Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Educational Management:Vol12.Issue1.1998:
Research on total teacher ef fectiveness: conception
strategies
Yin Cheong Cheng
Ce ntre fo r Re se arc h and De ve lo pme nt, The Ho ng Ko ng Institute o f Educ atio n,
Ho ng Ko ng
Kwok Tung Tsui
Ce ntre fo r Re se arc h and De ve lo pme nt, The Ho ng Ko ng Institute o f Educ atio n,
Ho ng Ko ng
Based on the conception of
total teacher effectiveness,
aims to develop strategies for
conceptualizing teacher
effectiveness research. From
the new conception, the units
of research on teacher effectiveness are cell, array and
layer. The strategies
advanced for conceptualizing
research include the individual unit description strategies, the within-layer relationship strategies, the betweenlayer relationship strategies,
and the whole structure
strategy. Based on the conception strategies, teacher
effectiveness research can be
shifted from traditional simplistic one-dimensional conception to sophisticated
multidimensional conception
and can have various
research alternatives for
different research purposes
and contexts. Hopefully, these
strategies can provide a new
direction for studying and
improving teacher effectiveness in particular and school
effectiveness in general.
This article was adapted
from a paper presented at
the European Conference on
Educational Research held
in Seville, Spain, 24-28
September 1996
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [ 1998] 3 9 –4 7
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
In cu r r en t sch ool r efor m m ovem en ts in differ en t pa r ts of th e wor ld, th er e is a gr ea t
dem a n d for r esea r ch on tea ch in g, tea ch er s,
a n d tea ch er edu ca tion w ith a n u n der sta n din g
th a t tea ch er s a r e th e k ey elem en t for th e
su ccess of sch ool edu ca tion (Ca r n e gie For u m ,
1986; Cooper a n d Con ley, 1991; E du ca tion
Com m ission , 1992; Ru ssell a n d Mu n by, 1992).
In th e la st two deca des, in or der to im pr ove
th e per for m a n ce of tea ch er s, policym a k er s,
tea ch er tr a in in g in stitu tion s a n d sch ools, a
gr ea t n u m ber of in n ova tion s in tea ch in g
tech n iqu es, m eth odologies a n d su per vision
wer e design ed a n d im plem en ted. Alth ou gh a
h u ge a m ou n t of r esou r ces h a d been in vested
in to edu ca tion a l r efor m s in itia ted by a n u m ber of edu ca tion a l policies, th e per for m a n ce
of stu den ts a s a wh ole w a s declin in g a t a sign ifica n t r a te in Hon g Kon g a s well a s oth er
developed cou n tr ies in th e wor ld. Th e policy
m a k er s a n d th e pu blic be ga n to be aw a r e of
th e im por ta n ce of tea ch er per for m a n ce to
stu den ts’ edu ca tion a l ou tcom es a n d tr y to
m a k e policy effor ts for im pr ovin g tea ch er
qu a lity a n d effectiven ess (E du ca tion Com m ission , 1992; E lliott, 1993; Gr a ce a n d Law n ,
1991; Gideon se et a l., 1991).
Tr a dition a l con cepts of tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch focu s m a in ly on in dividu a l
tea ch er s, pa r ticu la r ly a bou t in str u ction in a
cla ssr oom con text, a n d ign or e th e com plexity
of th e sch ool or ga n iza tion a l en vir on m en t th a t
ca n in flu en ce th e r ole a n d per for m a n ce of
tea ch er s a t both in dividu a l a n d gr ou p levels.
In evita bly, th er e is a ser iou s con ceptu a l ba r r ier lim itin g th e effectiven ess of a n y sch ool
r efor m s developed for im pr ovin g edu ca tion
qu a lity a n d tea ch er effectiven ess in a ch a n gin g edu ca tion a l en vir on m en t.
Som e sch ola r s gr a du a lly fou n d th a t sch ool
r estr u ctu r in g a lon e wou ld n ot im pr ove tea ch in g (E lm or e, 1992). Th is is beca u se tea ch in g
ca n n ot be r edu ced to a few r ela tively str a igh tfor w a r d “gen er ic” a n d r obu st beh avior s
wh ich ca n be a pplied a cr oss differ en t su bjects
a n d differ en t gr ou ps of stu den ts in differ en t
sch ools. In sh or t, edu ca tor s, r esea r ch er s a n d
policy m a k er s m u st r eth in k a bou t h ow to
a cqu a in t sch ool m a n a gem en t w ith th e com plex tea ch in g pr ocess n eeded to im pr ove
tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g effects. In evita bly,
th er e is a n u r gen t n eed to u n der sta n d th e
com plex n a tu r e of sch ool pr ocesses a n d
tea ch er effectiven ess fr om a br oa der per spective a n d develop n ew m a n a gem en t str a te gies
to im pr ove th em if we w a n t to a ch ieve better
stu den ts’ lea r n in g ou tcom es (Ch en g, 1996a ,b).
Ba sed on Ch en g a n d Tsu i’s (1996) con ception
of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess, th is pa per a im s
to develop n ew str a te gies for con ceptu a lizin g
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch , th a t ca n fa cilita te m or e stu dies in th is a r ea a n d sh ift th em
fr om th e tr a dition a l sim plistic on e-dim en sion a l con ception to soph istica ted m u ltidim en sion a l con ception s. Hopefu lly, th ese
str a te gies ca n pr ovide a n ew dir ection for
stu dyin g a n d im pr ovin g tea ch er effectiven ess
in pa r ticu la r a n d sch ool effectiven ess in gen er a l.
Conceptual framework of total
teacher ef fectiveness
Ta k in g th e lim ita tion s of th e tr a dition a l con cepts in to con sider a tion , Ch en g a n d Tsu i
(1996) developed a n ew con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k
of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess th a t ca n be su m m a r ized a s follow s (plea se r efer to th e or igin a l a r ticle for th e deta il).
