A Development of Assessment Framework of Competencies for Student Teachers’ Learning Management and Specific Content Knowledge in the Field of English

Authors

  • นิยม อานไมล์

Keywords:

Teaching Competencies Assessment Framework, Specific Mathematic Content Knowledge, Rater Agreement Index, Micro-teaching

Abstract

The purposes of this research were to (1) make the assessment framework of competencies, (2) make the assessment observational record form of competencies, (3) investigate the ater Agreement Index (RAI) of the assessment framework of competencies in learning management and study the achievement of the specific content knowledge of English student teachers.
The samples selected using Simple Random Sampling were 30 students from 61 students studying in the 4th year in English program, Faculty of Education, Buriram Rajabhat University. The research instruments were the assessment framework of competencies for learning management in 5 essential elements and specific content knowledge of English teachers. The statistics used were percentage, average and standard deviation. The research findings revealed that 1. The assessment framework of competencies for learning management consists of 5 essential elements including 1) planning (before teaching), 2) classroom environment and classroom management, 3) strategies for encouraging the effective learning, 4) feedback and learner assessment, and 5) self-reflection (after teaching). The assessment framework of the specific content knowledge of English got the Rater Agreement Index (RAI) of the experts., 2. The assessment observational record form of competencies in learning management after Micro teaching was consistent in 5 essential elements as arranging from highest to lowest; feedback and learner assessment (RAI = 0.985), classroom environment and classroom management (RAI = 0.970), planning (before teaching) (RAI = 0.963), strategies for encouraging the effective learning (RAI = 0.945), 4), and self-reflection (after teaching) (RAI = 0.926). The assessment observational record form of competencies in the specific content knowledge of English student teachers were 100 items of 4 multiple-choice tests. The item difficulty (p) was between 0.26-0.78, item discrimination (r) was between 0.22-0.56, and reliability (Lovett Reliability) was 0.814., and 3. The results of analyzing the Rater Agreement Index of the experts as the assessment framework of competencies in learning management were the test scores of the specific content knowledge of English student teachers after learning higher than the criterion score of 70% at the 0.05 level of significance.

References

นันทกา วารินิน. (2557). รูปแบบการพัฒนาสมรรถนะการจัดการเรียนรู้ของครูสำหรับโรงเรียนสังกัด
สำนักงานเขตพื้นที่การศึกษาประถมศึกษากำแพงเพชร เขต 2. วิทยานิพนธ์ ครุศาสตรดุษฎีบัณฑิต
มหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏนครสวรรค์.
สุรศักดิ์ ปาเฮ. (2556). “การพัฒนาสมรรถนะครูในศตวรรษที่ 21” เอกสารประกอบการอบรมสัมมนาครูและ
บุคลากรทางการศึกษาในสังกัด สพป.แพร่เขต 1-2. ณ โรงแรมนครแพร่ทาวเวอร์ วันที่ 22-23 เมษายน
2556. (โครงการความร่วมมือระหว่างเขตพื้นที่กับมหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏลำปาง)
Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. 1999. Assessment and measurement of pedagogical
content knowledge. In J.Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), “Examining pedagogical
content knowledge” (pp. 147-161). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publisher.
Bell, J., Veal, W. R., & Tippins, D. J.1998. “The evolution of pedagogical content
knowledge in prospective secondary physics teachers”. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.
Burry-Stock, Judith A. and other. (1996). Ratrt Agreement Indexes for Performance
Assessment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56 (2), 251-265.
Eick, C. J. 2000. “Inquiry, nature of science, and evolution: The need for a more
complex pedagogical content knowledge in science teaching”. Electric Journal of Science
Education. 4 (3). Available: http://unr.edu/homepage/ crowther/ejse/eick.html
Halim, L., & Meerah, S. M. 2002. “Science trainee teachers’ pedagogi-cal content
knowledge and its influence on physics teaching”. Research in Science and Technological
Education. 20 (2): 215-225.
Kinach, B. M. 2002. “A cognitive strategy for developing pedagogical content
knowledge in the secondary mathematics”. Teaching and Teacher Education. 18: 51-71.
Lederman, N.G.; & J. Gess-Newsome.(1999). Reconceptualizing secondary science
Teacher education. In J. Gess-Newsome and N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining
pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp.199–
213).Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Tuan, H. L. 1996. “Investigating the nature and development of pre-service
chemistry teachers’ content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical con
tent knowledge”. Proceeding of the National Science Council Part D: Mathematics, Sci-
ence and Technology education. 6 (2): 101-112.
Tuan, H. L. & Kaou, R. C. 1997.“Development of a grade eight Taiwanese physical
science teachers’pedagogical content knowledge development”. Proceeding of the Na
tional Science Council Part D: Mathematics, Science and Technology education. 7 (3):
135-154.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. 2001. “Professional development of
reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge”. Journal of Re
search in Science Teaching. 38 (2): 137-158.
Veal, W. R. 1998. “The evolution of pedagogical content knowledge in prospective
secondary chemistry teachers”. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National
Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.
Zembal-Saul, C. A., Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. S. 1999. Constructing a framework for elementary
science teaching using pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome
& N. G. Lederman (Eds.), “Examin-ing pedagogical content knowledge” (pp. 237-256).
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Published

2017-10-02

Issue

Section

Research Articles