Effective Lecturing Behaviour in

Effective Lecturing Behaviour in English-Medium Instruction: A Pilot Study

Authors: Drs. R.G. Klaassen Dr. J. Snippe

I.

Delft University Press

1~o h\~O EFFECTIVE LECTURING BEHAVIOUR IN ENGLISH-MEDIUM INSTRUCTION: A PILOT STUDY

8504 550G i'

ih Wi

i

ii

ia .,

I

i i ai

'Mil

I'

---=--=-

WW _

WTM-series: 1.

W ORK MOTIVATION AND CHANGE IN EASTERN EUROPE Edited by: A.G. Amold, J.H.E . Andriessen and HJ . van der Horst

2.

SOFTWARE VOOR DE ONTWIKKELING VAN EEN DIGITALE LEEROMGEVING

Door: A.M.e. van Os

EFFECTIVE LECTURING BEHAVIOUR IN

ENGLISH-MEDIUM INSTRUCTION: A Pilot Study

Authors: Drs. R.G. Klaassen Or. J. Snippe

Delft University Press/1999

Delft University Press Postbus 98 2600 MG Delft The Netherlands Telephone: +3115 2783254 Telefax: +3115 278 1661 E-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 90-407-1882-2 Copyright 1999 by Klaassen, R.G. & Snippe, J. All rights reserved. No part of the mate rial protected by th is copyright notice may be reproduced or utilised in any form or by any means, electronical or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher: Delft University Press Printed in the Netherlands

CONTENTS

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.2

Effective lecturing behaviour Structure Interaction Presentation Conclusion

1 2 3 3 4 6

2.

PROCEDURE

7

3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

INSTRUMENTS

9

Student questionnaire Student interview High Inference Rating ob se rvati ons Lecturer interview

9 9

RESULTS ON THE STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Conclusions student questionnaire

15 16

4. 4.1

5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3

6.4

10

12

RESULTS OF THE STUDENT INTERVIEW

17

Tradi.tional type of lecturer Student-cent red type of lecturer Additional remarks Conclusions student interview

17

HIGH INFERENCE RATING OBSERVATIONS

21 21 22 23 26

Quality of the instrument Lecturer one Lecturer two, three and four Conclusions High Inference Rating observations

18 19 19

7. 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4

Structure Interaction Presentation Conclusion

8. 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4

Structure Interaction Presentation Implications for a training

9.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

LECTURER INTERVIEW

CONCLUSIONS

Literature

AppendixA. Appendix B. Appendix C.

27 27 28 28 29

31 31 32 33 35

37

41

J I

Does Anyone Speak English? ..

1.

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the world, English has a dominant position in a growing number of prestigious domains, such as science, technology, aviation, research, books, transnational business, trade and international organisations (Phillipson, 1992). The widespread function of English as the language of communication requires universities to prepare students for a society in which functional communieation in English is as decisive for a successful career as the content of their university study. English, therefore, is increasingly used in the educational arena as a medium of instruction. Moreover the increase in mobility of European, American and other students, who follow their university education at a university most apt to their wishes, requires universities to offer qualitative weil designed programmes preferably in a language accessible to all the students. Yet, most of these students do not speak English as their first language. Additionally, most of the lecturers in the European Universities do not speak English as their first language either. As a consequence non-native speakers joined in an instructional setting may experience difficulty to meaningfully and effectively communicate content matter material, in such a way th at the quality of education does not suffer. The functional communication problems are a cause of concern for the quality of education in many European universities. Until a decade ago, especially the non-native versus the native speaker issues were explored in English speaking countries. Today, however, the expansion of English education between nonnative speakers with different language backgrounds requires insight into the problems encountered in the multicultural classroom and the consequences of English-medium instruction for local students as weil as students of other nationalities. For English as the language of communication on the one hand may cause an increase in lecturers' workload and affect their lecturing behaviour and on the other hand it may affect students' study behaviour and workload, whieh may result in a loss of academie achievement (Jochems et al 1994). Both English speaking communities as weil as other European communities are aware of the necessity for research into the ever increasing activities in the area of intemationalisation. In Brinton and Snow (1989), McWilliam (1992) among others address these issues from different perspectives. At the Delft University of Technology an exploratory study into the consequence of English as the medium of instruction for the local students has been conducted in the early nineties. In this study it has already been established that Dutch students' results suffer, when the medium of instruction is English (Vinke, 1995). Even though the level of English of both lecturer and student participants in this study was sufficiently high to

1

guarantee academic success, level of English respectively were IELTS bandwidth 8 1 and TOEFL approximately between 550-600 2. This study furthennore revealed that the lecturing behaviour of participating lecturers suffered from a language switch to English . Non-native lecturers became less redundant, expressive, dear and structured in the English-medium lecture. As a result of this study recommendation were made by Vinke (1995) to train the lecturers in order to guarantee a basic quality level of lecturing behaviour. The present research will try to provide input for a training, in which the encountered problems may be tackled. The approach toward a training is based on the following two assumptions. The first concerns the fact that it is fairly impossible to improve teachers' English language proficiency in a limited time-span and, consequently , a language training would not be cost effective. The second assumption concerns the fact that English-medium instruction requires more than a simp Ie switch towards English. It requires lecturers who can deal with their own limited proficiency as weil as the students' limited proficiency in English. Effective lecturing behaviour is assumed to contribute to a more professional approach to English-medium instruction and therefore considered as one of the possible variables; which ought to be explored as an option for input into a training. This assumption results into the following research question and will be elaborated upon in the following paragraphs. RESEARCH QUESTION:

Which effective teaching behaviours do experienced teachers use in English-medium instructional settings th at may have a positive influence on the learning of students?

1.1

EFFECTIVE LECTURING BEHA VIOUR

One of the measures of the quality of a lecturer is effective teaching behaviour, which has been studied in process-product research (Lowyck, 1994). In general this type of research shows that a variation in teaching behaviour is systematically related to a variation in learning outcome of students. (Tomic & Span, 1993). The research can either be done by observational studies or by studies that relate the students' learning result to the observed behaviour. The difficulty with the latter is that conclusions can only be drawn very carefully from the research results, as the differences in learning outcome cannot without doubt be attributed to a change in teaching behaviour (Tomic & Span, 1993). Another type of studies concerned with teaching behaviour are studies using student evaluation questionnaires, in which students rate lecturers on the effeetiveness of their teaching behaviour (Marsh, 1987; Feldman, 1986). The student questionnaires are not merely considered as measures of student attitudes toward the instructor but also as an indication of wh at students actually learn from the content of a 1 IELTS: International English Language Testing System, administered by the Britisch council.lELTS bandwidth 8 is equivalent to a TOEFL score of 650. , Vinke and Jochems (1992) consider a minimum TOEFL score of 450 necessary for academie success. Macrea (1997) mentions a TOEFL score of 550 as a minimum level for university studies in technica I engineering at an English university . The students, who participated in the experiment were closer to the upper range of the TOEFL score , approximately 580 .

2

course (Marsh, 1987). The common denominator of these studies is the teaching behaviour (variables) which are isolated and considered as having influences on the students' leaming outcomes. A number of these teaching behaviours can be clustered under three main headings structure, interaction and presentation.