Levels of teacher effectiveness
In dividu a l tea ch er s, gr ou ps of tea ch er s, a n d
a ll tea ch er s a s a wh ole in th e sch ool r epr esen t
differ en t levels or or ga n iza tion a l u n its of
tea ch er s wh o ca n play differ en t r oles a n d
m a k e differ en t con tr ibu tion s to th e fu n ction in g of th e sch ool, in clu din g edu ca tion a l
pr ocesses a n d m a n a gem en t pr ocesses. Th er efor e th er e a r e th r ee levels of tea ch er effectiven ess in clu din g th e in dividu a l level, th e gr ou p
level, a n d th e sch ool level. In dividu a l-level
tea ch er effectiven ess r efer s to th e effectiven ess of in dividu a l tea ch er s in per for m in g
[ 39 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
th eir ow n a ssign ed ta sk s su ch a s tea ch in g in
cla ssr oom , eva lu a tin g stu den ts’ edu ca tion a l
ou tcom es, a n d m a n a gin g stu den ts in th eir
cla sses, etc. Th e tr a dition a l stu dies often
focu s on tea ch er effectiven ess a t th is level.
Gr ou p-level tea ch er effectiven ess r efer s to th e
effectiven ess of a gr ou p or tea m of tea ch er s in
per for m in g th eir gr ou p ta sk s a n d a ch ievin g
gr ou p objectives. To differ en t fu n ction a l
gr ou ps, th eir gr ou p ta sk s m ay be differ en t.
For exa m ple, disciplin e com m ittee, extr a cu r r icu la r a ctivities com m ittee, sta ff developm en t, scien ce su bjects pa n el, m a th em a tics
pa n el, a n d E n glish la n gu a ge pa n el a r e typica l
gr ou ps of tea ch er s. It is believed th a t th e
“syn er gy” of a gr ou p is poten tia lly gr ea ter
th a n th e su m of en er gy of its m em ber (Ka r p,
1980; Kor m a n sk i a n d Mozen ter, 1987). Sim ila r ly, tea ch er effectiven ess a t th e sch ool level
r efer s to th e effectiven ess of a ll tea ch er s a s a
wh ole in per for m in g sch ool a ctivities a n d
a ch ievin g sch ool a im s a n d objectives.
Recen tly, th e wh ole sch ool a ppr oa ch is
str on gly em ph a sized in stu den t gu ida n ce a n d
cou n sellin g or m or a l a n d civic edu ca tion . It
h olds th a t wh en a ll tea ch er s a ct con gr u en tly
a s a wh ole, th ey m ay h ave a better ch a n ce to
ch a n ge th e in ter n a l a n d exter n a l con str a in ts
a n d a ch ieve edu ca tion a l ta sk s. All th ese
a bove types of tea ch er effectiven ess a r e
im por ta n t in r esea r ch .
Domains of teacher effectiveness
In th e tea ch in g pr ocess, th e tea ch er ’s per for m a n ce in a ffective, cogn itive, a n d beh avior a l
dom a in s ca n dir ectly a ffect th e stu den ts’
lea r n in g pr ocess a n d th eir a ffective, cogn itive, a n d beh avior a l developm en t. Th er efor e,
th e con sider a tion of tea ch er effectiven ess
sh ou ld in clu de th e qu a lity of tea ch er com peten ce a n d tea ch er per for m a n ce in th ese
dom a in s a n d th eir effects on stu den ts’ developm en ts in th ese dom a in s.
Total teacher effectiveness
Ta k in g th e a bove th r ee dom a in s a n d th e th r ee
levels in to con sider a tion , th e n a tu r e a n d
ch a r a cter istics of tea ch er effectiven ess ca n be
stu died a t m u lti-levels a n d m u lti-dom a in s.
Th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess for in vestiga tin g th e com plica ted n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess is illu str a ted in F igu r e 1 (Ch en g a n d Tsu i, 1996).
Th is fr a m ewor k a ssu m es th a t tea ch er effectiven ess is in evita bly r ela ted to th e tea ch er ’s
tea ch in g pr ocess a n d th e stu den t’s lea r n in g
pr ocess. Th er efor e, th e con ception of tea ch er
effectiven ess in volves two im por ta n t ca tegor ies of a ctor s (tea ch er s a n d stu den ts) a t
th r ee differ en t levels (in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d
sch ool). Th e pr ocesses a n d effects of tea ch in g
a n d lea r n in g m ay h a ppen in th e beh avior,
[ 40 ]
a ffective, a n d cogn itive dom a in s of differ en t
a ctor s a t differ en t levels. Specifica lly, tea ch er
effectiven ess sh ou ld in volve th e beh avior a l,
a ffective, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a ll
tea ch er s a n d stu den ts a t in dividu a l, gr ou p,
a n d sch ool levels. Th is str u ctu r e of tea ch er
effectiven ess is differ en t fr om th e tr a dition a l
th in k in g th a t focu ses m a in ly on th e in dividu a l level of tea ch er or stu den t a n d ign or es th e
m u ltiplicity of per for m a n ce of tea ch er s a n d
stu den ts. Th e n ew con cept is ca lled tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess beca u se it ca n pr ovide a
h olistic pictu r e of th e n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Layers of teacher effectiveness
As sh ow n in F igu r e 1, tea ch er effectiven ess is
r ela ted to th e tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g pr ocess
involvin g th e tea ch er com peten ce layer,
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer, stu den t exper ien ce layer, a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e
layer. Th e tea ch er com peten ce layer is th e
tota l beh avior a l, a ffective, a n d cogn itive com peten ce of tea ch er s a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p,
a n d sch ool levels. Th is layer r epr esen ts th e
tota l sta tic qu a lity of tea ch er s. Th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer is th e tota l per for m a n ce of
tea ch er s in th e th r ee dom a in s a t th e th r ee
levels. It r epr esen ts th e dyn a m ic qu a lity of
tea ch er s in th e tea ch in g pr ocess. In a ddition ,
th e r ela tion sh ip between th ese two layer s ca n
be m oder a ted by th e in fl u en ce of th e exter n a l
tea ch in g con text (e.g. or ga n iza tion a l fa ctor s,
lea der sh ip, a n d sch ool en vir on m en t, etc.).
