents value a teachers willingness to spend
extra time with student, and teachers value classroom management and teaching
strategies such as using a variety of teaching modalities.
Bridging the Gap
Chapter One: Introduction
Bridging the Gap between Teachers, Administrator’s, Students and Parents
Today’s educational community is a very diverse group, consisting of students,
teachers, administrators, and parents. Each comes with their own unique perspective on
what they would like to see occur in a classroom. What they all share is a common,
sometimes elusive, goal: “A Good Teacher”. However, the characteristics of what
construes a “good teacher” vary significantly depending on ones background experience
and perspective. Nationally, schools are ranked with their API (Academic Performing
Index) score. Teachers, however, are only ranked informally and subjectively through
such mediums as the website Rateyourteacher.com, and personal opinions. A shared
understanding of the characteristics of a good teacher can be developed within the
educational community, with all participants valuing varying viewpoints. This
understanding has the potential of positive repercussions such as:

More “good teachers”: Providing teachers with a clear understanding of the
characteristics of good teachers will encourage and motivate teachers to develop
and enhance those traits.

Less friction between teachers and administrators, parents, and students: By
developing a common ground between all parties within the educational
3
Bridging the Gap
4
community, new understandings can be gained. This is not the same as finding a
middle ground, but rather that together these groups can identify what to aspire to
and work towards.

When people who really care about an issue come together and bring their best
thinking from their various perspectives, there is the potential for new options to
be generated.
Purpose Statement:
The purpose of this paper is to examine the differing beliefs on what makes good, or
effective, teaching. The specific research questions are:
1.
What do teachers believe are the most important characteristics of a good
teacher?
2. What do administrators believe are the most important characteristics of a good
teacher?
3. What do students believe are the most important characteristics of a good teacher?
4. What common ground can be found within these beliefs?
Bridging the Gap
The goal of this research project is not to “prove” what a “good teacher” is, but rather
to understand and evaluate what different members of the educational community
believe.
Importance of the Study:
This study will be of value to all stakeholders in the educational community, but
especially for preservice teachers. Understanding the different viewpoints and their
respective characteristics of good and effective teachers will help new teachers grow to
become such.
5
Bridging the Gap
6
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
My interest is in exploring the different perspectives of people in the educational
community regarding what they believe to be the most important characteristics of a good
teacher. Good teachers have been studied ever since Plato described how Socrates taught
by asking questions of his pupils. An awareness of the different qualities that a “good
teacher” embodies, and how an individuals perspective influences which characteristics
they view as the most important, can be used to motivate and enhance good teaching.
What follows is a sample of the literature I reviewed. This review has given me ideas to
use in developing a survey for asking questions and other data collecting measures as
well as providing a theoretical context for my study. It also has opened my eyes to how
cultural backgrounds can determine students’ expectations of their teachers. A review of
the literature yielded, interestingly enough, similar trends as was found in my own data
collection. First and foremost is that “good teachers”, whether being described by
teachers, students, or other educational stakeholders, are nearly always defined in one of
two different ways: either in terms of personality characteristics or in terms of ability
characteristics.
The Personality Perspective
According to the ‘personality’ perspective, crucial to being a good teacher is
having a balanced and mature personality. Viewed from this perspective, a good teacher
is typified as ‘kind, enthusiastic’ and possibly ‘attractive’. Lowyck (1994) noticed that in
Bridging the Gap
professions having strong social components such as teaching, qualities like friendliness
are very opportune. “Students express a desire for intelligent, creative, and empathetic
teachers who create trustworthy and respectful spaces for learning in their classrooms
(Robertson, 2006 p.765).
Research into the personality of teachers goes back to the 1920’s and 1940’s,
when “styles of leadership were related to the performance of students’ (J.J. Beishuizen,
2001 p.186). The personality perspective is similar to the humanistic tradition in
education, where development of human values is considered an important educational
task. The personality perspective yields such comments as ‘calm’, ‘puts things in a
positive perspective’, and ‘makes students respect their teacher’. Interestingly, teachers
themselves tend to favor this perspective, showing a markedly high valuing of
establishing good relationships as part of good teaching.
The Ability Perspective
The ‘ability’ perspective highlights skills, knowledge, and experience as being
crucial factors to good teaching. Viewed from this perspective, a good teacher is typified
as being able to execute skills routinely and effectively. Characteristics of teachers from
the skill-oriented perspective are ‘ability to keep order’, ‘organized’, and ‘gives clear
instructions’.
In studying the effectiveness of teaching from a skill-oriented perspective,
Rosenshine and Furst (1973) concluded that “ nine process variables contributed to good
learning results: clarity, variability, enthusiasm, task orientation, criticism, indirectness
7
Bridging the Gap
8
student opportunity to learn, structuring comments, varying the level of questions and
cognitive activities” (pg. 187). This ‘ability’ perspective of “good teachers” is displayed
by comments such as ‘good teachers can teach all subjects’, ‘takes care of the classroom’,
‘gives clear instruction’ and ‘careful’ (J.J. Beishuizen, 2001, p. 192).
Age/Grade Range of Student
J.J. Beishuizen’s study, Students’ and Teachers’ Cognitions about Good
Teachers, found that the age/grade range of a student also influenced their choice of most
important qualities to a good teacher. “Primary school students described good teachers
primarily as competent instructors, focusing on transfer of knowledge and skills, whereas
secondary school students emphasized relational aspects of good teachers” (p. 185). Her
study concluded that primary students expect ‘task-oriented teaching competence,
whereas teachers emphasize good relationships” (p. 196). Eccles, Midegely, and Adler
(1984; Eccles, Wigfield, Harold, & Blumenfeld, 1993) proposed that in “secondary
education an increasing discrepancy arises between students’ need for autonomy and
control on the one hand and the opportunity to learn independently on the other hand”.