1.1.1

STRUCTURE

Structure is indicated as planning, organisation and cues (Guskey, 1988), the teachers' preparation and organisation (Hativa, 1998), lecture organisation (Saroyan & SnelI, 1997) and finally Creemers (1991) notes that to structure the instruction is a means to keep pupiIs on the leaming task. Structure includes aspects of orientation and organisation of the lecture material (Smuling et al, 1993) . The incorporation of an introduction and an explicit explanation as to the way in which a lecture is organised, periodic summaries and a conclusion possibly enhance the effectiveness of a lecture (McKeachie, 1994). Furthermore, the organisation of a lecture is improved when signposts are used to inform students of the content ahead, cues are used when a transit ion is made from one topic to another, links are made between new and prior knowledge and new knowledge is placed in the context of the discipline (Leinhardt, 1987, Fiowerdew , 1994). Contrary to the demonstrated effectiveness of structuring behaviour in the mother tongue in the English-medium lecture th is lecturing behaviour is insufficiently used. Some studies indicated American students feit the use of effective lecturing behaviour, if used by foreign teaching assistants, contributed to their understanding (Vinke, 1995) . Yet in the foreign teaching assistant (FTA) literature, it was found, that lecturing behaviour expressing structure suffers from a switch in language. The FTA research mentions that FTA's fail to summarises the contentmaterial (Williams, 1992), rephrase the content material to alesser extent (Gilette, 1982), fail to indicate transition to a new topic and use fewer signals which explain the relations between topics (Williams, 1992). Furthermore, FTA's rather overuse markers or use markers incorrectly (Gillespie , 1988). With respect to Dutch lecturers, Vinke in her study at Delft University of Technology found lecturers to be less redundant in the English-medium lectures. Nonetheless, Vinke also discovered that a language-switch has a limited influence on the provision of structure . Albeit limited the switch in language may have a negative influence and may be of consequence for the effectiveness of the lecture. Therefore, it wiU be important to establish the nature and the effect of structuring behaviour in English-medium lectures, such that structuring behaviour as one of the effective lecturing behaviours may be considered as one of the aspects which can be included in a training.

1.1.2

INTERACTION

Another aspect of effective instruction mentioned concerns the overall concept of interaction. The aspect of interaction as a factor of effective instruction is represented in the different studies as the different levels of questioning (Rosenshine & Furst, 1973), as

3

group interaction (Marsh, 1987) and as responding to student answers, correcting student errors and checking for understanding (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986). These interactions may be considered as basic feedback procedures that contribute to the understanding of the lecture material. Saroyan & Snell (1997) remark the following with respect to a regular lecture (mother tongue). If a typical complex university subject matter is presented, allowance or encouragement of interaction is particularly difficult to sustain. The reason for the difficulty with interaction in a lecture is the substantial amount of time consumed which cannot be used for an adequate coverage of a large amount of information. To present subject matter in a foreign language only increases the complexity of the transfer of the subject matter. As it is more difficult to interact in a foreign language a decrease in interaction might be one of the results. One of the studies on foreign teaching assistants mentioned in the evaluation of effective teaching behaviour, found a negative correlation between "interaction" and the extent in which FrA's simply provide subject matter (Bailey, 1983). The suggested reasons according to Vinke (1995) are a lack in language proficiency, due to which foreign teaching assistants fail to elicit student response and adequate checks of students ' understanding of the presented material. Vinke furthermore found in her study at Delft University of Technology th at lecturers feIt more reluctant to interact due to linguistic inflexibility and limitations. The reasons provided for the linguistic inflexibility are a limited vocabulary, less ability to improvise and an increased effort to provide qualifying statements or rephrasing explanations. If lecturers feelless inclined to interact, the level of interaction may indeed correspond negatively with the extent in which teachers simply provide subject matter. Yet interaction as a means of feedback is especially important in English- medium instruction. Interaction provides the opportunity to the lecturer to check if students have understood his language and if the students' interpretation of the lecturers words are in agreement with the lecturers' intentions (WilIems, 1996)

1.13

PRESENTATION

Presentation is the last aspect, which consists of three aspects pertinent to a positive influence on student leaming. These three factors are clarity, visual support and nonverbal behaviour. In the normative literature on presentations clarity, non-verbal behaviour and visual support are mentioned as aspects of an exemplary presentation (Smuling et al.,1993) .

CLARITY

The literature on effective teaching behaviour points out both clarity and visual support as being supportive of students' understanding. Clarity is described by Hines (1981) as a number of teaching behaviours which are related to the facilitation of communication of the subject matter to students in such a way th at they may be able to understand and assimilate the subject-matter. The teaching behaviours concemed are e.g. clear explanation by means of concrete examples , definition of concepts and avoidance of

4

vague terminology or ambiguous sentences (Vinke, 1995). Several others mention similar teaching behaviours, (Land & Smith, 1979; Rosenshine & Furst, 1973; Hiller, Fisher and Keass, 1969). Hativa in a case-study on the clarity of a lecture concluded that unclear speech, the presentation of non-essential information, the use of unfamiliar words, terms, symbols and notations, failure to identify crucial elements in graphs, table and demonstrations all contributed to a lack of adjustment to students needs, necessary for the facilitation of student leaming (Hativa, 1998). With respect to Foreign teaching assistants as weil as Dutch lecturers switching the language of instructions it was found th at both FfA's and the Dutch lecturers experienced difficulties in finding the right words to express their ideas in English (Vinke, 1995). Clarity, therefore, may be an important aspect of English-medium teaching behaviour.

VISUALS

The use of visuals is often mentioned as beneficial to student leaming in both mother tongue lectures as weil as English-medium lectures (Ol sen & Huckin, 1990, Smuling et al, 1993). Especially, in English-medium lectures, appropriate visuals help students focus on the main points in a lecture and aids them in understanding concepts and difficult terms delivered orally, as such visuals tend to be redundant to the orally delivered presentation (Flowerdew & Miller 1997). Yet Flowerdew (1997) also mentions the triple burden created by simultaneously listening, taking notes and deciphering a sheet. As such, visuals may interfere with the presented mate rial unless some extra time is provided to students to note-down and process the presented oral and visual information. Thus the frequency and the quality of the sheet requires careful preparation. The complementary function of visuals to oral delivery, only if carefully prepared, may contribute to a positive leaming environment (King, 1994).

NON-VERBAL BEHA VIOUR

Non-verbal behaviour is an aspect of presentation th at may contribute to the understanding of the presented subject matter. Non-verbal gestures may be used to emphasise the main points or to indicate transition to a new topic. Keeping eye contact may signal an open attitude to student input and a means to check if students understand the presented subject matter. Furthermore, lecturers who appear confident may be perceived as knowing their subject. Although most people are aware of the role of nonverbal behaviour, very little educational research on non-verbal behaviour in education is availablt: (van Tartwijk, 1995). Linguistic research, however, confirms th at bodily or facial movements have been shown ,10 be an integral part of the overall communicative message, correlating highly with the auditory channel and signalling phonological, semantic, discoursal and interactional meaning (Kellerman, 1992). Vinke 1995, did include non-verbal behaviour in her educational research, an observational study of lecturers who switched their language of instruction to English. In the observational study it was concluded non-verbal behaviour such as body movement was slightly less in English medium-instruction. Yet, students who evaluated teaching behaviour in an experimental setting (English) and a control group setting (Dutch) perceived the non-

5

verbal behaviour of the video-taped teaching behaviour to be better in the English experimental setting (Vinke, 1995 , Snippe & Klaassen, 1997). A possible explanation is that, although lecturers gesture less in English, their gestures are of a more dramatic nature. Another explanation might be that students pay more attent ion to non-verbal behaviour when the language of instruction changes to a second language. If non-verbal behaviour is possibly a means of supp~rts of the overall presentation, it might be used as an extra tooi to support the leaming of students in a second language.

1.2

CONCLUSION

Most research on English-medium instruction conducted in the Netherlands has been realised from a comparative perspective in which Dutch-medium instruction is compared to English-medium instruction. Although these studies have greatly contributed to the insight into the differences between native and second language instruction, they did not very often consider the process of English-medium instruction itself. In th is study the process will be considered in its own right. Consequently, the focus is not so much to find out if effective teaching behaviour has changed as compared to Dutch-medium instruction. The focus is rather to study what happens in English-medium instructional settings with respect to effective teaching behaviour. The effective teaching behaviours structure, interaction, clarity , the use of visual and non-verbal behaviour such as discussed above are affected divergently when a change of the language of instruction occurs. Yet the use of such effective teaching behaviours might contribute to a positive evaluation of an English-medium instructional setting, it may not be considered at all, or it may be perceived as negatively influencing English-medium instruction. The purpose of this study is to consider and discuss what is going on in English medium instructional settings with respect to effective teaching behaviours dealt with in the introduction. The results of this study will be used for the generation of possible input for a teacher-training course for English-medium instruction .