Th e stu den t exper ien ce layer r epr esen ts th e
tota l lea r n in g exper ien ce of stu den ts in th e
th r ee dom a in s a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d
sch ool levels. An d th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer r epr esen ts th e tota l lea r n in g
ou tcom es of stu den ts in th e th r ee dom a in s a t
th e th r ee levels. In gen er a l, th e qu a lity of th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer a s a wh ole h a s a
positive im pa ct on th e qu a lity of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce layer a n d th e la tter h a s a
positive r ela tion sh ip w ith th e qu a lity of th e
stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer. Aga in , th ese
r ela tion sh ips m ay be a ffected by th e ch a r a cter istics of th e in ter n a l tea ch in g con text
(in clu din g stu den t su bcu ltu r e, cla ssr oom
clim a te, stu den t a bility gr ou pin g, lea r n in g
en vir on m en t, etc.) a n d pr e-existin g stu den t
ch a r a cter istics (su ch a s IQ, fa m ily
ba ck gr ou n d, etc.). Th e a ssessm en t of tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess is m a in ly ba sed on th e
qu a lity of th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer,
ta k in g th e tea ch er com peten ce layer a n d
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer in to con sider a tion . Th er e m ay be feedba ck loops du r in g
a ssessm en t fr om th e la tter layer s to th e
for m er layer s.
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Figure 1
The struc ture o f to tal te ac he rs’ e ffe c tive ne ss
Te ac hing
Te ac he r
c o mpe te nc e
laye r
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Te ac he r
pe rfo rmanc e
laye r
Le arning
Stude nt
e xpe rie nc e
laye r
Stude nt
le arning
o utc o me s
laye r
Co gnitive do main
Affe c tive do main
Be havio ral do main
Individual le ve l
Gro up le ve l
Sc ho o l le ve l
Teac her development c yc le
Teac her development c yc le
Te ac he r
Stude nt
Exte rnal
Inte rnal
Pre -e xisting
Te ac hing Co nte xt
Te ac hing Co nte xt
Stude nt Charac te ristic s
(Adapted from Cheng and Tsui, 1 9 9 6 )
Units of research and research
strategies
Th e con ception of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
ca n pr ovide a power fu l fr a m ewor k for con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch a n d developin g r esea r ch
str a te gies. Sin ce th e con ception of tea ch er
effectiven ess is differ en t fr om tr a dition a l
th in k in g, th e im plica tion s a n d str a te gies
a dva n ced for r esea r ch m ay be m or e com pr eh en sive a n d soph istica ted.
As sh ow n in F igu r e 1, th e str u ctu r e of
tea ch er effectiven ess is com pr ised of fou r
layer s a n d ea ch layer cou ld be br ok en dow n
Table I
Example s o f re se arc h units: c e ll, array and laye r
Teacher competence
layer
A
B
C
I
G
S
X
Teacher performance Student learning
layer
experience layer
A
B
C
A
B
C
L1
Student learning
outcomes layer
A
B
C
L2
P
Note:
I: individual level; G: group level; S: sc hool level; A: affec tive domain; B: behavioral domain;
C: c ognitive domain; X: an example of a c ell; L1 and L2: two examples of a array;
P: an example of a layer
in to th r ee a r r ays. An d ea ch a r r ay cou ld be
fu r th er divided a s th r ee in dividu a l cells su ch
th a t th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e
is com posed of 36 differ en t cells. In Ta ble I,
som e exa m ples of cells, a r r ays, a n d layer s a r e
given . Cell X r epr esen ts a n in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s com peten ce in th e beh avior a l
dom a in . Ar r ay L1 r epr esen ts a n in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s per for m a n ce in a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s. Ar r ay L2 r epr esen ts th e beh avior a l lea r n in g exper ien ce of
stu den ts a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d sch ool
levels. Layer P r epr esen ts th e tota l stu den ts’
edu ca tion a l ou tcom es in th r ee dom a in s a t
th r ee levels.
Th e cell u n it, a r r ay u n it, a n d layer u n it ca n
be u sed a s bu ildin g u n its to con ceptu a lize
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch a n d develop
r esea r ch str a te gies. Ba sed on a differ en t
ch oice of r esea r ch u n its, r esea r ch str a te gies
developed m ay be ver y differ en t a n d th eir
im plica tion s for pr a ctice a n d im pr ovem en t
m ay be ver y differ en t too.
F r om th e str u ctu r e in F igu r e 1 a n d th e
a bove r esea r ch u n its, th e str a te gies a dva n ced
for con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch ca n be cla ssified
a s th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies,
th e w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip, th e between layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies, a n d th e wh ole
str u ctu r e str a te gy.
[ 41 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Individual unit description
strategies
Th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies
r efer to r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on ly
on a descr iption of th e ch a r a cter istics of a n
in dividu a l u n it of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. Th ey ca n be fu r th er cla ssified
a s follow s:
The individual cells approach
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e ch a r a cter istics of
ch osen in dividu a l cells of th e tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy
pr ofession a l com m itm en t (i.e. a ffective
dom a in ) of in dividu a l tea ch er s (i.e. in dividu a l level) in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer. Or,
in a n oth er ca se, to iden tify th e cla ssr oom
m a n a gem en t sk ills (i.e. beh avior dom a in )
u sed by a gr ou p of E n glish la n gu a ge tea ch er s
(i.e. gr ou p level) in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce
layer.
The individual arrays approach
Th e r esea r ch descr ibes m a in ly th e ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l a r r ays of th e tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy
th e ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l tea ch er s’
a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce (i.e. th r ee dom a in s a t th e in dividu a l
level in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) is a
popu la r a r ea for tea ch er stu dy. For a n oth er
exa m ple, to investiga te th e pa tter n a n d sta n da r d of stu den ts’ m a th em a tics com pu ta tion
sk ills a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p (or cla ss), a n d
sch ool levels (i.e. beh avior a l dom a in a t th r ee
levels in th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer )
in a sa m ple of pr im a r y sch ools. Th is is a lso a
com m on topic in eva lu a tin g effectiven ess of
tea ch er s a n d sch ools.
The individual layers approach
Th e r esea r ch a im s a t descr ibin g th e ch a r a cter istics of th e in dividu a l layer in th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple,
to explor e th e over a ll ch a r a cter istics of th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer in clu din g th r ee
dom a in s a n d th r ee levels. Th e oth er layer s for
r esea r ch a r e th e tea ch er com peten ce layer,
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer, a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e layer.