This may explain the shift between primary students valuing teachers based on skills and
secondary students valuing teachers based on relational aspects.
Bridging the Gap
9
Didactic vs. Facilitative Teaching
In a related study, Adult students’ perceptions of good teaching as a function of
their conceptions of learning – Part 2. Implications for the evaluation of teaching (2004),
Keber, Jenkins, and Chi Ng interviewed college students about their perceptions of good
teaching. What they determined was that students perceptions of good teaching is
dependent upon whether a student holds reproductive conceptions of teaching or selfdetermining conceptions of learning. “Those with reproductive conceptions of learning
saw good teaching as ensuring that facts were absorbed. As conceptions of learning
developed towards reconstruction of meaning, the good teacher became seen as a
facilitator of learning” (p. 82). What I found most interesting was that students in nonacademic orientations, as well as though in engineering preferred didactic, reproductive
learning; whereas students who used a deep approach to learning preferred a learning
environment that promotes understanding. Kember (2001) found that “students held
either a didactic/reproductive/absolute set or a more sophisticated
facilitative/understanding/transformative trio” (p. 82). Novice students were more likely
to hold the didactic/reproductive/absolute set of beliefs about teaching. The diversity of
opinions regarding good teaching can be considered thus by relating good and poor
teaching to conceptions of learning. “Interpreting perceptions of teaching quality in terms
of conceptions of learning provided an explanation for contrasting views of good
teaching” (p. 83). Students preferring didactic teaching would consider a “good teacher”
one that conforms to their preference. Essential characteristics include teachers providing
lectures, and ‘have ways to make students understand and ways to make students work
Bridging the Gap 10
hard’. Students with self-determining conceptions of learning disliked didactic teaching
and preferred more facilitative forms. They found didactic teaching as being “too much
transmission and insufficient opportunity for discussion and interaction…it seems that it
is a one-way channel” (p. 87). For these students, a good teacher was a facilitator of
learning, rather a transmitter of a body of content knowledge. These teachers would “
empower their students with the tools to learn on their own and take responsibility for
their own learning. They encourage their students to explore and construct their
knowledge” (p. 88).
The Relational Aspect
Many teachers value the relational aspect of teaching as primary. This is echoed
again in Joanne Robertson’s “If You Know Our Names It Helps!” Students’ Perspectives
About “Good” Teaching (2006). She explored the relationship between students’
perceptions and the research regarding optimal teaching strategies and learning
environments. She considered ethnographic data collected from students in urban,
suburban, private, and public (primary to postsecondary) schools. Much of her data was
collected from interviews and written essays with these students. She concluded that
relational aspects are the key factor in effective teaching. Students persistently expressed
desires for “intelligent, creative, and empathetic teachers who create trustworthy and
respectful spaces for learning in their classrooms” (p. 765). This correlated with other
research on effective teaching (Stronge, 2002) and supports her claim that teaching and
learning are really all about relationships.
Bridging the Gap 11
As the school districts, politicians, and media press for higher test scores many
teachers and students feel under tremendous pressure. Improving teacher-student
relationships is a low-cost strategy that should be considered. The results of many
research articles I reviewed document the effectiveness of a caring teacher in the
classroom. Studies characterize these effective teachers as accessible, professional, and
friendly. Such qualities as ‘warm’, ‘understanding’, ‘encouraging’ and ‘loving’ are hard
to measure, but these qualities should be advocated for within the educational
community.
Education, as a business, is generally determined from the ‘inside out’, meaning
that those on the inside of the teaching profession assume that they know what students
need, and what teachers are expected to give. This is not the case in most other
businesses, where often the needs of the customer dictate the service the industry
provides. University Students’ Expectations of Teaching (Sander, Stevenson, King and
Coates 2000) explored undergraduate students’ expectations of and preferences in
teaching, learning and assessment. The study determined that “students expected to be
taught by formal and interactive lectures but preferred to be taught by interactive lectures
and group-based activities” (p. 309). Students asked to rate various qualities of a good
teacher selected ‘teaching skill’, followed by ‘approachability’ as the most important.
What I found especially interesting was that the research of student expectations suggests
that they are dependent on a number of factors, including culture (Shank et al., 1996;
Twale et al., 1997); gender (Walker et al., 1994); and age (Levine, 1993). Therefore,
even ideal expectations (what a student would ideally like to have occur) vary widely
from predictive expectations (what a student assumes is most likely to have occur) to
Bridging the Gap 12
normative expectations, which evolve from experience. It is clear upon reflection how a
students’ prior experience will dictate his or her expectations and predictions. The study
concludes that students may have unrealistic or inappropriate expectations of courses
“and it would be appropriate to have those expectations managed to a more appropriate or
realistic level” (Hill, 1995). This is not to say that students’ expectations and preferences
should necessarily drive educational reform, but they may be usefully considered. What
was most useful for the purposes of my study was learning what qualities university
students’ rank highest in terms of teaching. Ranked highest was ‘teaching skills’,
followed by ‘teacher approachability’, ‘knowledge’, ‘enthusiasm’ and ‘organization’.
Chandra Foote’s Characteristics of Bad High School Teachers (2000) study
compared perceptions of “bad” teachers, which she gathered in interviews with high
school administrators, teachers, parents, and students. In her study, the following
questions arose: When a person hears that a teacher is a “bad” teacher, what images and
characteristics do they construct to fit that meaning? Do the four major constituents
(students, teachers, parents and administrators) share similar or discrepant images of the
bad teachers? For the purposes of my action research project, the question would be, what
images and traits do we assign to a person believed to be a “good teacher”? Might these
traits be contradictory, and how could that potential conflict be resolved?