6

2

PROCEDURE

The choice for qualitative research is based on the premise that such a research may provide insight into the mechanisms that may influence English-medium instruction as a whole. The lecturers under study represent naturalistic case studies, which means one tries to establish what is going on in reality in English-medium lectures. As this particular study is a pilot study which seeks to establish the contribution of effective teaching behaviours to the leaming climate in English-medium lectures it is particularly apt to be studied with qualitative instruments. The focus is on how the lecturing behaviour is perceived by students, observers and lecturers themselves. The descriptive information on particular a process, obtained with qualitative methods, may yield hypothesis open to further testing in future research. In accordance with the chosen method of research, the researcher will not seek to generalise any of the findings, but rather try to obtain information in which behaviour is likely to contribute in Englishmedium lectures. Such may be used in training and is open to further testing. Several perspectives have been taken to study the teaching behaviour in these lectures to increase the validity of the research results. Students, observers and the lecturers themselves have been questioned by different research methods. Such combined points of view are also called multiple sources triangulation. This term first introduced by Denzin (1978) is among others mentioned in the qualitative research literature of Hutjes & van Buuren (1996), Swanbom (1996). Denzin explains triangulation as the different methods of research, which are used to study one case and to discover and correct the weaknesses in a research design. Four lecturers with a varied background with respect to language origin and educational experience in general and English-medium instruction in particular are studied by means of a multiple case study ( Hutjes & van Buuren, 1996). To obtain insight in the process of the respective effective lecturing behaviour a wide variety of lecturers with respect to teaching experience and language background in particular are chosen, as these background variables may provide additional contrastive information. The lecturers have been video taped during two courses presented at the second half of the educational year and will be used as observation material. The tot al number of videotaped lectures adds up to 18 two-hour lectures. The lectures are evaluated by means of a student questionnaire at the end of their lecture period. As almost all the students attended both courses , students are familiar with each lecturer and results are relatively comparable.

7

- -- - --

-

- - - - -,-,- - - - -

One of the videotaped courses was presented by three different lecturers in a rather traditional fashion. In other words the lecturers' presentations consisted mainly of a monologue. The background of the three more traditional type of lecturers varies. Lecturer one is non-native with a germanic language background and approximately four years of teaching experience in the presented setting. Lecturer two has a non-native, non-germanic background and approximately one and a half year of teathing experience in the present setting. Lecturer three is native speaker and has approximately 15 years of teaching experience in the present setting. The other videotaped course was presented by just one lecturer in a more student-cent red fashion, meaning that student presentations and discussions with students took up a large part of the lecture. Lecturer four is a nonnative speaker, with a germanic language background and approximately 15 years of teaching experience in the present setting. The number of lecturers and students participating in th is case study is rather low. Reasons for the relatively few case studies are the purpose of the study and the limited time span available. The objective of the study is to gather information on the elements th at might be included in a teacheF training. Results are therefore discussed within and between cases such that an indication of the most effective teaching behaviour is obtained that may be used in a training. Additionally, the study will be used to capture information on the aptness of the instrurnents to possibly evaluate such a training. Students participating in this study are in their third or fourth year of education at Delft University of Technology or at the International Training Centre (ITC institute )3. All ITC students are foreign and make up the majority of the participating student group. Students are generally in the final ph ase of their studies. The videotaped courses are representative of courses which students take to specialise in geological engineering. Both the specialisation of the lectures and the final stage of the students' study contributes to the low number of lecture participants in this study. In agreement with the few cases and student participants results are considered as suggestive. None of the results can be generalised without further study.

; International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences: colloquial name =International Training Centre (ITC) .

8

3.

INSTRUMENTS

3.1

STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

- The Iectures and the teaching behaviour are evaluated by means of a student evaluation questionnaire and a student-interview. The student questionnaire contains 32 questions conceming teaching behaviour that reflect structure, interaction and presentation. Student could rate the Iecturer on a five point Likert scale of l(poor) to 5 (excellent) . An example of a question is "the Iecturer makes clear links between new mate rial and prior knowiedge" . Besides questions conceming the lecturers' behaviour,7 questions on the lecture itself have been added. The 7 questions conceming the lectures focused on students' understanding and attent ion during the lecture. The 32 item conceming the lecturers' behaviour, which consisted of the 3 main aspects, structure, interaction and presentation are based on among others the following studies. The list of effective teaching behaviour in the Student evaluation of educational quality (SEEQ) which has been developed by Marsh (1987). A number of items identified as being important measures of student leaming and student satisfaction of Iecturer behaviour by Feldman (1989). The evaluation questionnaire used in higher education to rate Iecture presentations developed by Smuling(1993) and the questionnaire used by Vinke (1995), which was used to determine a change in lecturer behaviour when a switch in the language of instruction occurs. Students answered the questionnaires at the end of the last lecture of each lecturer, before the exam.

3.2

STUDENT INTERVIEW

The interview concemed a semi-structured interview in which six students 19% of the total sample were questioned on the main aspects of effective teaching behaviour such as defined in the introduction: structure, interaction and presentation. Four students were questioned on the more traditional type of lecturers, who presented primarily monologues and two students were questioned on the more studentcentred lecturer, who created opportunity for interaction by means of student presentations. As a result of the re1uctance of the students to rate the student questionnaire, the students are asked to participate in an interview after the Iecturer had been prompted to leave the Iecture-hall. To, furthermore, guarantee anonymity of the participating students, the students were interviewed at alocation outside their 9

faculty building. The student interviews were not taped to avoid any appearances, which would damage their trust in the researcher to solely use the obtained information for research purposes and nothing else. Yet to render the information more reliable, a detailed account of the interview has been submitted for agreement to the participating students. The advantage was that the students had the opportunity to check with the other students on agreement of the presented information by the interviewees. Each of the participating students agreed with the contents of the interview account made up by the researcher. Students were asked to give their opinion of the 1ecturer behaviour and whether they considered the teaching behaviour as supportive or detrimental to their understanding and attention during the 1ectures. If at the end of the interview the students felt aspects pertinent to the lecturer behaviour and/or their understanding were not discussed, they were free to discuss them at the end of the interview. The type of questions which were discussed during the interview are discussed in the results, such that the link between questions and results is dear.

3.3

HIGH INFERENCE RATING OBSERVATIONS

A third instrument concerns the High Inference Rating (HIR) observations. The purpose of the high inference rating observations is to obtain the observers' opinion on effective teaching behaviours, such as structure, interaction and presentation described in the introduction, in English-medium instruction. The assumption was made th at if effective teaching behaviour is explicitly applied by the lecturer it should be reflected in the ratings of the observers. The choice for observation by means of the high inference rating method instead of the time and/or event sampling method is based on the following reasons. The first reason is that a time and eventsampling instrument emphasises the objective registration of occurring teaching behaviour, whereas subjective registration of teaching behaviour such as attitude, speech and atmosphere are hard to grasp in a time and event sampling instrument. High inference rating observation, however, is especially suitable to gain insight into the more subjective aspects of teaching behaviour. A se~ond reason concerns the registration of perceived teaching behaviour as opposed to the factual displayed lecturing behaviour. It is important to establish whether certain teaching behaviour is perceived in the first place. Yet more important is to establish the intensity of the displayed teacher behaviour, such as perceived by the observers. For if certain teaching behaviour is not perceived, it may be assumed students will equally fail in perception of the same teaching behaviour. Note, however, that these subjective elements introduced in the case study by means of the high inference-rating instrument are at the same time its weakness. This weakness should be kept in mind in the discussion of the research results related to this instrument.

10

TRAINING

In order to minimise subjective interpretations of the questions, which is considered to be a fundamental weakness of the instrument, a training has been build into the design. As the occurrenee of effective teaching behaviour in these observations were related to the relative frequency in which the behaviour occurs in a lecture, a common frame of reference had to be established to ensure a correct interpretation of the items. This common frame of reference was established in a training and was created in co-operation with the observers, resulting in a protocol for the rating of effective teaching behaviour. In other words, the frame of reference in the training established which effective teaching behaviour should be rated as occurring frequently and explicitly. Thus, a common basis of interpretation was established before the observers rated the high inference rating questions on the lecturer behaviour of the four participating lecturers .