In gen er a l, in dividu a l u n it descr iption
str a te gies pr ovide a system a tic w ay to
descr ibe cer ta in a spects of th e tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. However, th e fi n din gs of
stu dies ba sed on th ese str a te gies a r e often
su per ficia l, sim plistic, a n d fr a gm en ta r y
beca u se th ey on ly descr ibe cer ta in
ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l u n its a n d ign or e
or ga n ic r ela tion sh ips between dom a in s,
between levels, a n d between layer s in th e
[ 42 ]
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. Obviou sly,
th is k in d of stu dy does n ot con tr ibu te ver y
m u ch to th e u n der sta n din g of th e com plex
n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Within-layer relationship strategies
With in -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies r efer to
th e r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on r ela tion sh ips between u n its w ith in a n y on e layer
of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e.
Th ese str a te gies ca n be fu r th er cla ssified in to
th e follow in g k in ds:
The cell-cell approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ips
between sepa r a te cells in on e layer. For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip between job
sa tisfa ction a n d job effor t of in dividu a l tea ch er s (i.e. a ffective dom a in vs beh avior a l
dom a in a t th e in dividu a l tea ch er level, or, two
cells a t th e in dividu a l level of tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ). For a n oth er exa m ple, to explor e
th e r ela tion sh ip between in dividu a l tea ch er ’s
job beh avior a n d wh ole sch ool tea ch er s’
socia l beh avior a l n or m s (i.e. beh avior a l per for m a n ce a t in dividu a l level vs a t sch ool level
in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) is a typica l
topic in pa st or ga n iza tion a l clim a te stu dies
(Ash for th , 1985; Ch en g, 1986; Ha lpin , 1966).
The cell-array approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e a r r ay w ith in a n y
on e layer of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip between wh ole sch ool beh avior a l n or m s
(i.e. on e cell a t th e sch ool level) a n d in dividu a l tea ch er ’s a ffective, beh avior a l a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce (i.e. on e a r r ay a t th e in dividu a l level) (see F igu r e 2).
The array-array approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between two sepa r a te a r r ays w ith in on e layer.
For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip
between over a ll in dividu a l tea ch er per for m a n ce (i.e. on e a r r ay a t in dividu a l level) a n d
over a ll gr ou p per for m a n ce in th e a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s (i.e. on e
a r r ay a t gr ou p level) is on e typica l ca te gor y of
r esea r ch wh ich focu s often on th e in fl u en ce of
gr ou p dyn a m ics on tea ch er s’ job effectiven ess
(see F igu r e 3).
Inc luding c o nte xtual fac to rs in studying
re latio nships within laye r
As m en tion ed pr eviou sly, th er e a r e poten tia l
in fl u en ces fr om th e exter n a l a n d in ter n a l
tea ch in g en vir on m en ts a n d pr e-existin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics on th e tea ch in g a n d
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
lea r n in g pr ocesses. Th er efor e, ea ch of th e
a bove a ppr oa ch es to in vestiga tin g th e r ela tion sh ips w ith in layer s m ay a lso ta k e th ese
con textu a l in fl u en ces in to con sider a tion in
or der to deepen th e u n der sta n din g of h ow
th ese r ela tion sh ips a r e con tin gen t on differ en t con textu a l fa ctor s.
Figure 2
Within-laye r re latio nship strate gy: an e xample o f the c e ll-array appro ac h
within o ne laye r
C
B
B
S
A
I
A = Affec tive Domain, B = Behavioral Domain, C = Cognitive Domain
Figure 3
Within-laye r re latio nship strate gy: an e xample o f the array-array appro ac h
within o ne laye r
C
C
B
Between-layer relationship
strategies
Th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies
r efer to r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on
th e r ela tion sh ip between two r esea r ch u n its
th a t a r e on two differ en t layer s. If th e ch osen
two layer s a r e a dja cen t (e.g. tea ch er com peten ce layer a n d per for m a n ce layer ; or tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer a n d stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ; or stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer a n d lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ), th e r ela tion sh ip between two r esea r ch u n its to be
stu died m ay be per ceived a s a dir ect r ela tion sh ip. If th e ch osen two layer s a r e n ot a dja cen t,
th e r ela tion sh ip to be stu died m ay be per ceived a s a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip. For exa m ple, th e r ela tion sh ip between a tea ch er ’s
tea ch in g style (i.e. in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) a n d stu den ts’ feelin g of
in ter est in lea r n in g (i.e. in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ) m ay be a dir ect r ela tion sh ip. Bu t th a t between a tea ch er ’s a ca dem ic
qu a lifi ca tion (i.e. in th e tea ch er com peten ce
layer ) a n d stu den ts’ sa tisfa ction in lea r n in g
(i.e. in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer )
m ay be a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip.
Accor din g to th e ch oice of r esea r ch u n its on
layer s, th er e m ay be differ en t a ppr oa ch es to
con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch , a s follow s:
B
A
S
be im por ta n t wh en con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch
on tota l tea ch er effectiven ess.
A
I
A = Affec tive Domain, B = Behavioral Domain, C = Cognitive Domain
Com pa r ed w ith th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies, th e w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip
str a te gies seem to be m or e power fu l beca u se
th e stu dies ba sed on th ese str a te gies m ay
pr ovide m or e k n ow ledge a bou t th e r ela tion sh ip a m on g u n its of on e layer of th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. However,
th ese str a te gies wh ich focu s on on ly on e layer
yield r esea r ch fin din gs wh ich still h ave lim ita tion s for en h a n cin g tea ch er effectiven ess.
Th ey ca n n ot pr ovide a n y k n ow ledge a bou t
h ow tea ch er com peten ce a ffects tea ch er per for m a n ce, h ow tea ch er per for m a n ce in fl u en ces stu den ts’ lea r n in g exper ien ce, a n d h ow
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce r ela tes to lea r n in g ou tcom es. Th er efor e, ta k in g between layer r ela tion sh ip in to con sider a tion sh ou ld
The cell-cell approach between two layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between two cells on two sepa r a te layer s. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow in dividu a l tea ch er ’s
job com m itm en t (i.e. a cell in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to th e lea r n in g
a ttitu des of a gr ou p (cla ss) of stu den ts (i.e. a
cell in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ).
The cell-array approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch explor es th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e a r r ay on two sepa r a te layer s. For exa m ple, to stu dy h ow
in dividu a l tea ch er ’s job com m itm en t (i.e. a
cell) r ela tes to in dividu a l stu den t’s a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce in
lea r n in g a ctivities (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e stu den t lea r n in g per for m a n ce layer ).