Research also shows that many teachers are frequently unaware of how students
perceive their teaching (Appleby 1990; Perlman and McCann 1998). They also my have
misperceptions of what students perceive as good teaching. William Miley and Sonia
Gonsalves A Simple Way To Collect Data On How Students View Teaching Styles
collected data on this subject, finding that indeed students and teachers have different
Bridging the Gap 13
expectations and desires. Their research indicates that students want more respect,
whereas teachers believe that students want them to control the classroom and to
entertain them. Appleby (1990) found that teachers are most irritated by immature and
inattentive students, while students are most irritated by teachers lacking in empathy and
communication skills.
Corbett’s What Urban Students Say About Good Teaching (2002)
study focused on inner-city youth and their shared vision of good teachers. This article
findings suggested that good teachers don’t necessarily raise test scores or schools API
(academic performance index), but demonstrate to their students how much they care.
This was my first glimpse of the possible great divide between the views of students and
administrators. I teach at Palisades Charter High School, which is in an affluent
community seemingly far removed from the urban students in Corbett’s study. However,
the majority of the PCHS students are from the inner city (south central Los Angeles).
As with Foote’s study, the results of this study will help in developing the methodology
for my own study.
Murphy’s The Good Teacher and Good Teaching: Comparing Beliefs of SecondGrade Students, Preservice Teachers, and Inservice Teachers (2004) compared the
beliefs of characteristics of good teaching between individuals at various educational
levels. One of the findings was of particular interest to me in regards to my proposed
study. Murphy found that beliefs about good teachers seemed to be formed at an early
age, and stay consistent. This implies that shared beliefs on characteristics of good
teaching can be found, even from divergent groups such as students and administrators, if
their early childhood education was similar.
Bridging the Gap 14
Mageehon’s What Makes a “Good” Teacher “Good:” Women in Transition From
Prison to Community Reflect (2006) provided a glimpse into an educational system not
normally considered: that of young women in detention facilities. Not surprisingly, an
identified key characteristic was compassion. This study, as with Corbett’s, highlights the
importance of teachers teaching more than just information to students. For these
students, a “good teacher” was based on the idealization of a “good parent”: a nurturer,
mentor, friend, and tough-love provider.
In a similar context, Ursano’s The Teaching Alliance: A Perspective on the Good
Teacher and Effective Learning (2007) study considers the teaching alliance, part of the
relationship between teacher and student, as an essential component of effective learning.
For the “good teacher”, teaching is not a display of knowledge. “Rather, it is a process
includes identifying an area for learning and deciding on the interventions that will foster
learning (p. 187). It is in this context that the importance of the teacher-student alliance
becomes clear, as the reactions between teachers and students may become impediments
to learning. When a strong teacher-student alliance exists the teacher is able to meet the
student learner at the point where, when, and how they can learn, thereby maximizing
learning. As in Corbett’s and Mageehon’s study, this article examines how the
relationship between teachers and students affect student learning. Ursano views the
‘educational diagnosis’ as an essential aspect of the teaching alliance and a determining
factor in good teaching. “The teacher continually assesses the student learning to identify
impediments to it. The teacher makes an educational diagnosis, an assessment which
clarifies the etiology of missed opportunities or errors in learning” (p. 190). The
educational diagnosis begins with asking “why” – why is a student not learning? These
Bridging the Gap 15
diagnoses of impediments to learning can then direct the method of educational
intervention. Thus, in Ursano’s perspective, a “good teacher” is one that develops
carefully the student – teacher relationship to maximize student learning through a
process of “setting a context for learning, diagnosing learning problems, and deciding on
the educational interventions that will be most helpful in fostering the learning of a
student” (p. 192).
Lee Morganett’s Good Teacher-Student Relationships: A Key Element In
Classroom Motivation And Management (2001), as in Ursano’s study above, considers
the role that the teacher-student relationship has on student learning and achievement. Dr.
Morganett concludes that it is critical for teachers, and teacher-training programs, to
focus more on developing strong teacher-student relationships, that doing so will result in
increased motivation and decreased behavioral problems. Certainly it is true that many
students do not appear to be sufficiently motivated to achieve the level of success that
they may be capable of. Research has shown that it is reaffirming to be accepted and
valued (Coopersmith, 1967; Driekers, 1968; & Maslow, (1970). Morganett concludes that
“students who feel accepted by their teachers are more likely to do what the teacher asks
of them (e.g. assignments) and less likely to do things that make teachers’ lives difficult
(e.g. disrupt)” (p. 261).
Polk’s Traits of Effective Teachers (2006) identified ten basic characteristics of
effective teachers from a large body of available literature. Polk proposed that good,
effective teachers would be able to produce results in the form of student achievement.
He suggested that schools should implement professional development that requires
teachers to plan and critically review their own development of these ten desired traits.
Bridging the Gap 16
Polk’s defining a good teacher in terms of student learning outcomes is markedly
different to that of the “good parent”, the “caring and compassionate” teacher described
above in Mageehon’s study. It is this very difference that I plan to explore in depth in my
own upcoming study.
F. Banks and D. Barlex’s “No One Forgets a Good Teacher!” What Do “Good”
Technology Teachers Know? (2002) examines the link between having a “good degree”
and being a “good teacher”, to determine how significant content or subject knowledge
are for creative and effective teaching. Their study sought to ascertain “what links can be
made between a teacher’s knowledge and the associated pedagogic strategies and
practices to ensure successful learning (p. 17). In 1986, Shulman studied how successful
college students transformed their expertise of subject matter into terms that high school
student can comprehend. Since then, there has been more research into this complex
relationship between subject knowledge and pedagogy (Shulman & Sykes, 1986;
Shulman 1986, 1987; MacNamara 1991, Turner-Bisset 1999). Banks and Barlex
considered three different aspects of teacher knowledge: the curriculum-oriented work of
Shulman (1986), the cognitive approach of Gardner (1983, 1991), and the interrelated
tradition of didactics and pedagogy in continental Europe (Verret 1995, Chevellard
1991). It is common for teachers to admit to fully understanding a concept only after
being required to teach it. Similarly, Banks and Barlex concluded that it is the “active
intersection of subject knowledge, school knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge that
brings teacher professional knowledge into being”(pg.19).