QUESTIONS

In addition to the main purpose of the HIR, the instrument could be used to ga in insight into the similarity between the ratings of the educational observers and the student ratings with respect to structure, interaction and presentation of the lecturer. The questions used in the high inference rating observations are therefore derived from the student questionnaire and the behavioural observation instrument developed by Murray (1983).4 Sub-scales ref1ect the main aspects and sub-aspects discussed in the introduction, structure, interaction and presentation. Presentation is subdivided into clarity, non-verbal behaviour and visuals. Questions are rated on a5 point Likert scale of 1 (rarely, not at all) to 5 (almost always, very much so)

INTER OBSERVER AGREEMENT

- Prior to the definite observations of the videotaped lecturers a test has been run, with an arbitrary videotaped lecturer who provided English-medium instruction. The result of the test video have been used to verify whether the in the training established frame of reference met our expectations. On the basis of a pearsoE correlation between observer ratings on the test-videotape a decision has been made about the necessity of additional training . The inter observer correlation on the results of the test-videotape were significant for six of the seven observers. Consequently, number seven did need additional training. As number seven did not have the opportunity, due to circumstances, to participate in the group training, it could be inferred that the co-operation and the group process the six observers endured, contributed to the clarification of the established reference-frame. It was Iikely, therefo re , the desired result would be attained in an additional group training. As the correlation was rather high for six of the observers, however, it has been decided further training was not likely to improve the inter observer agreement impressively

, Murray ' s observation instrum ent was developed to find out, which specific teaching behaviours co ntribut ed 10 positive or negative evaluations of students and was tested on 54 teachers in the social sciences.

11

for six of the seven observers and would consume a lot of time and money not very weIl spent. Hence the definite videotapes have been observed by six observers.

LECTURERS, OCCASIONS AND OBSERVERS

- The lecturers were observed on different occasions by different sets of observers. The observed occasions are compiled on three videotapes and observed by three pairs of observers. Not only did the videotaped occasions of the lecturers differ, thus yielding multiple occasions across the three tapes, but also the sequence of the lecturers in the three videotaped compilations differed, in order to avoid a sequential effect. The choice for different occasions was based on the assumption that lecturer behaviour across lectures would be relatively constant. Thus in choosing multiple occasions one tries to obtain information conceming the stability of teaching behaviour across time. Yet if teaching behaviour is not stabie across occasions, the multiple occasions would do justice to the differences in behaviour across the lecture period.

CHOICE OF VIDEOTAPED FRAGMENTS

- Each Video(3) has one occasion consisting of 20 minutes lecture time of each lecturer (4). The 20 minutes consisted of 10 minutes at the beginning of a lecture hour and 10 minutes at the end of one lecture hour. As aresult 20 minutes lecturetime always contains either an introduction and/or a conclusion of the lecture. The reason for this choice is related to the effective teaching behaviour, structure, interaction and presentation which the researcher desired to measure. Especially at the beginning and end of a lecture effective teaching behaviour is likely to occur. At the beginning for example it is likely that lecturers make links to prior knowledge and provide a lecture outline and at the end, time is often provided to ask questions on the lecture mate rial , therefore it is assumed 10 min at the beginning and end would yield the most inforrnative data . The rating of each lecturer took place immediately after the videotaped 20 minutes. Replay of the occasion was not allowed, nor was rating during the 20 minutes lecture-time allowed. As a consequence of this rule the observer situation corresponded as closely as possible to the student observations of the lectures . With the natural exception that the ob servers were trained experts and students were non-trained experts in the observation of teaching behaviour.

3.4

LECTURER INTERVIEW

- FinaIly, a lecturer interview has been held after the videotaped lectures. The results of these interviews are illustrative and should be considered as supplementary anecdotal information, in addition to the results found in the student interview, the student questionnaire and the high inference rating observations. In the semi-

12

structured interviews the lecturers are questioned with respect to their teaching experience with English-medium education and their beliefs conceming the three main aspects of effective teaching behaviour discussed in the introduction. The interviews are taped on cassette, transcribed and reported. The interviews have been conducted several weeks after the end of the lecture period . Reason for the built-in delay is the type of inforrnation desired, that is the researcher wished to discuss the conscious and unconscious behaviour in English-medium education in general instead of the particular behaviour of these videotaped lectures, with respect to the effective teaching behaviours structure, interaction and presentation.

13

14

4.

RESULTS WITH RESPECT TO THE STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Response rates varied between the different lecturers. Two of the lecturers were prepared to reserve some lecture time for students to fil! out the questionnaire. The other two lecturers were more reluctant in their assistance, as the lecturers feared they would not be able to cover all the lecture material if they would shorten the lecture period. The response rates in the more traditionallecture were 64%, 73% and 41 % respectively, whereas the response rate in the more student-centred lecture was 93 %. Cronbach's reliability of the student questionnaire items on the lecturer and lecture measured across the four participating lecturers is very high (a = .93). Student ratings seem to be uniform within cases and between cases. Although, within cases scores are likely to be more related, there is reason for concern about the student ratings. Some students showed a tendency to actually mark the questions on the lecturer 32 times 5. Additionally, lecturer ratings between cases vary very little from low-medium 2.5 to medium-high 4.5. Both the marginal differentiation within cases and between cases may be clarified by two alternative explanations. The first explanation refers to the design of the questionnaire. The questionnaire may have included items which closely corresponded to one another and measured the same aspect. From a students' perspective the questions, therefore may have been too detailed . As Y is considered present, X which is closely related, is not perceived as being different by students. Thus the immediate effect of a detailed questionnaire may be that students rate the lecturer in each question according to their overall impression of the lecturer, which results in a clustering of questionnaire ratings of different aspects. A second explanation concerns the student population that answered the questionnaire. Most of the students participating in the case study are foreign. A problem of evaluation questionnaires among the foreign students in this study surfaced as the questionnaires were distributed. Students related their anxiety with respect to the privacy of their response. Although, preventive measures were immediately taken such as: provision of anonymous questionnaires, collection of the questionnaire through the researcher , numerous reassurances concerning the privacy of their responses and remarks such as "the results are solely used for this research", students have shown a tendency to give socially acceptable answers . Another effect , which might have influenced the data, is closely related to the previous explanations. Some of the foreign student ratings may have reflected the amount of trust and personal association contributed to a lecturer or their fear of repercussion on the lecturers' performance and the immediate consequence their

15

- - -

--- - " -- - --------- - -

opinions held for the lecturers' job . These mechanisms may have resulted in ratings, which convey the interpersonal relationship with a lecturer, instead of the desired critical attitude towards the teaching behaviour of a lecturer. These alternatives provide an explanation for the high alpha and as aresult the marginal differences in ratings between and within cases with respect to the questioned teaching behaviour

VALIDITY

Concerning the validity of the questionnaire and the questionnaire results the following should be remarked. Validity refers to the question whether the items on the questionnaire measure what should be measured. Careful preparation of the questionnaire has been used to exclude items which were not related to the effective teaching behaviours, structure, interaction and presentation. The aspects were based on a literature review of effective teaching behaviours and items were derived form existing and tested questionnaires of effective teaching behaviours (Marsh, 1987; Smuling et al., 1993; Feldman, 1989; Vinke, 1995). There was no reason, therefore, to suspect the validity would be inadequate. Yet on the basis of the results the intemal validity of the questionnaire can be disputed. Generalisation from a subjective feeling and socially acceptable answers, which seems to have occurred, affected responses to all items. Although these subjective feelings and socially acceptable answers may have little to do with the actual measurement and construct of the effective teaching behaviour questions, they render the instrument in this context invalid. Consequently, it should be concluded th at a student evaluation questionnaire, such as used in these cases, was an invalid instrument to measure (foreign) students' opinion of the effective teaching behaviours.

