Consideraciones finales

Beyond the above overall relationships between teachers’ belief and pedagogy scores, one can also identify associations between individual beliefs and individual practices, from both the quantitative and qualitative data. Pearson correlations between the eight beliefs and ten LCE practices were mostly consistent with my own initial hypotheses about which beliefs would be associated with which practices. Figure 6.11 depicts visually the relationships that both showed high correlations and fit within my hypothesised framework (full correlation tables are presented in Appendix-6.11).

Figure 6.11: Pearson correlations between individual beliefs and practices

Since correlations could possibly result from both variables being correlated with a third omitted factor, a regression was also carried out with the seven beliefs (Scale 3 being omitted) as predictors of each of the ten pedagogy categories. Significant predictors are depicted visually in Figure 6.12, and overall results are presented in Appendix 6.11.33 Regression shows that even when controlling for other factors, certain beliefs are still significant predictors

Due to the small sample size (60), all control variables could not be included in these regressions, which limits the interpretations that can be made.

156

of nearly all learner-centred practices, particulary beliefs related to purpose of education, knowledge, and also beliefs about equality, democratic relationships, and responsibility for outcomes, discussed more in Section 6.6.

Figure 6.12: Summary of regression results for 7 beliefs as predictors of 10 practices

The relationships shown above that display the most significant correlations and also fit within my hypothesised framework, are explained in more detail below. For each belief, I begin with the key quantitative correlation findings that make sense conceptually, and supplement this with illustrative qualitative examples of teachers who epitomise these relationships (drawing from both interviews and classroom observations). The examples used represent the ‘expected’ relationships, though there are cases where teachers’ expressed beliefs were inconsistent with their observed behaviours.

1. Equality:

Teachers who believe strongly in human equality are more likely to create an inclusive classroom environment. Moreover, it makes sense that they would also affirm the value of teaching poor or low-caste children – and are thus more likely to affirm and draw linkages to

157

children’s communities, and to value the prior knowledge that all children bring. For example, Lata’s (B2-L) inequality beliefs are evident in her interview: she makes several discriminatory comments like Scheduled Castes “do not have tendency to work hard”, “they smell, they stink actually”, they are “uncivilised”, and “they don’t learn anything, these groups.” Such discrimination is also evident in her pedagogical practice: she scolds one student “you are stupid and you’ll never be able to learn”. When asking students to list differences between living and non-living things, she says “students who are intelligent should list all the names; those who are weak, list at least two points”. Teachers like Neena (B1-L), Ajay (B1-L) and Suman (M3-L) who also display strong inequality beliefs (based on their composite belief scores), are observed to call on the same few students sitting in the front, while ignoring students at the back who are obviously struggling. In contrast, teachers with high equality beliefs (Sandeep B4-H, Reshma K1-H, Siby K2-H) were observed making special efforts to involve children who were not paying attention, to help individual students who were struggling, to encourage girls especially to present their ideas, and to congratulate students that they are all smart.

2. Democratic relationships:

Teachers with more democratic beliefs are more likely to promote a fear-free emotional environment, to encourage students to participate actively and ask lots of questions. For example, teachers with strongly hierarchical beliefs (e.g. Seema M1-L, Usha M2-L, Meenal B3-L, Aisha B3-L) create a strong environment of fear to maintain discipline. They were observed hitting the desk with a stick to get students’ attention, hitting students for talking in class, and yelling loudly or hitting students for making mistakes. In contrast, Sandeep (B4-H), Shobha (K2-H) and John (K3-H) all display strongly democratic beliefs. They are also warm, approachable and friendly with their students, and students seem very comfortable around them, mostly on-task and engaged in classroom activities, with few instances of behaviour management needed.

3. Diversity:

Teachers who value children’s uniqueness and encourage them to pursue diverse fields, are more likely to seek to develop children’s talents in diverse extra-curricular areas beyond a narrow range of curricular areas. For example, Reshma (K1-H), possessing high diversity beliefs, gives ample opportunities while teaching for students to engage in various activities like singing, drawing, colouring, or physical movement. School B3, where most teachers score low on diversity beliefs, did not place much emphasis on extra-curricular goals beyond getting students to memorize textbook content. The one period scheduled for drawing was cancelled by the teacher due to lack of blackboard or drawing materials. Rather than encouraging students to draw with pencils in their notebooks, she left to sit in another class while students

158

sat idle for the last half hour of the day, reflecting the low priority placed on drawing for its own sake.

