Differences in Instructional Activities in High and Low Achieving Junior High Classes. R&D Report Number 6106.

Autor/in	Evertson, Carolyn M.
Institution	Texas Univ., Austin. Research and Development Center for Teacher Education.
Titel	Differences in Instructional Activities in High and Low Achieving Junior High Classes. R&D Report Number 6106.
Quelle	(1980), (47 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Academic Ability; Academic Achievement; Class Activities; Class Size; Classroom Techniques; Discipline; Educational Strategies; Junior High Schools; Low Achievement; Student Behavior; Student Motivation; Student Needs; Student Participation; Teacher Behavior; Teacher Effectiveness + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Schulleistung; Klassengröße; Klassenführung; Disziplin; Lehrstrategie; Sekundarstufe I; Unterdurchschnittliche Leistung; Student behaviour; Schülerverhalten; Schulische Motivation; Schülermitarbeit; Schülermitwirkung; Studentische Mitbestimmung; Teacher behaviour; Lehrerverhalten; Effectiveness of teaching; Instructional effectiveness; Lehrerleistung; Unterrichtserfolg
Abstract	The teacher's ability to manage the classroom has been consistently associated with pupil achievement and high pupil attitudes. Research has also shown that classes with high proportions of low ability students tend to be more difficult to manage because of the special needs of these students. This paper focuses on the strategies and behaviors apparent in classrooms of teachers who are teaching similar subject matter content to classes of differing ability levels. Two low ability classes were also examined to contrast teacher behaviors which are successful in initiating and maintaining instructional activities. Higher ability classes had teachers who: (1) described and presented objectives and materials more clearly; (2) provided content and reasonable work standards related to student interests and needs; (3) were consistent in dealing with student behavior; (4) were receptive to student input; (5) nurtured affective skills; and (6) maintained a task-oriented focus. Teachers in low ability classes were seen as adapting presentations to ability levels, reinforcing inattentive student behavior, and using more personal conferences to stop misbehaviors. Maintaining student cooperation and attention was harder in the low ability classes. A comparison of the two low achieving classes suggests that there are optimal ways of providing instruction to increase productive learning time. (CJ)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2004/1/01