4.1

CONCLUSIONS STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

As a result of these findings the questioning of (foreign) students should be carried out by means of an adapted questionnaire. Questions in future research questionnaires should take into account students' fear to say something negative. Thus questions should not be too detailed and anonymity of students should be respected. Alternative questions may be added to gain results which are less likely to be biased. Students may be questioned more accurately if they are provided with statements from which they have to choose the one, they consider as most applicabie to a particular lecturer. Consequently, more valid results may be obtained from a statement questionnaire as opposed to a rating skill questionnaire which is more sensitive to socially acceptable answers . Yet the nominalor at best ordinal data obtained with statement questions limit the possibility to relate results to data obtained by observations for example rated on a Likert type of scale.

16

5.

RESULTS OF TUE STUDENT INTERVIEW

Six students are interviewed in a semi-structured interview. During the interview the students were questioned with respect to the three aspects of effective teaching behaviour; structure, presentation and interaction. These aspects were discussed by means of the following questions for each lecturer. - Did you hear and did you understand the lecturer clearly? Did you perceive the type and number of visuals the lecturer used as sufficient? Did you experience the visuals used as supportive to your understanding? - Did you perceive the lecturer as being open to the needs of students and did the lecturer maintain contact with the students in the lecture- hall? - Did you clearly understand the provided structure and if you did or did not, why? - Did you perceive the interaction as a positive contribution to the lecture? This question was divided in the following sub-questions 1. Did you feel the interaction taking place was sufficient? 2. Did you benefit from the fact that interaction took place? 3. Did you find interaction taking place with other student as useful? 4. Did you understand the interaction that took place? The focus in the interview on the traditional type of lecturers was according to plan, along the lines of the effective teaching behaviour aspects; structure, presentation and interaction. The student-centred lecture interview slightly digressed as the context of the lecture influenced the thematic structure of the interview. The interview results on the traditionallecturers will be discussed in the first place and the student-centred lecture in the second place. Student perceptions of each lecturer are discussed separately.

5.1

TRADITIONAL TYPE OF LECTURERS

The first lecturer in the more traditional lecture situations was perceived as being an excellent teacher. The students considered his present at ion to be loud and clear and his lecture lefl nothing to be desired. Furthermore, the lecturers' use of visuals (sheets including lexl and pictures and power point) was weil balanced and supported the main points made in the lecture . The open attitude towards the students made the lecturer easy to approach according to the students . The applied structure contribuled 10 the motivation and understanding of the students and the clarity of the lecture. According to the students the lecturer presented a clear outline of the main points, explained the 17

----------------~~-~------------------------------------------------ -------

relevance of the subject matter, provided appropriate examples, signalled the subjects that were ahead and was explicit in his expectations towards the students. With respect to the interaction students were pleased with the time reserved for questions during the lecture as much as with the implementation of the interaction. Students stated th at the Iecturer gave ample opportunity to ask questions during and after the lectures. He checked in the Iecture with his eyes whether students understood the answers and paraphrased if necessary. Just one minor point was made with respect to questions asked by students. According to the students the lecturer should repeat questions asked by students in the lecture such that questions could be understood by every student in the lecture-hall. Lecturer two has a non-germanic language background, as aresuIt students feit the accent difficult to follow. The soft tone of voice contributed to the difficulty students experienced understanding the lecture, which led according to the students to a decrease in attention-span. The visuals did not seem very supportive either as students concluded the sheets to be too detailed like the lecture itself. The structure of the main points was uncIear and tended to become lost in a detailed account of the lecture mate rial. Consequently, students stated they failed to pick up what was expected from them and how they would be assessed on the subject-matter. With respect to interaction students felt the interaction failed due to the fact that they couldn't understand the lecturer and due to the fact th at the Iecturer tended to focus the interaction exclusively on one person. As a result of the focussed interaction, other students did not hear discussions taking place elsewhere in the lecture-hall and became disinterested in the Iecture itself. Yet students feit this lecturer to have the potential to overcome the teaching difficulties and mentioned the lecturer to be very responsive after lecture hours whenever students feit the need to ask for help. Students perceived the last Iecturer as an excellent researcher, yet lacking the teaching qualities to convey the content mate rial. As the lecturer was a native speaker none of the students did have problems understanding the presentations on a sentence level. Yet the lecturers' lack of transparency in the application of structure made the Iecture presentation, according to the students, difficult to follow . The lecturer used many asides which obscured the context of the examples and the outline of the main points. Moreover, th~ visuals did not provide any support with respect to the main points of the lecture and the number of presented graphs on sheet only further obscured the clarity of the lecture. Students said, interaction did hardly take place, due to the fact that little eyecontact was kept with the students and more important students feared to ask silly questions

5.2

STUDENT-CENTRED TYPE OF LECTURER

With respect to the student-centred lecturer, students would like the lecturer 10 build in more pauses, as the flow of his words tends to be a little fast. Yet they understood the Iecturer quile weil. With respect to the visuals students wished to have more visual

18

support by means of sheet or additional slides. None the less the used visuals were experienced as supportive. According to the students the lecturer took the needs of the students into account and was quite open. The structure was dear enough; however, structure did not take up a large part of the instructions as many student presentations were given . Students were extremely pleased about the student presentations as they feIt it was an important contribution to the exchange of knowledge and experience most of the foreign students already have. The students regretted, however, they were not assessed on their capacity to integrate theory with the practical problems of their home countries in their presentations. Finally the students did not have any trouble with the contents of the interaction and their motivation was stimulated as a result of the student presentations .

5.3

ADDITIONAL REMARKS

At the end of the two interviews students were asked whether they felt everything with respect to the lecturer behaviour had been discussed and if they wished to contribute anything else. Students were satisfied with the discussion with regard to the teaching behaviour. The foreign students , however, did especially want to discuss their background and the influence of their background on the leaming situation. The remarks concerned the difference in the moment of transitionallife periods between foreign students and local students 5 and the educational system foreign students enter into in the Netherlands. Consequently, the treatment of foreign students as if they were local students is perceived as bearing on the learning process. Although this may be of importance, it is beyond the scope of this study. Those interested in the additional remarks are referred to the appendix.

5.4

CONCLUSION STUDENT INTERVIEW

Although the am ou nt of students interviewed is limited and the interviews have not been taped, they seem to be more representative of the students' opinions of the participating Iectures as compared to the results on the student questionnaire, which was severely biased. In the interview, students expressed themselves both positively and negatively and moreover explicitly on the Iecturing behaviour of the participating lecturers. Obviously, trust and confidence between the researcher and students is a necessary ingredient for obtaining representative data. In spite of the limited validity gene rally attached to an interview , these data provide a powerful indication of the perception of the students concerning the participating tecturers and should be considered equally serious as the data collected with different instruments on these four lecturers.

' The tran sitionallife period of foreign students concerns the transition from an old to a more responsible job in their field of work. A change of career etc. Local students are in a transitional period from secondary education to a first job in the field of their education.

19

Some effective lecturing behaviour contributes to a positive learning environment in English-medium instruction as perceived and experienced by the interviewed students. Positively regarded effective lecturing behaviour mentioned by the intetviewed students are in accordance with the main topics of the intetview: with respect to presentation students mentioned loudness, clear articulation and an open attitude as appreciated behaviour. Structuring behaviour, such as provision of a clear outline of the main points, explanation of the relevance of the subject matter, use of appropriate examples, signalling of subjects that are ahead and explicit expectations toward student contributions are mentioned as behaviour which promotes a favourable perception of the lecturer performance. Additionally, visual support of the main points and a balanced exchange of text and pictures or graphs appear to positively influence student perceptions. Last but not least interaction is mentioned as contributing to effective feedback. Especially, the opportunity to ask questions, the encouragement to ask questions, the maintenance of eye-contact to check whether students understood and finally paraphrasing (ot) questions and answers is felt to contribute to students understanding. The absence of the above-mentioned effective teaching behaviours seem to influence student perception of the lecturer negatively and may consequently influenee student leaming adversely. Moreover the following lecturing behaviours seem to be perceived as negatively influencing student leaming according to the perception of the students. Distracting accents, the use of too many asides, a lack of eye contact, failure to pause in the flow of words, too detailed and too little or too many visuals, and finally focussed interaction (failure to keep the attention of all the students while interaction takes place). A note of caution is required with respect to the results on the student-centred lecturer. Although, the student-centred lecturer in comparison to the more traditional type of lecturers seems to be perceived most favourably, the effective teaching behaviour, in particular the lecturers' speech and his use of visuals, leave room for improvement. As a result of the foreign students' background and the emphasis on the exchange of experiences the foreign students may have experienced the student eentred Jecturer more positively than their Dutch counterparts would have in the same situation. Especiall y, as the immediate result was that foreign students feit they were taken seriously with respect to the exchange of knowledge from their countries of origin and with respect to their age. Consequently, this favourable perception is rather equivocal, as the context of this lecture may have received undue emphasis and student perceptions seem to be coloured. Furthermore, the interview reveals that it may be necessary to adjust the instructional method to the participating students. Foreign students for example may have a preference for student-presentations as a result of their background, whereas Dutch student may thrive on a different instructional approach. Yet these are matters which need to be studied more elaborately. The finding is merely an element which may be considered if English-medium instruction is offered to mixed groups of foreign and local students.