The array-array approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e r ela tion sh ip
between two a r r ays on two sepa r a te layer s.
For exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a
gr ou p of m a th em a tics tea ch er s (i.e. a n a r r ay
[ 43 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to
th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a cla ss of stu den ts in lea r n in g
a ctivities (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e stu den t lea r n in g per for m a n ce layer ).
The cell-layer approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e sepa r a te layer. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s com m u n ica tion sk ills a ch ieved in a
tr a in in g cou r se (i.e. a cell in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer ) r ela tes to th e over a ll per for m a n ce of th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer. Obviou sly, th is is a lso a n exa m ple to
illu str a te th e in dir ect r ela tion sh ip between a
cell a n d a layer.
The array-layer approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e a r r ay a n d on e sepa r a te layer. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a gr ou p of
la n gu a ge tea ch er s (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to th e over a ll
a ch ievem en t of stu den ts a t th r ee levels in th e
th r ee dom a in s (i.e. th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ).
The layer-layer approach
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e over a ll r ela tion sh ip between two sepa r a te layer s. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e ch a r a cter istics of
th e wh ole tea ch er per for m a n ce layer r ela te to
th e over a ll a ch ievem en t of stu den ts a t th r ee
levels in th e th r ee dom a in s (i.e. th e stu den t
lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ).
Som e exa m ples of th e a bove a ppr oa ch es a r e
a lso illu str a ted in F igu r es 4 a n d 5. Com pa r a tively, th e fin din gs of a dir ect r ela tion sh ip
stu dy sh ou ld be m or e u sefu l th a n th ose of a n
in dir ect r ela tion sh ip stu dy beca u se th e
r esu lts of a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip stu dy m ay
be com plica ted by m iddle layer (s) existin g
between th e in vestiga ted layer s.
Inc luding the c o nte xtual fac to rs in
studying re latio nships be twe e n laye rs
As sh ow n in th e str u ctu r e of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess (F igu r e 1), th e exter n a l a n d
in ter n a l tea ch in g con texts a n d th e pr e-existin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics m ay h ave in fl u en ces on th e dir ect or in dir ect r ela tion sh ips
between layer s. Th er efor e, it is im por ta n t to
in clu de th ese con textu a l fa ctor s in r esea r ch
a n d in vestiga te h ow th ey m oder a te or in ter fer e w ith th e r ela tion sh ips between layer s. In
oth er wor ds, th e in clu sion of con textu a l fa ctor s in th e a bove a ppr oa ch es ca n deepen th e
[ 44 ]
u n der sta n din g of th e con tin gen t n a tu r e of
tea ch er effectiven ess.
Obviou sly, th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip
str a te gies a r e m or e power fu l th a n th e oth er
str a te gies beca u se stu dies ba sed on th ese
str a te gies ca n pr ovide m or e in for m a tion a n d
k n ow ledge a bou t th e lon gitu din a l r ela tion sh ips between com pon en ts of th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e, a s sh ow n in
F igu r e 1, a n d th e fin din gs ca n be m or e u sefu l
to en h a n cem en t of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Th er efor e, in tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch ,
th ese str a te gies sh ou ld be str on gly r ecom m en ded.
The whole structure strategy
In a ddition to th e a bove str a te gies, we m ay
a dopt th e wh ole str u ctu r e of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess to con ceptu a lize r esea r ch . Th is
is th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy wh ich ta k es
a ll th e layer s, a r r ays, a n d cells in to con sider a tion a n d ca n pr ovide a m or e com pr eh en sive
u n der sta n din g of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
in stea d of on ly con sider in g fr a gm en ta r y
r ela tion sh ips between sepa r a te u n its. Of
cou r se, sin ce it in volves so m a n y fa ctor s a n d
com pon en ts, it wou ld be qu ite difficu lt in
r esea r ch design pa r ticu la r ly in u sin g th e
qu a n tita tive a ppr oa ch . Th er efor e, ca se stu dy
or qu a lita tive m eth ods wou ld be pr efer a ble in
u sin g th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy to con du ct
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch .
Research on the concept of
congruence
Accor din g to th e con cept of con gr u en ce in
system s (Ch en g, 1996a ; N a dler a n d Tu sh m a n ,
1983), wh eth er tea ch er com peten ce is con gr u en t a cr oss th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s a n d a cr oss th e in dividu a l,
gr ou p, a n d sch ool levels (i.e. con gr u en ce
w ith in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer ) ca n
a ffect th e con tr ibu tion of th e tea ch er com peten ce layer to th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer.
Th e con gr u en ce a cr oss dom a in s r epr esen ts
th e exten t to wh ich a ffective com peten ce,
beh avior a l com peten ce, a n d cogn itive com peten ce of tea ch er s a r e m u tu a lly su ppor ted a n d
r ein for ced in con tr ibu tin g to tea ch er s’ a ction
a n d per for m a n ce. Th e con gr u en ce a cr oss
levels r epr esen ts th e exten t to wh ich th e
com peten ce of in dividu a l tea ch er s, gr ou ps of
tea ch er s, a n d wh ole sch ool tea ch er s is m u tu a lly su ppor ted a n d r ein for ced in con tr ibu tin g
to tea ch er s’ a ction a n d per for m a n ce. Ba sed
on th e con cept of con gr u en ce, th er e a r e som e
im por ta n t pr oposition s th a t ca n be tested in
th e r esea r ch on tea ch er effectiven ess pa r ticu la r ly by th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te-
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
gies a n d th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gies. Th ey
a r e listed, a s follow s:
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of tea ch er com peten ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d a cr oss levels, th e
m or e th e con tr ibu tion of th e tea ch er com peten ce layer to th e tea ch er per for m a n ce
layer.
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of tea ch er per for m a n ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d a cr oss levels
(i.e. con gr u en ce w ith in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ), th e m or e th e con tr ibu tion of
th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer to th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer.