Haney’s Constructivist Beliefs About the Science Classroom Learning Environment:
Perspectives from Teachers, Administrators, Parents, Community Members, and Students
Bridging the Gap 17
(2003) examines the perceptions of teachers, administrators, parents, community
members, and high school students about the science learning environment. In a similar
fashion to the study that I am proposing, Haney’s study considered the belief structures of
different members of the educational community to see how they compared, in the hope
that the results might shed light on educational reform.
This review of literature helped to tie my action research project to what others
have done before. There is a wealth of research on what makes good teaching, traits of
effective teachers, and the like. There are articles exploring differing points of view.
Other articles look for common threads between differing perspectives in a similar
fashion. Being able to use these insights helped to inform my own research more
effectively and efficiently, as well as providing me with examples of research questions,
data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.
Bridging the Gap 18
Chapter Three: Methodology
Participants:
My participants fit into three categories: students, parents, and teachers.

Students: approximately 500 chemistry students from AP classes, Honors classes,
and Regular classes at Palisades Charter High School, a diverse school with
students from many different socioeconomic, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds.
Students from more than 100 zip codes attend Palisades Charter High School.
Ethnic Composition:
White
42.90%
Hispanic
25.90%
African-American
21.50%
Asian
7.50%
Other
2.20%
Approximately 30% of the students at Palisades Charter High School are on the
Free Lunch Program.
ppppppSTUDENT BODY


Parents: The parents that were used in data collection are the parents of the before
mentioned students of mine.

Teachers: approximately 25 High School Teachers that teach at Palisades Charter
High School.
Bridging the Gap 19
Materials:
Three methods of data collection were primarily used. The first was a simple checklist
survey.
Checklist:
Check below the qualities that you consider being most important for a teacher to possess
for effective teaching.
____1. Well-designed lesson plans.
____2. Content knowledge.
____3. Engaging in extra research.
____4. Classroom management.
____5. Class rules.
____6. Spending time with students outside of class.
____7. Professional dress/appearance.
____8. Compassion and understanding of students needs.
____9. Utilizes a variety of instructional strategies/techniques.
____10. Enthusiastic.
Bridging the Gap 20
The second method of data collected was from a survey using a rating scale.
Rating scale questionnaire:
Rate the following from 1 (not important) to 5 (most important)
Good teachers…
1. Make sure that students do their work.
2. Control the classroom.
3. Are willing to help students whenever and however the students want help.
4. Explain assignments and content clearly.
5. Vary the classroom routine.
6. Take the time to get to know students and their circumstances.
The third method was in the form of short answer, or free response. The following openended questions were asked:
1. What are the most important characteristics of a good teacher?
2. When you think of a good teacher, what traits and characteristics do you attribute
to that teacher? Describe this teacher in as much detail as possible.
3. When you think of your all-time favorite teacher, what was it about him or her
that made this teacher stand out?
Procedures:
The procedure was quite simple: first I distributed the surveys, rating scales, and
questionnaires to all my students. The data was collected, organized and analyzed. A
Bridging the Gap 21
second set of surveys, rating scales, and questionnaires were sent home with the students
to be completed by parents and returned. This data was also collected, organized, and
analyzed. A third set of surveys, rating scales, and questionnaires were distributed to the
teachers at my school. This data was then collected, organized, and analyzed. A coding
scheme was developed to use for the open-ended questions. Data was analyzed for
commonalities as well as conflicts to determine if there is a unifying principle behind the
ideal of a “good teacher”
Bridging the Gap 22
Chapter Four: Findings
The specific research questions were:
1.
What do teachers believe are the most important characteristics of a good
teacher?
2. What do administrators believe are the most important characteristics of a good
teacher?
3. What do students believe are the most important characteristics of a good teacher?
4. What common ground can be found within these beliefs?
Three distinct groups were researched separately: students, parents, and teachers. I will
discuss the findings of these individuals as groups. The first data collection method was a
simple checklist survey, where students, teachers and parents selected from a list of ten
attributes commonly agreed upon in research as “good teaching” techniques. Participants
were free to select as many of these attributes as they liked. A sample of the checklist is
located in the Appendix. Following is the data gathered from the checklist surveys.
Question #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Number of Student Responses
104
134
40
99
31
43
14
Bridging the Gap 23
8
9
10
121
113
127
Summary – the “Big Five”: The Most Highly Ranked Attributes by Students
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Content Knowledge
Enthusiastic
Compassion and Understanding of Student Needs
Utilizes a Variety of Instructional Strategies/Techniques
Well-Designed Lesson Plans
Question #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of Parent Responses
58
67
24
57
31
21
14
60
57
60
The “Big Five”: The Most Highly Ranked Attributes by Parents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Content Knowledge
Compassion and Understanding of Student Needs
Enthusiastic
Well-designed Lesson Plans
Classroom Management
Question #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Number of Teacher Responses
18
20
6
22
10
7
7
22
22
Bridging the Gap 24
10
17
The “Big Five”: The Most Highly Ranked Attributes by Teachers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Classroom Management
Compassion and Understanding of Student Need
Utilizes a variety of instructional strategies/techniques
Content Knowledge
Well-designed Lesson Plans
Following the checklist survey, the following short questionnaire with a rating scale was
given to the three research groups.
Rate the following from 1 (not important) to 5 (most important)
Good teachers…
1. Make sure that students do their work.
2. Control the classroom.
3. Are willing to help students whenever and however the students want help.
4. Explain assignments and content clearly.
5. Vary the classroom routine.
6. Take the time to get to know students and their circumstances.
The data collected for the three research groups follows.
