![[Navigation Map]](../../../images/maps/casestudy.gif){kind=small}
Mike Horsley TREAT Faculty of Education University of Sydney
Very little research into the use of textbooks has been based on observation of teachers using textbooks in classrooms. Most studies have have studied textbook content and the underlying characteristics of textbooks ( Zahorik 1991 ). Some studies ( Zahorik 1991, Laws 1988, Laws and Horsley 1992 ) have sought to reveal factors influencing teacher use of textbooks in teaching through questionaires and interviews with teachers.
However, few studies have conducted observations on teachers and their textbook use in classroom teaching and learning situations. Alverman ( 1987 ) observed science teachers and how they used textbooks in discussions. Hinchman ( 1987 ) observed textbook use by three teachers through observation and interviews. She concluded that teachers exhibited three different types of textbook use; methodological coverage, text book based information source, and reference use in higher level class discussions.
Horsley and Laws ( 1990 ) developed an observational instrument TEXTOR to examine textbook use in teaching and learning in secondary classrooms. TEXTOR is based on instant category analysis. Reviews of literature, preliminary observations and content validation have allowed TEXTOR's developers to identify a range of textbook use categories which are identifies by classroom observers using the schedule. The schedule seeks to identify
TEXTOR was used in pilot study in 20 social science classrooms ( using 20 teachers ) during 1991 with trained observers and results reported at the Australian Teacher Educators Association in 1992. TEXTOR was further refined in another pilot study in a study of 13 lessons from a Social Science Staff in 1992. ( These results have yet to be published )
A number of research questions were identified prior to the study
As a result in this study it was decided to:
a. identify an expert teacher using a number of criteria including academic background of the teacher, subject matter expertise, performance in teacher education, common sense notions of a good teacher held by the teacher's students and the school and its Principal, teacher peers and leaders, further professional development, teaching experience
b. observe a range of lessons and classes over a period of time to ascertain the teachers use of textbooks in teaching and learning for the teachers classes
c. use TEXTOR to record and structure the observational data gathered
d. compare this data with data gathered in Laws and Horsleys pilot study of twenty lessons using TEXTOR ( in 6 secondary subjects ) and with a preliminary study of thirteen social science lessons conducted by two B. Ed. Honours students in a study in a single Subject Department.
The teacher chosen for the study exhibited a number of characteristics and capabilities that lead the researcher to believe that she could be categorised as an expert teacher - even by using different conceptualisations of expert.
The teacher had a strong academic background with academic success at underground level leading to selection and completion of an Honours Degree in one of the subjects she taught ( Honours Class 2 Division 1 ). In her Diploma in Education she was awarded a Diploma with Merit ( approximately 10% of candidates ) and had achieved an Outstanding Grade in Practice Teaching .
As well, she was studying in a Masters Program and had completed a unit on issues and rsearch in Textbooks. She was an experienced teacher with five years teaching with Teaching experience in two schools. She was identified by the Principal as one of the "most important and strong teachers in the school", was active in school curriculum development, extracurricular activities and school professional development. At this stage of her career she was commencing contribution to professional development through her school system subject and professional development associations.
Expertise can also be conceptualised in relation to knowlege of the curriculum and its associated pedagogy. The teacher taught English and History and she could be considered an expert in terms of developing the pedagogical knowledge of promoting inquiry, investigation, asking questions, evaluating and developing critical skills and literacy emphasised by the syllabuses in History and English.
The school used in this study was a private catholic girls school in the Western Suburbs of Sydney. The School is a Catholic Systemic School of approximately 800 girls. In this school the school textbook policy was for students to purchase books from a booklist for the subject indicated. In both subjects that the teacher taught students purchased their own texts either second hand or from the school hire scheme. Students had copies of texts even if they reflected the past syllabus.
The Lessons that were observed included 4 grade levels
and were distributed throughout the day ( the school had a six period day with each lesson being 55 minutes long )
There seemed no variation in the text material use either from the year level of the class or period during the day.
It was decided that observation would take place on the teachers heaviest teaching days in a two month period for five days. Actual observations took place over 4 teaching days with the observer either watching the first three lessons of the day or the last three lessons.
In the lessons observed the students brought their own texts and used them in class for seven out of the twelve lessons.
In many lessons the teacher used text materials that students did not have access to by
Text materials based on textbooks and kits were used in 10 out of the 12 of the lessons observed. Textbooks were used in seven though not for the entirety of the lesons and in a way that reflected the teachers goals and not the underlying structure of the text.
It was possible to calculate the time spent in the classroom that text materials were used as the basis of teaching and learning.
It was possible to calculate the amount of photocopying that the teacher attempted and to identify the nature of the handouts that the teacher prepared for her classes.