Figure 4
Be twe e n-laye r re latio nship strate gy, e xample s o f dire c t re latio nships
Units on Teacher Competence Layer
Teacher Performance Layer
Ce ll-Ce ll Appro ac h
B
I
Ce ll-Array Appro ac h
C
B
C
A
I
G
Array-Array Appro ac h
C
C
B
B
A
I
In a ddition to testin g th ese pr oposition s,
stu dyin g h ow to en su r e con gr u en ce w ith in
th e tea ch er com peten ce layer, w ith in th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer, a n d w ith in th e
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer to br in g
a bou t tea ch er effectiven ess is a lso a n im por ta n t a r ea for r esea r ch . Th is con gr u en ce
a ppr oa ch is ver y differ en t fr om th e tr a dition a l r esea r ch th a t focu ses on ly on fr a gm en ta r y a n d over t a spects of tea ch er
per for m a n ce w ith ou t ta k in g tota lity a n d
con gr u en ce in to con sider a tion .
Conclusion
A
I
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d
a cr oss levels (i.e. con gr u en ce w ith in th e
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ), th e
m or e th e con tr ibu tion of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce layer to th e stu den t
lea r n in g ou tcom es layer.
A
S
A = Affe c tive Do main, B = Be havio ral Do main, C = Co gnitive Do main
I = Individual Le ve l, G = Gro up Le ve l, S = Sc ho o l Le ve l
To a gr ea t exten t, th e a bove str a te gies r epr esen t differ en t de gr ees of com plexity of
r esea r ch con ception . Com pa r a tively, th e
con ception com plexity of r esea r ch u n its
va r ies w ith th e cell a s th e lea st, th e a r r ay a s
th e secon d, a n d th e layer a s th e m ost com plex. Th e con ception com plexity of str a te gies
a lso follow s a h ier a r ch y w ith th e in dividu a l
u n it descr iption str a te gies a s th e lea st, th e
w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies a s th e
secon d, th e between -layer str a te gies a s th e
th ir d a n d th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy a s th e
m ost com plex. Obviou sly, in clu sion of th e
in ter n a l a n d exter n a l con texts a n d pr eexistin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics in to r esea r ch
w ill in cr ea se th e con ception com plexity of
ea ch str a te gy. F u r th er m or e, in clu sion of th e
con cept of con gr u en ce between dom a in s a n d
between levels in to r esea r ch w ill en r ich
r esea r ch con ception a n d su ppor t th eor y
developm en t to expla in h ow to en h a n ce
tea ch er effectiven ess. In or der to br in g a bou t
m ea n in gfu l fin din gs for im pr ovin g edu ca tion a l pr a ctice a n d en h a n cin g tea ch er effectiven ess, in evita bly m or e soph istica ted
r esea r ch con ception s a n d str a te gies a r e
n eeded. Th e str a te gies developed fr om th e
tota l tea ch er effectiven ess fr a m ewor k ca n
pr ovide a w ide r a n ge of a lter n a tives for
r esea r ch er s to con ceptu a lize th eir stu dy of
tea ch er effectiven ess a s well a s sch ool effectiven ess.
Hopefu lly, th e com in g edu ca tion a l r efor m s
ca n ben efi t fr om r esea r ch on tea ch er effectiven ess u sin g m or e soph istica ted a n d com pr eh en sive con ception str a te gies in both
loca l a n d in ter n a tion a l con texts.
[ 45 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Figure 5
Be twe e n-laye r re latio nship strate gy, e xample s o f dire c t re latio nships
Units on Teacher Competence Layer
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Teacher Performance Layer
Ce ll-Laye r Appro ac h
A
I
Array-Laye r Appro ac h
C
C
B
B
A
A
I
I
G
Laye r-Laye r Appro ac h
S
C
B
A
I
G
S
A = Affe c tive Do main, B = Be havio ral Do main, C = Co gnitive Do main
I = Individual Le ve l, G = Gro up Le ve l, S = Sc ho o l Le ve l
References
Ash for th , B.E . (1985), “Clim a te for m a tion : issu es
a n d exten sion s”, A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t
R eview , Vol. 10 N o. 4, pp. 837-47.
Ca r n e gie For u m on E du ca tion a n d th e E con om y’s
Ta sk For ce on Tea ch in g a s a P r ofession (1986),
[ 46 ]
A N a tion Prepa red : T ea ch ers for th e T w en tyfi rst Cen tu r y, N ew Yor k .
Ch en g, Y.C. (1986), “Sch ool effectiven ess a s r ela ted
to or ga n iza tion a l clim a te a n d lea der sh ip
style”, Ed u ca tion a l R esea rch J ou r n a l, Vol. 1,
pp. 86-94.
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Ch en g, Y.C. (1996a ), S ch ool Effectiv en ess a n d
S ch ool-b a sed Im prov em en t: A M ech a n ism for
Dev elopm en t, F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
Ch en g, Y.C. (1996b), T h e Pu rsu it of S ch ool Effectiv en ess: R esea rch , M a n a gem en t a n d Policy,
Th e Hon g Kon g In stitu te of E du ca tion a l
Resea r ch of th e Ch in ese Un iver sity of Hon g
Kon g, Hon g Kon g, pp. 1-244.
Ch en g, Y.C. a n d Tsu i, K.T. (1996), “Tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess: n ew con ception a n d im pr ovem en t”, In ter n a tion a l J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l
M a n a gem en t, Vol. 10 N o. 6, pp. 7-17.
Cooper, B.S. a n d Con ley, S.C. (1991), “F r om bla m e
to em power m en t: cr itica l issu es in th e
tea ch er wor k en vir on m en t”, in Con ley, S.C.
a n d Cooper, B.S. (E ds), T h e S ch ool a s a Work
En viron m en t: Im plica tion s for R efor m , Allyn
& Ba con , MA, pp. 2-16.
E du ca tion Com m ission (1992), R epor t N o. 5,
Gover n m en t P r in ter, Hon g Kon g.
E lliott J . (E d.) (1993), R econ stru ctin g T ea ch er
Ed u ca tion : T ea ch er Dev elopm en t, Th e F a lm er
P r ess, Lon don .
E lm or e, R.F. (1992), “Wh y r estr u ctu r in g a lon e
won ’t im pr ove tea ch in g”, Ed u ca tion a l L ea d er sh ip, Vol. 49 N o. 7, pp. 44-8.