Student Response Data
Question
#
1
2
3
Rating = 1
Rating = 2
Rating = 3
Rating = 4
Rating = 5
8
5
1
16
8
1
46
29
10
42
37
29
24
70
102
Bridging the Gap 25
4
5
6
1
6
6
0
15
13
7
41
39
21
39
39
108
32
43
Parent Response Data
Question #
1
2
3
4
5
6
Rating = 1
4
2
1
1
2
1
Rating = 2
4
3
3
1
12
1
Rating = 3
11
10
5
4
20
20
Rating = 4
19
23
20
8
21
23
Rating = 5
37
29
42
60
17
24
Teacher Response Data
Question
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
Rating = 1
Rating = 2
Rating = 3
Rating = 4
Rating = 5
2
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
0
2
3
1
6
2
6
1
4
4
2
4
8
0
5
8
11
14
8
21
8
5
All three groups – students, parents, and teachers – all gave the highest overall
rankings to the fourth question, reflecting their desire for teachers that explain content
and assignments clearly.
Following the rating-scale questionnaire, the three groups were given a series of
open-ended questions for them to answer in short essay format. Their answers were
Bridging the Gap 26
then coded and divided into the two main categories, ability and personality
characteristics.
Personality:
C = Calm
L = Loving
U = Understanding
S = Stern/Strict
T= Takes Time for Students
E = Enthusiastic
Ability:
E = Able to Explain material Well
O = Organized
M = Manages Class Well
K = Strong Content Knowledge
Student Data
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
8
171
44
14
31
42
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
42
17
22
47
Parent Data
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
7
37
21
6
39
31
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
29
12
7
43
Teacher Data
Bridging the Gap 27
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
4
16
7
2
15
15
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
1
4
4
12
Analysis of Findings
The data gathered from the checklist survey showed the most agreement between
students and their parents. As the graphs below illustrate, students and parents both
selected categories 2, 8, 9, and 10 most frequently. Those categories, respectively, reflect
the beliefs that good teachers have strong content knowledge, are compassionate and
understanding of student needs, employ a variety of instructional techniques and
strategies, and are enthusiastic. Both parents and students selected strong content
knowledge as a characteristic of a good teacher most frequently. Teachers also selected
these characteristics, but it is noticeable that strong content knowledge was not selected
proportionally as often as it was for parents and students. On the other hand, teachers
selected classroom management most frequently. This trait was not one of the more
popular choices for parents and students. As the data shows, students and parents are
valuing content knowledge and instructional techniques most highly, whereas teachers
are valuing classroom management most highly.
Bridging the Gap 28
Student Checksheet Responses
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of Parent Responses
Parent Checksheet Data
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Question
7
8
9
10
Bridging the Gap 29
Number of Teacher Responses
Teacher Checklist Data
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Question
The second data collection tool was the rating scale survey. In this survey,
students, parents, and teachers were asked to rank a series of statements about
teaching characteristics from 1 (least important) to 5 (most important). The specific
characteristics ranked were:
1. Make sure that students do their work.
2. Control the classroom.
3. Are willing to help students whenever and however the students want help.
4. Explain assignments and content clearly.
5. Vary the classroom routine.
6. Take the time to get to know students and their circumstances
Bridging the Gap 30
Due to the variance between the individual questions and research groups, the
findings of each characteristic will be considered separately.
1. How important is it that teachers make sure students do their work?
Students do not consider it of the highest importance that teachers make students
do their work, although overall more students consider it of importance than not. As
the graph below illustrates, the most common rating for students is a 3 out of 5 for
this characteristic. Parents, on the other hand, overwhelmingly rated it extremely
important. Nearly all of the parents surveyed gave this characteristic the highest
ranking, 5 out of 5. Similarly, teachers also tended to rank this characteristic highly.
Although several teachers ranked this characteristic a 3 out of 5, more than half of the
teachers surveyed ranked it the highest, 5 out of 5.
Student Rating Scale Question 1
50
Number of Responses
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
Rating:Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 31
Parent Rating Scale Question 1
Number of Responses
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
Teacher Rating Scale Question 2
Number of Responses
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 32
2. How important is if that teachers control the classroom?
Surprisingly, although students had not selected classroom management very
frequently in the checklist survey, where it did not make “the top five”, they did
consider it very important. The data clearly illustrates that students value a
teacher’s ability to manage the classroom highly. The parents data is amazingly
similar to students, with the trend in their bar graphs near identical. Teachers
overwhelmingly selected this characteristic as being of highest importance.
Student Rating Scale Question 2
Number of Responses
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 33
Parent Rating Scale Question 2
Number of Responses
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
Teacher Rating Scale Question 2
Number of Responses
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 34
3. How important is it that teachers are willing to help students whenever and
however the students want help?
Students overwhelmingly selected this characteristic as being of highest
importance, with almost no students assigning to it low importance. Both parents
and teachers also valued this choice highly, although not to the degree that
students did, as the graphs below illustrate. Several teachers wrote in comments
to the effect that they do not believe this is a characteristic of a good teacher.
Student Rating Scale Question 3
Number of Responses
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 35
Teacher Rating Scale Question 3
9
Number of Responses
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Parent Rating Scale Question 3
Bridging the Gap 36
45
Number of Responses
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
4.
How important is it that teachers explain assignments and content clearly?
Students overwhelmingly valued this category extremely highly, with over 100
students ranking it a 5 out of 5. Teachers and parents also chose a ranking of 5
overwhelmingly. It is clear that there is a high level of agreement between students,
parents, and teachers that a “good teacher” explains assignments and content clearly.
Bridging the Gap 37
Student Rating Scale Question 4
Number of Responses
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
Teachers Rating Scale Question 4
Number of Responses
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 38
Parents Rating Scale Question 4
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
5.
2
3
4
5
How important is it that teachers vary the classroom routine?