20

6.

RESULTS HIGH INFERENCE RATING OBSERVATIONS

The quality of the high inference-rating instrument can be established by means of the consistency of the inter-observer agreement on occasions jointly observed and the internal consistency of the rating form (item reliability). The inter-observer agreement and item reliability will be discussed before the results of the rating form are discussed in the subsequent paragraphs , structure, interaction and presentation.

6.1

QUALITY OF THE INSTRUMENT

OBSERVER AGREEMENT

Correlation between observers on the rated videotapes revealed a high level of agreement on the displayed lecture behaviour concerning four of the lecturers (correlation tables may be found in the appendix). Correlations are all significant beyond the .03 level and range from r = JO till r = .72. In accordance with the expectations concerning the stability of lecture behaviour across time the lectures' results will be discussed across occasions , unless the score for individual occasions are deviant. Having established that the observer training yielded consistent rating behaviour of the rated occasions on all the participating lecturers, the issue of item reliability should be considered next.

RELIABILITY

The consistency of the ratings over the lecturers has been calculated by means of an item reliability analysis. Cronbach 's reliability of the respective aspects of effective teaching behaviour, which are built into the rating form, measured across lecturers and occasions is as follows: Structure alpha = .77, Interaction alpha = .92 and Presentation alpha = .75. Factor analysis has not been used to confirm the preconceived structure of the rating form. The number of observers is rather small to warrant such a statistical procedure in addition to the fact that factor analyses loading on these results are highly subject to chance . To account for the structure of the sub-scales , its choice is in the first place weil grounded in theory and secondly the preconceived structure of the rating form is supported by a high item reliability . Thus the consistent data of the high inference rating instrument may be subjected to further analysis . Hence the sum scores 21

are calculated over the items of the three sub-scales related to the main aspects of effective teaching behaviour, structure, interaction and presentation. These sum scores will be considered as an indication of the occurrence of the effective teaching behaviour, which will be discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs. Due to the variance in sum scores of lecturer one across occasions, lecturer one will be discussed prior to the presentation of the results on lecturer two, three and four.

6.2

LECTURER ONE

The lecturing behaviour of the rather traditional type of lecturer one is rated inconsistently across occasions, although observers showed relative agreement in their rating patterns. The rating scores of lecturer one on lecturing behaviours structure and interaction differ significantly. For lecturer one the significant difference on the aspect structure between occasion one and three and two and three are (t = 14.29, P =.038 / respectively t = 5.29, P =.034). The aspect interaction of occasion two and three also differ significantly (t = 14.75, P =.043). Mean scores of lecturer one on the aspect structure, interaction and presentation across occasions are displayed in table 1. In the column between significance levels are displayed between the occasions one and three and two and three.

T a bi e 1: M eans an d· sl~m"tiIcance 0 CLecturer 1 across occasions Lecturer 1 Occasion 3 Sum scores of aspects Occasion 1 Sign. Occasion Sign. Occ.I-3 2 Occ.2-3 Structure (8) 3.50 (.21) 3.10 (.44) .034* 1.41 (.04) .038* Interaction (9) 2.57 (.61) .043* 1.25 (.00) 2.89 (.15) Presentation (16) 4 .10 (.33) 3.20 (.85) 3.56 (.27) Mean scores have been calculated on a 5point-scale from 1. Not at all - 5. Almost always *differ significantly beyond .05 • Occ. = occasion, sign . = significant

-

The inconsistent item scores across two occasions may be due to the following cause . The teaching style of this lecturer could not be caught in the occasions (= video taped samples) i.e. the lecturing behaviour apparently differentiated in the video taped samples. The video samples of 20 minutes on each video of each lecturer were chosen aselect , 10 minutes at the beginning of a lecture and 10 minutes at the end of a lecture. The samples were chosen at the beginning and at the end, because the effective lecturing behaviour of interest would most likely occur at those time-intervals. Although there is no reason to assume th is choice would not be representative of the effective lecturing behaviour of interest, especially as lecturer two, three and four were rated consistently on the main aspects, this possibility should not be ignored. Consequently, the entire video taped lectures from which the samples were chosen have been reviewed in an

22

attempt to explain the differences in ratings of Iecturer one between the different occasions. Lecturer one tended to give a rather explicit instruction and introduction in his first lecture, whereas the lecture in the middle of the Iecture-period did not have such an elaborate and structured introduction. Consequently, structure may have been rated differently, in different samples. With respect to interaction the Iecturer tended to have a number of 5 minutes periods built into his Iecture, in which students were allowed to ask questions. These 5 minute periods were unevenly spread "time wise" throughout the lecture. This resulted either in the occurrence of a relatively large amount of interactiontime during a 20 minute sample or no interaction at all. Consequently, interaction may have occurred in one sample and not in another. These differences in teaching style in comparison to Iecturer two, three and four may have had the following repercussions . The consequence of randomly chosen videosamples with respect to Iecturer one may have caused samples which did not include an elaborate introduction nor an elaborate closure and displayed a lack of interaction or abundant interaction. Accordingly, the samples of lecturer one could not capture the ave rage Iecturing behaviour and were unrepresentative of Iecturing behaviour displayed by lecturer one. Lecturer one wil!, therefore, be excluded from further analysis .

6.3

LECTURER Two, THREE AND FOUR

In tables 2, 3, and 4 in which the different aspects of Iecturing behaviour are discussed, lecturers two and three are indicated with the traditional type of lecturers and Iecturer four is indicated as the more student-cent red type of lecturer. These indications have been used to point out the differences in context. Lecturer two and three gave a more lecture like class with an emphasis on coverage of subject-matter inforrnation, whereas Iecturer four provided opportunity to interact by means of student presentations and the elicitation of discussion after the student presentation. In table 2 the mean of the sum score of the items belonging to the aspect structure, interaction and presentation are displayed for Iecturer two, three and four ca\culated across occasions. The sum score on the aspect structure consists of 8 items, including for example: The Iecturer stated teaching objectives and the Iecturer uses cues words, such as however, contrary, therefore , etc. The nine items on the aspect interaction included for example: the Iecturer stimulates question asking, the Iecturer checks if everyone understood etc. The last aspect concerned presentation. The aspect presentation is further divided into the sub-aspects of presentation, clarity, non-verbal behaviour and visuals. The means in the sub-scales concern sum scores of the aspects belonging to the main aspect presentation.