4. Learning as knowledge construction:

Teachers who view learning as a process of constructing knowledge rather than memorizing transmitted content, are understandably more likely to draw out students’ existing knowledge, and to encourage students to participate actively and interact with a variety of materials in order to arrive at new concepts. In many of the Bihar and Maharashtra classrooms, students listen quietly to the teachers talking, with only one right answer accepted, and the textbook and workbook used exclusively as the only source of learning. Many of the Maharashtra teachers spend the majority of class time reading from the textbook, and writing points on the board to be copied (e.g. Seema M1-L, Suman M3-L, Anil M4-L – all who view knowledge as transmitted). Seema occasionally asks students closed questions, but if students cannot answer, she loudly provides the correct answer herself. Aisha (B3-L) begins by asking a student to read the lesson aloud, but when he doesn’t read well, instead of helping him she picks another student to read, and soon just starts reading out herself, while students listen quietly. Meanwhile Ruth (K4-H), who sees learning as knowledge construction, teaches addition and subtraction problems by distributing paper money which she had prepared the night before, and allowing students to interact in groups to trade bills in order to arrive at the answers themselves. Such instances of students interacting in groups, moving around, handling TLMs (e.g. chalk, marbles, plants, chits of paper, cardboard flashcards), and sharing what they already know is common among teachers who view knowledge as constructed (e.g. Priya M2-H, Reshma K1-H).

5. Purpose of education as social justice:

Teachers’ purpose beliefs are evident in what they emphasize in their teaching: whether things like discipline, writing correct answers and getting high marks, or whether they prioritize genuine understanding and holistic learning of values and skills that will contribute positively to society. For example, teachers like Lata (B2-L), Aisha and Meenal (B3-L) see the primary purpose of education and of their own teaching as discipline, and achieving good marks in order to get a good job. This is manifested in their practice: their primary objective is to get students to sit quietly and write correct answers – even if this involves scolding or hitting students to make them do so. For most of Meenal’s lesson, students are off-task, and most of Meenal’s time is spent asking students to keep quiet and fill out their workbooks, hitting students who do not listen, and writing the correct answer herself for those who get it wrong. On the other hand, Reshma (K1-H), Shobha (K2-H) and John (K3-H) see education as a means for cultivating the skills and values needed for developing productive citizens and contributing to a more ethical society. In their lessons, they often use classroom incidents as

159

opportunities for emphasizing values such as healthy competition, honesty, kindness, cooperation, and helping at home.

6. Responsibility for outcomes:

Similar to purpose beliefs, teachers who see themselves as personally responsible for ensuring that students learn are more likely to continuously check whether or not students have understood what is being taught, and to give individual help to those who haven’t. Aisha and Supriya (B3-L), who see their primary duty as punctuality and discipline, did not seem too concerned about maximizing class time for student learning. They spent most of the class time lecturing or correcting notebooks, while students sat memorizing, answering questions from the book, or were off-task. They rarely encouraged application of concepts, checked whether students understood, or offered help to students who didn’t. Anil (M4-L) does occasionally ask students questions about what he is teaching, but simply waits for one student to answer, and then carries on – regardless of whether others have understood. In contrast, Anita (M1-H) walks around helping individual students as they write, ensuring every child answers for themselves. Sheila (M2-M) asks students to help and check each other’s work, and asks every student to read aloud the examples they came up with.

7. Professional commitment:

Teachers’ excitement and commitment toward teaching as a profession, was also reflected in the enthusiasm and engagement they displayed in their teaching and generated among their students. Ram (M1-L), who “never wanted to become a teacher at all”, has no motivation to improve as a teacher because, he says, he doesn’t even want to remain a teacher. This lethargic attitude carries over to his work: he enters class late talking on his cell phone, and again later leaves the class twice to answer his phone. He was clearly not well prepared for class, seemed bored, and so did his students – they seemed reluctant to answer questions even if they knew the answers. Anita (M1-H), who always wanted to become a teacher and loves teaching, appears very animated during her lesson. She uses various TLMs (radio, charts, marbles) and uses actions while reciting poems to facilitate understanding, and students listen with excitement, eager to answer questions.

8. Change:

Teachers who are positively disposed towards questioning tradition and change, are more likely to ask open-ended questions and encourage students themselves to ask questions. Many teachers with low change-belief scores also did not encourage much questioning in their classes. At most, they asked single-answer questions, and if students couldn’t answer they would eventually provide answers themselves (e.g. Lata B2-L, Usha M2-L). Ajay (B1-L) reads

160

out questions from the textbook and accepts only one answer: “Do you have a sister?” “Yes, I have a sister” he gets students to repeat in chorus. In turn, Siby (K2-H), (who scored highest in change-beliefs), gives plenty of opportunities for students to discuss, freely share their opinions, and ask questions. He himself asks many open-ended questions that stimulate student thinking, and the concept of right or wrong answers never comes up – the focus is on sharing ideas. He facilitates a lively critical discussion that challenges social stereotypes about various occupations and the dignity of labour, encouraging students to explore perspectives other than their own.