Of the different sub-groups (students, parents, and teachers), teachers tended to
rate this quality as very to highly important, whereas both students and parents
only ascribed a mid-level of importance to it.
Bridging the Gap 39
Student Rating Scale Question 5
45
Number of Responses
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
Parent Rating Scale Question 5
Number of Responses
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 40
Teacher Rating Scale Question 5
9
Number of Responses
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
6.
How important is it that teachers take the time to get to know students and
their circumstances?
Interestingly, although both students and parents ranked this category highly, teachers
did not. For both students and parents, the graphs show a continuous progression with
a ranking of 4 being chosen more than a ranking of 3, and a ranking of 5 being chosen
more than a ranking of 4. Not very many teachers selected a ranking of 5 for this
category.
Bridging the Gap 41
Student Rating Scale Question 6
50
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
Parent Rating Scale Question 6
30
Number of Responses
Number of Responses
45
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
Rating: Least to Most Important
5
Bridging the Gap 42
Teacher Rating Scale Question 6
9
Number of Responses
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rating: Least to Most Important
The third, and final, method of data collection was the short answer, open-ended
questions. Due to the variety of responses, a coding scheme was employed. In analyzing
these responses, they seemed to fall into two main categories: personality and ability.
The following coding scheme was developed:
Personality:
C = Calm
L = Loving
U = Understanding
S = Stern/Strict
T= Takes Time for Students
E = Enthusiastic
Ability:
E = Able to Explain material Well
O = Organized
M = Manages Class Well
K = Strong Content Knowledge
Bridging the Gap 43
Using this scheme, the data was then analyzed and organized into the following.
Student Data
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
8
171
44
14
31
42
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
42
17
22
47
Parent Data
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
7
37
21
6
39
31
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
29
12
7
43
Teacher Data
Characteristic
C
L
U
S
T
E
# Responses
4
16
7
2
15
15
Characteristic
E
O
M
K
# Responses
1
4
4
12
Bridging the Gap 44
In analyzing this data, there are some striking points to illustrate: first, students
were much more likely than parents or teachers to write in these open-ended
comments. Secondly, all of these codes represent desired characteristics: these
comments represent what students, parents, and teachers value most in teachers; what
makes (or made) the most difference to them. It is also important to consider the
overall number of responses, or the “sample size”. I received data from approximately
200 students, 70 parents, and 25 teachers. So although it may seem that significantly
less teachers and parents made certain comments, one needs to look at the proportion.
By far, more students said that a “Loving” teacher is the most important quality
than any other characteristic. Terms students frequently used include: friendly,
helpful, kind, compassion, affectionate, caring, sweet. A typical student comment was
“a good teacher cares about each individual student”. Helpfulness was another highly
desired characteristic: “A good teacher goes out of their way to help you”. Content
knowledge, and the ability to deliver it well, in terms that students understand, also
figured predominantly in these open-ended comments. Typical comments of these
include such as “knowing what they are talking about”, “knowledgeable about the
subject”, and “knows the material”.
For parents, the most common desired teaching quality is strong content
knowledge. “They must know the material” and “knowing the material well” were
typical comments parents expressed. Like their children, parents highly value loving,
caring teachers. The teachers that they remembered as special had “great relationships
with the students” were “caring” and “understanding”. Enthusiastic teachers also
were highly desired by both teachers and students. Teachers also highly value content
Bridging the Gap 45
knowledge and building relationships with students. However, possibly due to their
own specialized background in education, many of their comments were more
specific about pedagogy. For example, comments such as “able to break things down
to a completely understandable level and build up to complexity” and
“compassion/interest in each student” were typical teacher comments.
ia
s
tic
e
Ti
s
ke
Ta
Characteristics
En
th
us
m
ct
St
ri
ng
di
U
nd
er
st
an
Lo
v
in
g
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Ca
lm
Number of Responses
Student Coded Data: Personality
Bridging the Gap 46
Student Coded Data: Ability
Number of Responses
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Explains Well
Organized
Manages
Class
Content
Knowledge
Characteristics
ia
s
tic
e
Ti
s
ke
Ta
Characteristic
En
th
us
m
ct
St
ri
di
ng
U
nd
er
st
an
Lo
v
in
g
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Ca
lm
Number of Responses
Teacher Coded Data: Personality
Bridging the Gap 47
Teacher Coded Data: Ability
Number of Responses
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Explains Well
Organized
Manages
Class
Content
Knowledge
Characteristic
Parent Coded Data: Ability
Number of Responses
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Explains Well
Organized
Manages
Class
Characteristic
Content
Knowledge
Bridging the Gap 48
ia
s
tic
e
Ti
s
ke
Ta
Characteristic
En
th
us
m
ct
St
ri
U
nd
e
rs
t
an
Lo
v
di
ng
in
g
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Ca
lm
Number of Respones
Parent Coded Data: Personality
Bridging the Gap 49
Chapter Five: Discussion
My study focused on a question of personal relevance to me: what, exactly, is a
“good teacher”? As a teacher, of course that is my goal. One wants to feel as though they
are making a difference, being valued. Yet those words are simultaneously vague and yet
loaded with meaning. A “good teacher” can mean different things to different people.
And so my study began with first trying to articulate clearly what a good teacher is. My
review of the literature suggested that a good teacher seems to be considered “good”
based on their ability, personality, or both. Throughout the many different articles I read
and the studies they were based on I saw recurrent themes, with “good teachers”
appearing to possess certain characteristics.
With a set of characteristics before me, I developed a series of questions to ask
three different groups of people: students, parents, and questions. My purpose was to
discover what they thought a good teacher was. Upon gathering nearly a thousand
different sources of data from questionnaires, surveys, and short essays from nearly two
hundred students, their parents, and teachers I work with, I sat down to analyze them.
My findings were not exactly earthshaking, or probably even surprising. But they were
very interesting to me!