Gideon se, H.D. et a l. (1991), Ca ptu r in g th e V ision :
R efl ection s of N CAT E’s R ed esign Fiv e Yea rs
A fter, Am er ica n Associa tion of Colle ges for
Tea ch er E du ca tion , Wa sh in gton , DC.
Gr a ce, G.R. a n d Law n , M. (E ds.) (1991), T ea ch er
S u pply a n d T ea ch er Qu a lity: Issu es for th e
1990s, Mu ltilin gu a l Ma tter s, Clevedon , PA.
Ha lpin , A.W. (1966), T h eor y a n d R esea rch in
A d m in istra tion , Ma cm illa n , N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ka r p, H.B. (1980), “Tea m bu ildin g fr om a Gesta lt
per spective”, in P feiffer, J .W. a n d J on es, J .E .
(E ds), T h e 1980 A n n u a l Ha n d b ook for Grou p
Fa cilita tors, Un iver sity Associa tes, Sa n Die go,
CA.
Kor m a n sk i, C.L. a n d Mozen ter, A. (1987), “A n ew
m odel of tea m bu ildin g: a tech n ology for
today a n d tom or r ow ”, in P feiffer, J .W. (E d.),
T h e 1987 A n n u a l: Dev elopin g Hu m a n
R esou rces, Un iver sity Associa tes, Sa n Die go,
CA.
N a dler, D.A. a n d Tu sh m a n , M.L. (1983), “A gen er a l
dia gn ostic m odel for or ga n iza tion a l beh avior :
a pplyin g a con gr u en ce per spective”, in Ha ck m a n , R.J . et a l. (E ds), Perspectiv es on B eh a vior
in Orga n iz a tion s, McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ru ssell, T. a n d Mu n by, H. (1992), “F r a m es of r eflection : a n in tr odu ction ”, in Ru ssell, T. a n d
Mu n by, H. (E ds), T ea ch ers a n d T ea ch in g: From
Cla ssroom to R efl ection , Th e F a lm er P r ess,
Lon don , pp. 1-8.
[ 47 ]
strategies
Yin Cheong Cheng
Ce ntre fo r Re se arc h and De ve lo pme nt, The Ho ng Ko ng Institute o f Educ atio n,
Ho ng Ko ng
Kwok Tung Tsui
Ce ntre fo r Re se arc h and De ve lo pme nt, The Ho ng Ko ng Institute o f Educ atio n,
Ho ng Ko ng
Based on the conception of
total teacher effectiveness,
aims to develop strategies for
conceptualizing teacher
effectiveness research. From
the new conception, the units
of research on teacher effectiveness are cell, array and
layer. The strategies
advanced for conceptualizing
research include the individual unit description strategies, the within-layer relationship strategies, the betweenlayer relationship strategies,
and the whole structure
strategy. Based on the conception strategies, teacher
effectiveness research can be
shifted from traditional simplistic one-dimensional conception to sophisticated
multidimensional conception
and can have various
research alternatives for
different research purposes
and contexts. Hopefully, these
strategies can provide a new
direction for studying and
improving teacher effectiveness in particular and school
effectiveness in general.
This article was adapted
from a paper presented at
the European Conference on
Educational Research held
in Seville, Spain, 24-28
September 1996
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [ 1998] 3 9 –4 7
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
In cu r r en t sch ool r efor m m ovem en ts in differ en t pa r ts of th e wor ld, th er e is a gr ea t
dem a n d for r esea r ch on tea ch in g, tea ch er s,
a n d tea ch er edu ca tion w ith a n u n der sta n din g
th a t tea ch er s a r e th e k ey elem en t for th e
su ccess of sch ool edu ca tion (Ca r n e gie For u m ,
1986; Cooper a n d Con ley, 1991; E du ca tion
Com m ission , 1992; Ru ssell a n d Mu n by, 1992).
In th e la st two deca des, in or der to im pr ove
th e per for m a n ce of tea ch er s, policym a k er s,
tea ch er tr a in in g in stitu tion s a n d sch ools, a
gr ea t n u m ber of in n ova tion s in tea ch in g
tech n iqu es, m eth odologies a n d su per vision
wer e design ed a n d im plem en ted. Alth ou gh a
h u ge a m ou n t of r esou r ces h a d been in vested
in to edu ca tion a l r efor m s in itia ted by a n u m ber of edu ca tion a l policies, th e per for m a n ce
of stu den ts a s a wh ole w a s declin in g a t a sign ifica n t r a te in Hon g Kon g a s well a s oth er
developed cou n tr ies in th e wor ld. Th e policy
m a k er s a n d th e pu blic be ga n to be aw a r e of
th e im por ta n ce of tea ch er per for m a n ce to
stu den ts’ edu ca tion a l ou tcom es a n d tr y to
m a k e policy effor ts for im pr ovin g tea ch er
qu a lity a n d effectiven ess (E du ca tion Com m ission , 1992; E lliott, 1993; Gr a ce a n d Law n ,
1991; Gideon se et a l., 1991).
Tr a dition a l con cepts of tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch focu s m a in ly on in dividu a l
tea ch er s, pa r ticu la r ly a bou t in str u ction in a
cla ssr oom con text, a n d ign or e th e com plexity
of th e sch ool or ga n iza tion a l en vir on m en t th a t
ca n in flu en ce th e r ole a n d per for m a n ce of
tea ch er s a t both in dividu a l a n d gr ou p levels.
In evita bly, th er e is a ser iou s con ceptu a l ba r r ier lim itin g th e effectiven ess of a n y sch ool
r efor m s developed for im pr ovin g edu ca tion
qu a lity a n d tea ch er effectiven ess in a ch a n gin g edu ca tion a l en vir on m en t.
Som e sch ola r s gr a du a lly fou n d th a t sch ool
r estr u ctu r in g a lon e wou ld n ot im pr ove tea ch in g (E lm or e, 1992). Th is is beca u se tea ch in g
ca n n ot be r edu ced to a few r ela tively str a igh tfor w a r d “gen er ic” a n d r obu st beh avior s
wh ich ca n be a pplied a cr oss differ en t su bjects
a n d differ en t gr ou ps of stu den ts in differ en t
sch ools. In sh or t, edu ca tor s, r esea r ch er s a n d
policy m a k er s m u st r eth in k a bou t h ow to
a cqu a in t sch ool m a n a gem en t w ith th e com plex tea ch in g pr ocess n eeded to im pr ove
tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g effects. In evita bly,
th er e is a n u r gen t n eed to u n der sta n d th e
com plex n a tu r e of sch ool pr ocesses a n d
tea ch er effectiven ess fr om a br oa der per spective a n d develop n ew m a n a gem en t str a te gies
to im pr ove th em if we w a n t to a ch ieve better
stu den ts’ lea r n in g ou tcom es (Ch en g, 1996a ,b).