The handouts fell basically into two types
a. Major Assignments and Project tasks requiring significant documentation ( often distributed to other classs ) ( two handouts ) and;
b. Text material that was designed as the knowledge and activity basis of the lesson. This material was mostly collected photocopy parts of a range of textbooks and Kits that the student did not have access to ( six handouts )
The teacher gave handouts in 9 out of the 12 twelve lessons and gave out and used a total of 575 copied pages. This represents a total of 48 pages per lesson for the twelve lessons observed ( one and a half pages per child per lesson).
It was calculated that approximately six minutes of each lesson where handouts were being used was taken in organisaing their distribution among the students.
A feature of the lessons observed was the quantity and quality of the prereading strategies that the teacher employed. Prereading activities were employed in10 of the lessons observed ( 83% ).
The teacher used a series of different prereading tecchniques. Some attempted to assist develop a schema for the students subsequent reading. Others attempted to focus and direct student reading for specific purposes.
Preview of vocabulary occurred in 3 lessons ( 25% ). Questions posed prior to reading featured in 5 lessons often accompanied by explainations of following student activity ( 3 lessons )
Written questions were explained prior to reading in 4 lessons ( 25% ) Although the teacher did not develop semantic outlines, mind maps or text structures prereading was a feature of the teaching. The lessons commenced with prereading as a result of each lesson being planned and highly structured. The strategies developed assisted the students in carrying out and focusing their reading and completint their written tasks.
Examples of prereading activities included explanations;
previewing questions; circling and discussing words in primary sources; recapping stories before reading on; discussion of homework and then oral questions; recall and then discussion of vocabualry in the reading set; reading through handouts and then exaplaining activities; setting the scene before individuals read;
discussed stimulus ( graphs and illustrations in a textbook ) and explained how to complete activities; and questions posed during reading. This variety and quality of prereading strategies contrasts with other observations of teachers usual prereading strategies and activities.
The teacher used a wide variety of techniques in the way she asked students to read the texts in her classroom. ( Teacher reading in class 50%, students read aloud around 8%, students read silently 40%, students read aloud in groups 25% ) These even included lessons where different groups of students were assigned to read protions of texts in different ways. This was done in order to develop different activities for group presentation and reporting back.
In some English lessons the teacher read scenes herself then posed questions and then assigned students to read in pairs.
In a few lessons students read alone in groups then completed group work. In a lesson on a Drama script the teacher read the text and then students read aloud in groups and some students were chosen to read parts. In most lessons the teacher read first and then students read texts silently.
The teacher followed best practice in asking students to read silently but often modelled good reading by reading initial passages or passages that were seen as particularly important. She thought clearly about the way that students should read text portions and why they would benefit from the different ways that student were assigned to read their materials.
In the TEXTOR Observation schedule observers inferred the teachers purpose for using the text by analysing how the teacher approached using text materials.
The teacher used the texts for a wide variety of purposes. These included
The purposes of using the texts can also be inferred by identifying the extent to which students used text materials to construct knowledge for themselves or whether the text is used in an expository and didactic way.
In four of the lessons the lessons initially started out as expository but then students were given the opportunity of devloping their own meaning from the reading and reflecting that they were doing. Often texts were used as the basis of group work which allowed students to find information and then develop their own writing. Only one of the lessons could be described as didactic and expository where students worked through text to absorb predigested information.
The tasks that the students were assigned were extremely varied. (Discussion 5, answering teacher/worksheet questions 5, comparison of Text sources 1, summarising 2, small group discussion 6, student research work 1) In considering the teachers purpose for using text materials the students were assigned different tasks in almost every lesson - and as a result used a considerable range of methods of extracting information and interacting with the texts that were used.
In five of the lessons, after reading the text, the teacher conducted discussion for some of the lesson. Also, in another five lessons, the students were asked to answer questions or worksheets for some part of the lesson. In addition, students constructed tables summarising information; read plays in pairs and constructed and presented monologues; students improvised role playing; students worked on individual assignments; completed subtexting; wrote a manuscript for a scene in a play; and used role cards as the basis of information to create and fill in tables.
The teacher used texbooks and text materials for homework activities in eight of the twelve lessons ( 66%). This was made easier by the circumstance that each student had their own copy of the text which they could use at home.
However, there was no clear pattern in the homework set. In most cases the homework developed from the way that the lessons had proceeded. As a result the homework included considerable variety of activity. In only one lesson did the homework consist of finishing off questions for homework. Other types of homework consisted of; tables constructed from text to answer teacher set questions; students writing monologues for a character using the text as a source;summarising work done in class; students developing role plays based on role cards from a kit; subtexting activities started in class to be finished for homework; and continuing assignments and exercises commenced in classtime. Again, there was a considerable variety in homework activities based around the completion of lesson aims and outcomes. In many lessons the homework was followed up and was used to both commence the new lesson and draw the lessons into a program that had a clear structure.
Again in comparing the expert teacher to others studied it is apparent that their needs for text resources are more determined by the need for exercises and activities. This need determined their similar but more limited search for material by reading texts, photocopying sections and providing resources for their students.