From my review of the literature on this subject, I expected to see that
“personality” characteristics would dominate the field from my student responses, and
this was indeed the case. The overwhelming majority of my students reported that a good
teacher is one that cares deeply for their students. They used such terms as loving, caring,
takes time for them, is interested in them, builds a relationship with them, gets to know
Bridging the Gap 50
them, etc. What was surprising to me was how important content knowledge was to them.
This “ability” was highly desired by students. They clearly want teachers to “know their
stuff” and to be able to explain it well. As I read their comments, I was surprised to see
how insightful they are. My students, for the most part, are only 16 years old. Yet their
comments were direct and to the point. They feel – strongly – that teachers should teach
what they know best. That they need to stay strong and current about what they are
teaching. Students feel strongly that teachers themselves need to “practice what they
teach”. Nearly as much as they want teachers to be emotionally caring and supportive,
they want them to know their material inside and out, and to be able to break it down and
explain it well. I expected students to want “cool” teachers. What they want are experts in
their subject knowledge that are able to effectively and clearly share their knowledge and
understanding.
The responses from the parents did not completely surprise me. Like their
children, they want teachers to be kind and caring, and to have strong content knowledge.
Parents also expect good teachers to be able to manage the class, keep students on task.
The parents that I received data also expect a good teacher to be nearly totally available
to help students outside of class as well. The number of parents that wrote comments
such as “will help students as much as necessary” was surprising. As a parent myself, and
knowing how many students the average high school teacher has, I know how hard it is
for teachers to find time to help all their students. Apparently the parents of my students
don’t feel the same!
The most surprising data for me came from other teachers. My review of the
literature had informed me that they tend to consider good teachers from a “personality”
Bridging the Gap 51
perspective. And, indeed, the majority of the teachers I received data from did report that
a good teacher is caring. However, many teacher’s responses were not only about ability
but were very specific. Teachers report that good teachers can manage their classes, have
strong content knowledge, and are able to convey it to their classes. Teachers were very
clear about this, and supported their beliefs with examples of different teaching strategies
and pedagogies that could, and should, be employed (in their opinions). And, in a near
complete polar opposite from parents, they do not believe that good teachers need to
spend time with students outside of class; whether that would entail building relationships
or providing educational support.
Now, what does all this mean? In terms of my study – looking for common
ground between the varying perspectives of students, parents, and teachers – I found it.
Students, parents, and teachers all believe that a good teacher is one that cares deeply
about his or her students. These “good teachers” also should possess strong content
knowledge and the ability to convey it to their students. For me, personally, it was quite
intriguing to learn how critical – in a good way – my students are. I don’t mean to say
that they are putting teachers down, but that rather they are consciously evaluating and
considering what it is that they are looking for in teachers. It was surprising, and
disappointing, to learn how many of my colleagues think. From what I read, many are
frustrated and possible overworked; certainly bitter.
There are of course limitations to my study. It is purely based on my data, which
comes only from the school that I teach at. Although it is extremely diverse, with students
coming from over a hundred different zip codes and representing a truly diverse
Bridging the Gap 52
population in terms of ethnic backgrounds and social economic status, my data does not
necessarily reflect the views of students, parents, and teachers everywhere.
Despite its limitations, I find my results very interesting, and believe other
teachers would as well. I intend to share it with my teachers at my school, and to my
students and parents as well. Our students – the consumers, if you will, of the educational
system – are savvy ones. They are thoughtful observers of their teachers, and they know
what they like – and what they don’t. In a system inundated with testing and standards, so
much seemingly out of a teacher’s control, certainly it is good to know what is being
valued. It provides a clear goal one can strive towards if the desire is there. My action
research project was not to determine but to understand. This understanding can be
shared however, and be made useful to others.
Bridging the Gap 53
References
1. Agnello, A., Foote, C., Pagano, C Vermette, P., and Wisniewski,S., (2000). The
Characteristics of Bad High School Teachers. Education Journal 121, 128-134
Katheiser, H., Ursano, A., and Ursano, R. (2007). The Teaching Alliance: A
Perspective on the Good Teacher and Effective Learning. Psychiatry 70 (3) Fall
2007, 187-192
2. Banks, F. and Barlex, D., (2001-2002). “No One Forgets a Good Teacher!” What
Do “Good” Technology Teachers Know? European Education, vol. 33,
no.4
Winter 2001-2002, 17-27
3. Asscher, J., Beishuizen, J., Boumeester, S., Hof, E., and Putten, C. ,(2001).
Students’ and teachers’ cognition about good teachers. British Journal of
Educational Psychology (2001), 71, 185-201.
Coats, D., King, M., Sander, P., Stevenson, K., (2000). University Students’
Expectations of Teaching. Students in Higher Education vol. 25, no. 3, 2000, 309322.
4. Morganet, L., (2001). Good Teacher- Student Relationships: A Key Element In
Classroom Motivation and Management. Education (2001) vol. 12, no.2, 260264.
Bridging the Gap 54
5. Robertson, J. Qualitative Inquiry., (2006). Qualitative Inquiry (2006), 12, 756,
756-767.
6. Gonsalves, S., and Miley, W. A Simple Way to Collect Data on How Students
View Teaching skills. College Teaching. (1995), 20.
7. Chi Ng, K., Jenkins, W., Kember, D., (2004). Adult students’ perceptions of good
teaching as a function of their conceptions of learning-Part 2. Implications for the
evaluation of teaching. Studies in Continuing Education, vol. 26, no. 1. March
2004, 81-97.
8. Fritsch, R., (2007). Threats to the Teaching Alliance. Psychiatry 70(3), Fall 2007,
200-202.
9. Galbraith, M., and Jones, M., (2006). The Art and Science Of Teaching
Developmental Mathematics: Building Perspective Through Dialogue. Journal of
Developmental Education vol. 30, issue 2, winter 2006, 20-27.