23

Table 2 Mean scores of lecturer two,. three and four Effective Teaching Traditional type of lecturers Student-centred Behaviour I type of lecturer Sum scores Lecturer 2 Lecturer 3 Lecturer4 Structure (8) 2.03(.57) 2.67 (.73) 2.15 (.68) Interaction (9) 1.59(.29) 1.30 (.34) 3.69 (.54) Presentation (16) 2.23(.19) 2.71 (.38) 3.10 (.67) Claritv(lO) 2.71(.27) 3.49(.43) 3.39(.57) Non-verbal (4) 2.17(.24) 2.50(.57) 4.13(.61) Visual (2) 3.13(.25) 3.17(1.17) 2.33(1.40) Mean scores have been calculated on a 5 point-scale from 1. Not at all- 5. Almast always

STRUCTURE

In table 2 lecturers two, three and four are all rated below the medium of the five-point scale on the aspect structure, in which 1 meant not at all and 5 very much sa. The more student-cent red lecturer is rated better in comparison to lecturer two and three . Overall, however, there does not seem to be a great deal of variance between lecturer two, three and four in the application of structure. This may be due to two reasans: 1. Structure is applied equally by all three participating lecturers 2. Structure is difficult to rate when observers are unaware of the content of the subject matter material. In the observer training ample examples of lecturer behaviour have been rated as a practice for the rating of the definite videotape . The common frame of reference seemed to be clear and in accordance with the correlation of the inter-ob server agreement of lecturer two, three and four. Yet the ob servers mentioned that the element structure was difficult to rate. Consequently, the lack of subject knowledge of the observed lectures may have interfered with the objective rating of the lecturing behaviour. Thus the second assumption may be partially true and the results may not be completely representative. In the present research, however, it will be assumed on the basis of the factual rating that structure is applied less than moderate in the lecture presentations of lecturer two is, three and four. Furthermore, it should be remarked that the rather student-centred lecturer applies relatively more structure to his lecture than the more traditional type of lecturers. This finding is contrary to the expectations th at in a more traditional type of lecture in which the emphasis lays on the provision of information of new subject matter, structure can be more effortlessly applied and interaction is relatively limited in such lectures (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986, Chang & Simpson, 1997).

INTERACTION

In accordance with the context of the student-centred lecture, which was characterised by student presentations and discussions, the student-centred lecturer behaviour was

24

rated highest on interaction . Thus it can be confinned th at interaction was perceived as taking place more saliently in the student-centred lecturer environment in comparison with the more traditionallecture environment. Apparently, lecturer 2 and 3 do only interact very little during their lectures.

PRESENTATION

Presentation seems to be the aspect of the observed lecturer behaviour, which is rated highest overall in the more traditional type of lecture. Apparently, presentation is one of the aspects which is most easily perceived or perfonned as compared to the aspects structure and interaction in the traditional type of lecture. In the following paragraphs the sub-aspects which constitute the aspect presentation will be discussed.

CLARITY

Lecturer three of the more traditional type of lecturers is moderate to fairly clear. The student centred lecturer is a little less clear in his presentation, but the difference in clarity is very sm all in comparison to lecturer three. The lecturer two with the nongennanic language background seems to be a little less clear in comparison to the lecturers with a gennanic language background. This could either be due to the language background of lecturer two or to the simple fact th at lecturer two tended to be less clear.

NON-VERBAL BEHA VIOUR

The student cent red lecturer seems to rely quite heavily on the non-verbal behaviour as a support of the presentation of his message. It might be th at the amount of interaction reinforces the use of non-verbal behaviour, as the student-centred lecturer scores quite high on interaction. Yet correlation does not reveal any significant relationship . Although, speculative and out of pi ace in this study, it may be interesting to investigate this assumption in future research .

VISUALS

Visuals are used equally in the traditional type of lecture, whereas the student-centred lecturer uses less visuals. Obviously, lecture discussions are supported with fewer visuals in comparison with a regular lecture presentation . The questions on visuals in the rating fonn pertain mainly to the factual use of visuals and if the visuals are used in a balanced way in the lecture . Yet the questions do not reveal the quality of the visuals used in the lectures. In the appendix a copy deemed most representative of each lecturers' visuals is included . Thus an impression can be obtained from the quality of the visuals. Note that the visuals of lecture two and three include a large amount of

25

information. According to Smuling et al. (1993), it is important to limit the amount of information presented in a sheet. Therefore the quality of the sheets of lecturer two and three leave room for improvement.

6.4.

CONCLUSION HIGH INFERENCE RATING OBSERVATIONS

On the basis of the finding on the high inference rating observation it can be concluded that presentation is the highest rated aspect in English medium instruction behaviour in a traditional type of context. Contrary interaction is rated highest in a more studentcentred type of context. Thus as it was assumed all the aspects of effective teaching behaviour are important , yet it wil! be particularly important to pay additional attent ion to the aspect structure in all contexts. While the traditional type of lecture demands extra attent ion for the aspect interaction. Yet on the basis of the present design it is important to conclude that few conclusion can be drawn. The lack of a benchmark and the lack of a possibility to correlate the findings with the student-questionnaire results, due to lack of results on the questionnaire, are a serious handicap in the interpretation and the evaluation of these data . Nonetheless in an attempt to provide some type of benchmark and an indication of the aspects determining the overall rating on the lecturer and the lecture, the means scores on the questions from the student questionnaire are correlated with the sum scores of the HIR on presentation, structure and interaction. Thus it may be found which of the effective teaching behaviours observed contributes to a positive evaluation of effective teaching behaviour in English-medium instruction . The correlation of the aspects structure, interaction and presentation and sub-aspects of presentation, clarity, non-verbal behaviour and visuals with the Overaillecturer rating of the student questionnaire did not yield any indication, as no significant correlation emerged. Correlation with the Overall Lecture rating of the student questionnaire show a tendency for non-verbal behaviour, structure and interaction to contribute to the composition of positively rated effective lecturing behaviour (p-values are respectively .072, .075 and .076) . Note that the significance level of .10 was leniently chosen, because of the small group (n=4) and more important the explorative nature of this analysis . Contrary to the highest sum ·scores on presentation, only one aspect of presentation, the perception of non-verbal behaviour seems to contribute to the overall score of the lecture . Additionally, interaction and structure, besides non-verbal behaviour may be responsible for a positive perception of effective teaching behaviour in English-medium instruction . This indication resulting from an exploratory analysis should be used very cautiously and needs further study .

26

7.

LECfURER INTERVIEW

The interview with the Iecturers was used to find out if the effective teaching behav iours, structure , interaction, presentation are mentioned by the four lecturers in this study as teaching behaviours they consciously employ in English-medium lectures. Additionally , it was of interest to know whether these lecturers experienced any differences between English-medium instruction and instruction in their native tongue. It should be emphasised again th at the Iecturer interview has been used for anecdotal background information to the main body of this pilot study . The interview was semi-structured and consisted of one general question to break the ice and four specific questions conceming the effective lecturing behaviour lecturers felt they used in English-medium lectures and a final question on what the lecturers felt should be included into a training for lecturers who are going to provide Englishmedium instruction.

The [irst question concemed whether the lecturers felt their teaching behaviour was different in English-medium Iectures as compared to mother tongue lectures. With respect to this first question, Iecturers did not experience mother tongue lectures as differing greatly from English-medium lectures. The only exception concemed the difficulties non-native Iecturers experienced with sentences formulations and finding the appropriate words to express one-self in English-medium Iectures. Additionally, the lecturers feit they had to reserve more time for preparation of the English-medium lectures .

7.1

STRUCTURE

Two of the Iectures did have a clear conception of the application of structure. One of these two Iecturers concemed the more student-centred lecturer, who expressed structure mainly in terms of guided leaming; The Iecturer provides a framework for the student to be able to leam subject-matter malerial The Ieclurer lries 10 be explicil with respect to wh at he expects from the students. The Ieclurer tries to actively involve students, within a pre-structured framework of the Iecture

27

The other more traditionallecturers ' concept of structure is more traditional in the sen se that the focus lay on the relationship between theoretical concepts and its' application, provision of outline, signalling of transitions , information on the subject ahead and principles and objectives of the subject. The remaining two Iecturers try to convey their knowledge from a more practical perspective. In the sen se that they try to relate the lecture mate rial in such a way as lecturers feel students' will encounter in their profession. These lecturers did not consider a possible lack of lucidity in the lecture structure as a limit at ion to student learning. They rather feit students were given the opportunity to become acquainted with the problems they were likely to encounter in their future profession.

