Unveiling the Essential Features of an Enneagram Coaching System for Teacher Instructional Abilities Development: A Survey Analysis Approach
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This study aimed to investigate teachers' perceived features of an e-coaching system and examine any differences in preferences based on teacher Enneagram personality types. The study included 386 participants selected through multistage random sampling. Online survey questionnaires were utilized to collect data on participants' demographic information and their perceived preferences for e-coaching system features. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA were employed to analyze the data. The results revealed four main categories of perceived e-coaching features: 1) well-documented teacher resource library, 2) coaching appointment management tool, 3) tracking tool, 4) learning sharing, and 5) system accessibility. Multiple comparison analyses indicated that preferences for the tracking tool and learning sharing categories varied based on respondents' Enneagram types at a significant level at 0.05, while no significant differences were observed for the other three categories.
Article Details
References
Anthony, A. B., Gimbert, B. G., Fultz, D. M., & Parker, R. A. (2011). Examining the relationship between e-coaching and the self-efficacy of novice teachers seeking certification through alternative routes. Journal of the National Association for Alternative Certification, 6(1), 46-64.
Asdornnithee, S. (2010). When a Five wants to grow: Using autoethnography to examine inner changes through the eyes of the Enneagram. The Enneagram Journal, 3(1), 87.
Boyce, L. A., & Clutterbuck, D. (2010). E‐Coaching: Accept it, It's Here, and It's Evolving! Advancing executive coaching: Setting the course for successful leadership coaching, 285-315.
Brown, C. A., Neal, R. E., & Fine, B. (2011). Using 21st century thinking skills applied to the TPACK instructional model. annual meeting of the AECT International Convention, Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront, Jacksonville, FL,
Busby, R., Ingram, R., Bowron, R., Oliver, J., & Lyons, B. (2012). Teaching elementary children with autism: Addressing teacher challenges and preparation needs. The Rural Educator, 33(2), 27-35.
Cimer, A. (2007). Effective teaching in science: A review of literature. Journal of Turkish science education, 4(1), 20-44.
Clutterbuck, D. (2022). Coaching and Mentoring: A Journey Through the Models, Theories, Frameworks and Narratives of David Clutterbuck. Taylor & Francis.
Coppola, B. P. (1996). Progress in Practice: The Scholarship of Teaching. The Chemical Educator, 1(3), 1-9.
Elmahdi, I., Al-Hattami, A., & Fawzi, H. (2018). Using Technology for Formative Assessment to Improve Students' Learning. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 17(2), 182-188.
Gardner, D. J. (2021). Educational Leaders' Perceptions of the Impact of MBTI Professional Development on Leadership Practices in One School Division in Virginia Virginia Tech].
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work?--a literature review of empirical studies on gamification. 2014 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences,
Hess, A. N. (2014). Scheduling research consultations with YouCanBook. me: Low effort, high yield. College & Research Libraries News, 75(9), 510-513.
Kilag, O. K. T., Guerrero, L. P., Abella, J. L., Samutya, M. M., Arcillo, M. T., & Asentado, D. E. (2023). Enhancing Educational Leadership: Exploring the Enneagram's Impact on Interpersonal Relationships. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND LEARNING FOR DEVELOPMENT, 2(6), 172-181.
Killion, J. (2012). Coaching in the K-12 context. The SAGE handbook of mentoring and coaching in education, 273-295.
Kyriacou, C., & Benmansour, N. (1999). Motivation to become a teacher of a foreign language. Language Learning Journal, 19(1), 69-72.
Lee, H.-J. (2005). Developing a Professional Development Program Model Based on Teachers' Needs. Professional educator, 27, 39-49.
Lee, M.-R. (2015). A study on the effects of enneagram group counseling on nursing students. International Journal of Bio-Science and Bio-Technology, 7(5), 235-246.
Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Klann, M., & Wulf, V. (2006). End-user development: An emerging paradigm. In End user development (pp. 1-8). Springer.
Luckcock, T. (2007). Theoretical Resource: The soul of teaching and professional learning: an appreciative inquiry into the Enneagram of reflective practice. Educational Action Research, 15(1), 127-145.
Magen-Nagar, N., & Peled, B. (2013). Characteristics of Israeli school teachers in computer-based learning environments. Journal of educators online, 10(1), 1-34.
Martin, P. C. (2008). Collaborative practices among teachers to serve low-achieving high school ESL students The George Washington University].
McGuinness, M. (2017). An introduction to the Enneagram.
Morris, J., Song, Y., Soloway, E., & Norris, C. (2021). Teacher professional development in STEM education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(4).
Neerincx, M., Paulussen, T., & Theunissen, N. (2013). E-coaching on teacher's competencies and situated lessons: The example of sex education. Soesterberg: TNO.
Noble, A. C. (2012). Examining the Instructional Utility of Curriculum Based Measurement in Achievement Evaluations.
Noom-Ura, S. (2013). English-Teaching Problems in Thailand and Thai Teachers' Professional Development Needs. English Language Teaching, 6(11), 139-147.
Northern, S. J. (2021). Examining the Effects of a Curriculum-Based Professional Learning Community on Teacher Efficacy Toward Inquiry-Based Science Instruction Western Kentucky University].
Ochoa, S. F., & Gutierrez, F. J. (2018). Architecting e-coaching systems: a first step for dealing with their intrinsic design complexity. Computer, 51(3), 16-23.
Penn-Edwards, S., Donnison, S., & Albion, L. (2016). Developing the inner teacher: guiding the reflective practice of first year preservice teachers. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 11(1), 10-21.
Rector, W. J. (2016). Teachers' perceptions about response to intervention reading strategies for at-risk students Walden University].
Riso, D. R., & Hudson, R. (2000). Understanding the enneagram: The practical guide to personality types. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Rogers, J. R., & Soyka, K. M. (2004). “One size fits all”: An existential-constructivist perspective on the crisis intervention approach with suicidal individuals. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 34, 7-22.
Rossett, A., & Marino, G. (2005). If coaching is good, then e-coaching is. T AND D, 59(11), 46.
Sharma, M. (2017). Teacher in a digital era. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 17(3), 10-14.
Stoetzel, L., & Shedrow, S. (2020). Coaching our coaches: How online learning can address the gap in preparing K-12 instructional coaches. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102959. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102959
Susilawati, M., & Nilakusmawati, D. P. E. (2018). Effectiveness of problem-based learning to optimize student learning outcomes in regression analysis course. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,
Sutarto, A. P., Khairai, K. M., & Wahab, M. N. A. (2020). Assessment of stress among assembly-line workers: correlation between subjective and objective physiological measures. International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 7(3), 207-224.
Thomson, C. (2009). Enneagram Styles, Coaching, and The Use of Metaphor. The Enneagram Journal, 2(1), 138.
Thornton, P. J. (1996). The physiological, psychological and work stress of primary school principals. International Journal of Educational Management, 10(6), 42-55.
Villalon, J. J. (2016). Lesson study: Its influence on planning, instruction, and self-confidence of pre-service mathematics teachers. US-China Education Review B, 6(7), 429-439.
Wagner, J. P. (2010). Nine lenses on the world: The Enneagram perspective. Enneagram Studies and Applications.