10. Livingstone, K., (2007). Valuing teacher practice through professional learning
with a difference. Primary & Middle Years Educator, vol. 5, issue1, April 2007,
2-5.
Bridging the Gap 55
11. Kreber, Carolin., (2003). The scholarship of teaching: a comparison of
conceptions held by experts and regular academic staff. Higher Education, 46, 93121, 2003.
12. Davis, S. ,(2007). Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice: What’s
Good, What’s Bad, And How Can One BE Sure? The Research, Practice Divide,
April 2007, 569-578.
13. Carpenter, B., and Tait, G., (2001). The rhetoric and reality of good teaching: A
case study across three faculties at the Queensland University of Technology.
Higher Education, 42: 191-203, 2001.
14. Vande Grift. W., (2007). Quality of teaching in four European countries: a
review of the literature and application of an assessment instrument. Educational
Research, 49, 2, 127-152.
15. Johnston, M. and Reid, D., (1999). Improving Teaching in higher Education:
student and teacher perspectives. Educational Studies, vol. 25, no. 3, 1999, 269281.
16. Foote, C., Vermette, P. , Wisniewski,S., Agnello,A. and Pagano, C. (2000). The
Characteristics of Bad High School Teachers. Education Journal 121, 128-134
Bridging the Gap 56
17. Corbett, D. and Wilson, B. (2002). What Urban Students Say About Good
Teaching. Educational Leadership 60, 18-22
Murphy, P.K., Delli, L.A., and Edwards, M. (2004). The Good Teacher and Good
18. Teaching: Comparing Beliefs of Second-Grade Students, Preservice Teachers,
and Inservice Teachers. The Journal of Experimental Education 72(2), 69-72
19. Mageehon, Alexandria. (2006) What Makes a “Good” Teacher “Good:” Women
in Transition From Prison to Community Reflect. The Journal of Correctional
Education 57(2)
20. Polk, Jeremy (2006). Traits of Effective Teachers. Arts Education Review 107
no4 March/April 2006 23-9
Haney, J., Lumpe, A., and Czerniak, C. (2003). Constructivist Beliefs About the
Science Classroom Learning Environment: Perspectives from Teachers,
Administrators, Parents, Community Members, and Students. School Science and
Mathematics
21. Covey, S.R. (1999) The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People N.Y., N.Y. :
Simon & Schuster
Bridging the Gap 57
22. Cannon, J., Chokshi, S., and Fernandez, C. (2003). A Us-Japan study
collaboration reveals critical lenses for examining practice. Teaching and
Teacher Education 19, 171-185.
23. Mageehon, A. (2006). What Makes a “Good: Teacher “Good:” Women in
Transition From Prison to Community Reflect. The Journal of Correctional
Education 57, (2), 145-157.
24. Mertler, C.A. (2000). Action Research: Teachers as Researchers in the
Classroom. California: Sage.
25. Polk, J.A. (2006). Traits of Effective Teachers. Arts Education Policy Review.
107, (4), 9-23.
26. Marshall, C., Rossman, G.B.(1999) Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
27. (2003) Constructive Beliefs About the Science Classroom Learning Environment:
Perspectives From Teachers, Admisitrators, Parents, Community Members, and
Students. School Science Math, 103, (8), 365-377.
28. Agnello, A., Foote, C., Pagano, C., Vermette, P., and Wisniewski, S. (2000). The
Characteristics of Bad High School Teachers Reveal Avoidable Behaviors For
Bridging the Gap 58
New Teachers. Education, 121, (1), 34-128. Retrieved April 23, 2007, from
http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.libroxy.csun.edu:2048/hww/results/results_single
_ftPES
29. Corbett, D, Wilson, B. (2002). What Urban Students Good. Educational
Leadership, 60, (1), 18-22.
30. Delli, L.A.M, Edwards, M.N., and Murphy P,K. (2004) The Good Teacher and
Good Teaching: Comparing Beliefs of Second-Grade Students, Preservice
Teachers, and Inservice Teachers. The Journal of Experimental Education,72, (2),
62-92.
31. Kane, P.R., and Temple, E. (1997). Who is a good teacher? Who is a good school
head? Independent School, 56, 50-57.
32. Jones, J. (1989). Students’ ratings of teacher personality and teaching
competence. Higher Education, 18, 551-558.
33. Stigler, J. W, and Hiebert,J. (1999). The teaching gap: best ideas from the world’s
teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York, NY: Summit
Books.
Bridging the Gap 59
34. Calderhead, J. (1989). “Reflective Teaching and Teacher Education. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 5 (1), 43-51.
35. MacNamara, D. (1991). Subject Knowledge and Its Applications: Problems and
Possibilites for Teacher Educators. Lancaster: BERA Conference.
Bridging the Gap 60
Appendix
Checklist:
Check below the qualities that you consider being most important for a teacher to possess
for effective teaching.
____1. Well-designed lesson plans.
____2. Content knowledge.
____3. Engaging in extra research.
____4. Classroom management.
____5. Class rules.
____6. Spending time with students outside of class.
____7. Professional dress/appearance.
____8. Compassion and understanding of students needs.
____9. Utilizes a variety of instructional strategies/techniques.
____10. Enthusiastic.
Rating scale questionnaire:
Rate the following from 1 (not important) to 5 (most important)
Good teachers…
1.
Make sure that students do their work.
2. Control the classroom.
3. Are willing to help students whenever and however the students want help.
4. Explain assignments and content clearly.
5. Vary the classroom routine.
Bridging the Gap 61
6. Take the time to get to know students and their circumstances.
Open-ended questions:
1.
What are the most important characteristics of a good teacher?
2.
When you think of a good teacher, what traits and characteristics do you attribute
to that teacher? Describe this teacher in as much detail as possible.
3. When you think of your all-time favorite teacher, what was it about him or her
that made this teacher stand out?