7.2

INTERACTION

The reason to either engage in more interaction or to limit the interaction seems to be provided by the foreign student group. Two of the lecturers feel foreign students are a more adult group which incites the exchange of experiences and fosters the interaction. These Jecturers tend to discuss different subjects with a foreign student group. Only one of these lecturers, however, is aware of the potential problem the language may present to some of the participating students and takes precautions to make sure each of the students understands the interaction. The other two Iecturers perceived the foreign students to feel a kind of threatened by interaction. This resulted in an attempt of the lecturers into the creation of "a safe atmosphere". The creation of a safe atmosphere was explained differently by each Iecturer by means of the observed lectures. One of the Iecturers feit interaction to be important and tried to create a safe atmosphere by means of the encouragement of students to ask questions and signal explicitly that it is 'ok' to ask questions irrespective of their content. Even though this lecturer experienced difficulties he feit relatively satisfied with the amount of interaction taking place. The other lecturer feit students should not be made more uncomfortable due to the fact th at interaction was required . This Iecturer explained students were free to ask questions, yet were not obliged too. The creation of "a more safe atmosphere" for this lecturer resulted therefore in refraining from interaction from both sides.

7.3

PRESENTATION

As far as clarity is concerned, only two lecturers feel they need to pay explicit attention to the explanation of difficuIt terminology . In addition all the more traditional type of lecturers try to provide concrete examples to support their explanation. Only one Iecturer feels he needs to pay attention to simple sentence formulation. The other three lecturers feit their language did not interfere with the message they tried to convey.

28

With respect to visuals all the lecturers admit visual support is important for the explanation of the subject-matter. The exchange between different types of visuals, such as slides, diagrams on sheet, spreadsheet and text on power point and/or sheet, should be weil balanced . Two of the lecturers especially emphasise the pictorial support . Yet only two of the lecturers mention the importance of visual support to facilitate the explanation of the main points in the lecture. Non-verbal support was only touched upon by one lecturer, who mentioned enthusiasm and self-confidence as a means to motivate students for his subject. The final question concemed the lecturers' input of important training aspects . According to two lecturers presentation is an important aspect to look at, by means of video and feedback on the behaviour which is displayed . These include accents which are difficult to follow, structuring a presentation, the conveyance of information and the use of clear and consistent terminology in one's language. Another lecturer suggested to first and foremost urge lecturers to familiarise themselves with the subject matter material in a foreign language. Secondly , the lecturer suggested that lecturers should structure their presentation and practice such th at they will be able to act without manuscript. Thirdly this lecturer suggested, lecturers should not try to cram all the material in one lecture hour, but limit the material to be discussed in one lecture hour. The last lecturer mentioned peer instruction as an ideal means to improve teaching alongside the language. Each of the lecturers mentioned feedback as an important means to improve lecturing behaviour.

7.4

CONCLUSION

Although none of these impressions from the interviewed lecturers can be generalised, there is one thing th at can be leamed from these interviews. In a training it wil! be important to help the participating lecturers to discover what their beliefs are with respect to teaching in English-medium instruction and which behaviour they choose to display in lectures as a result of these beliefs . Changing lecture behaviour into consciously applied effective lecture behaviour, may be achieved, according to these lecturers by means of reflection and effective feedback on the displayed lecturer behaviour. The format in which lecturers feit the reflection and effective feedback should take pi ace consists of peer review or video observation.

29

30

- - - - -- --

8.

---- - - -

CONCLUSIONS

The following research question has been considered from different perspectives: Which effective teaching behaviours are used by experienced English medium lecturers that may have a positive influence on the leaming of students. The different points of perspectives were the student participants, observers of the lecturing behaviour and the lecturers themselves. First students have been questioned by means of student questionnaire and interview, if they actually perceived the effective lecturing behaviour such as defined in the introduction and which behaviour in particular contributed to a positive evaluation of the lecturing behaviour. Secondly educational observers were asked to give their expert opinion on the taped lecturing behaviour and the occurrence of effective lecturing behaviour. Finally, the lecturers themselves were asked to what extent they used effective lecturing behaviour A tentative indication is found in this study that the occurrence of some effective lecturing behaviour influences the English medium instruction learning climate positively. Overall it seems possible to distinguish teachers, who apply effective lecturing behaviour consistently from those who apply effective lecturing behaviour occasional!y and haphazardly. The occurrence of some effective lecturing behaviour is perceived by some students as beneficial to their leaming. In the next paragraphs effective lecturing behaviour, which contributes to a positive evaluation of lecturers, is considered for training purposes. Note, however, th at this question should be considered cautiously, not only has this study been conducted on a smal! scale, but the results also seem to be context dependent as a different emphasis is made in the traditional type of lecture as compared to a more student centred type of lectures.

8.1

STRUCTURE

Orientation and Organisation are meaningful structuring devices in English-medium instruction In the traditional type of lecture, students perceived lectures more positively if they used the following structuring devices: the provision of a dear outline, explanation of the relevance of the subject matter, signal!ing of subjects that are ahead and explicit expectations toward student contributions. This finding is similar to those of Smuling et

31

al (1993) and McKeachie (1994), who especially mentioned orientation and lecture organisation as a means to enhance the effectiveness of a lecture. With respect to the student-centred lecturer students mentioned the aspect structure to be of minor importance as the emphasis in this lecture lay on interaction. Contrary to the student evaluations the observers rated the student-centred lecturer slightly higher in comparison to the more traditional type lecturers, which confirms a finding of Rosenshine & Stevens (1986). They mentioned lecture organisation to be one of the most important aspects in a lecture filled with discussion and student presentations.1t is not surprising therefore to find observers having rated the studentcentred lecturer a little higher in comparison to the more traditional type of lecturers. Overall it se ems that especially orientation and organisation contribute to a positive perception of effective lecturing behaviour and the understanding of English-medium lectures. Students do not specifically perceive the more fine-tuned structuring behaviour such as the use of cues, which clarify links between the different theoretical principles in a lecture, as supportive for the understanding of a lecture. In agreement with the students, observers mentioned to have experienced difficulties with the rating of such behaviour. Although the questioning of too subtle structuring behaviour did not reveal the importance of such behaviour it should not be ruled out as unimportant. Flowerdew fI997) mentioned in a study on authentic lecturing behaviour, fine-tuned structuring devices among the more important strategies in delivering a lecture. Yet fine-tuned structuring behaviour should be studied with different research methods from a more linguistic research perspective. In future research, if similar to this study, questions should focus on organisation and orientation. Additionally, observers should be filled in on the contents of the lecture material, such that they may be able to rate as accurately as possible which effective teaching behaviour is employed .

8.2

INTERACTION

The opportunity to reeeive and request feedback is positively reeeived by students in English-medium instruetion. Interaction provides the opportunity to the lecturer to check if students have understood his language and if students' interpretations of the lecturers' words are in agreement with the lecturers' intentions. Moreover, interaction provides students with the opportunity to check if they understood the lecturers' words and if their understanding of the lecturer is similar to his intentions. The students in the interview explicitly mentioned to positively perceive the opportunity to ask questions, the encouragement to ask questions, the maintenance of eye-contact check whether students understood and finally the paraphrasing (of student) questions and answers . Thus the actual feedback and the possibility to request feedback tend to be indicators of effective teaching behaviour. Students mention interaction as contributing to a positive evaluation of English-medium lecture behaviour. The student-centred lecturer, according to the observers, tends to interact more often as compared to the more traditional tvnp "f lprtllrpr

H.6.

N,

~U8Cfor.'fI$J(oQ(tng

0,' r;.N, ' l.D,N• • ~.B.l ItI'1enI q,, _ C. N.

fIO~t»H(PnndlI!

q. · l· D.N.non-~. &"""\IIItt.uMJJI_ q,,·'''' .8.l,N,·.rr.ctolnon · ~IIH# MJiI q" .ndq,. aor",Inld'~"_dby"'.""tll". •• moo,~b .... foundat;on .M't..n.d.pt.... byT . ... ui'O ' otfugl'lb ••• ond • .".fld