Ba sed on Ch en g a n d Tsu i’s (1996) con ception
of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess, th is pa per a im s
to develop n ew str a te gies for con ceptu a lizin g
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch , th a t ca n fa cilita te m or e stu dies in th is a r ea a n d sh ift th em
fr om th e tr a dition a l sim plistic on e-dim en sion a l con ception to soph istica ted m u ltidim en sion a l con ception s. Hopefu lly, th ese
str a te gies ca n pr ovide a n ew dir ection for
stu dyin g a n d im pr ovin g tea ch er effectiven ess
in pa r ticu la r a n d sch ool effectiven ess in gen er a l.
Conceptual framework of total
teacher ef fectiveness
Ta k in g th e lim ita tion s of th e tr a dition a l con cepts in to con sider a tion , Ch en g a n d Tsu i
(1996) developed a n ew con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k
of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess th a t ca n be su m m a r ized a s follow s (plea se r efer to th e or igin a l a r ticle for th e deta il).
Levels of teacher effectiveness
In dividu a l tea ch er s, gr ou ps of tea ch er s, a n d
a ll tea ch er s a s a wh ole in th e sch ool r epr esen t
differ en t levels or or ga n iza tion a l u n its of
tea ch er s wh o ca n play differ en t r oles a n d
m a k e differ en t con tr ibu tion s to th e fu n ction in g of th e sch ool, in clu din g edu ca tion a l
pr ocesses a n d m a n a gem en t pr ocesses. Th er efor e th er e a r e th r ee levels of tea ch er effectiven ess in clu din g th e in dividu a l level, th e gr ou p
level, a n d th e sch ool level. In dividu a l-level
tea ch er effectiven ess r efer s to th e effectiven ess of in dividu a l tea ch er s in per for m in g
[ 39 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
th eir ow n a ssign ed ta sk s su ch a s tea ch in g in
cla ssr oom , eva lu a tin g stu den ts’ edu ca tion a l
ou tcom es, a n d m a n a gin g stu den ts in th eir
cla sses, etc. Th e tr a dition a l stu dies often
focu s on tea ch er effectiven ess a t th is level.
Gr ou p-level tea ch er effectiven ess r efer s to th e
effectiven ess of a gr ou p or tea m of tea ch er s in
per for m in g th eir gr ou p ta sk s a n d a ch ievin g
gr ou p objectives. To differ en t fu n ction a l
gr ou ps, th eir gr ou p ta sk s m ay be differ en t.
For exa m ple, disciplin e com m ittee, extr a cu r r icu la r a ctivities com m ittee, sta ff developm en t, scien ce su bjects pa n el, m a th em a tics
pa n el, a n d E n glish la n gu a ge pa n el a r e typica l
gr ou ps of tea ch er s. It is believed th a t th e
“syn er gy” of a gr ou p is poten tia lly gr ea ter
th a n th e su m of en er gy of its m em ber (Ka r p,
1980; Kor m a n sk i a n d Mozen ter, 1987). Sim ila r ly, tea ch er effectiven ess a t th e sch ool level
r efer s to th e effectiven ess of a ll tea ch er s a s a
wh ole in per for m in g sch ool a ctivities a n d
a ch ievin g sch ool a im s a n d objectives.
Recen tly, th e wh ole sch ool a ppr oa ch is
str on gly em ph a sized in stu den t gu ida n ce a n d
cou n sellin g or m or a l a n d civic edu ca tion . It
h olds th a t wh en a ll tea ch er s a ct con gr u en tly
a s a wh ole, th ey m ay h ave a better ch a n ce to
ch a n ge th e in ter n a l a n d exter n a l con str a in ts
a n d a ch ieve edu ca tion a l ta sk s. All th ese
a bove types of tea ch er effectiven ess a r e
im por ta n t in r esea r ch .
Domains of teacher effectiveness
In th e tea ch in g pr ocess, th e tea ch er ’s per for m a n ce in a ffective, cogn itive, a n d beh avior a l
dom a in s ca n dir ectly a ffect th e stu den ts’
lea r n in g pr ocess a n d th eir a ffective, cogn itive, a n d beh avior a l developm en t. Th er efor e,
th e con sider a tion of tea ch er effectiven ess
sh ou ld in clu de th e qu a lity of tea ch er com peten ce a n d tea ch er per for m a n ce in th ese
dom a in s a n d th eir effects on stu den ts’ developm en ts in th ese dom a in s.
Total teacher effectiveness
Ta k in g th e a bove th r ee dom a in s a n d th e th r ee
levels in to con sider a tion , th e n a tu r e a n d
ch a r a cter istics of tea ch er effectiven ess ca n be
stu died a t m u lti-levels a n d m u lti-dom a in s.
Th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess for in vestiga tin g th e com plica ted n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess is illu str a ted in F igu r e 1 (Ch en g a n d Tsu i, 1996).
Th is fr a m ewor k a ssu m es th a t tea ch er effectiven ess is in evita bly r ela ted to th e tea ch er ’s
tea ch in g pr ocess a n d th e stu den t’s lea r n in g
pr ocess. Th er efor e, th e con ception of tea ch er
effectiven ess in volves two im por ta n t ca tegor ies of a ctor s (tea ch er s a n d stu den ts) a t
th r ee differ en t levels (in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d
sch ool). Th e pr ocesses a n d effects of tea ch in g
a n d lea r n in g m ay h a ppen in th e beh avior,
[ 40 ]
a ffective, a n d cogn itive dom a in s of differ en t
a ctor s a t differ en t levels. Specifica lly, tea ch er
effectiven ess sh ou ld in volve th e beh avior a l,
a ffective, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a ll
tea ch er s a n d stu den ts a t in dividu a l, gr ou p,
a n d sch ool levels. Th is str u ctu r e of tea ch er
effectiven ess is differ en t fr om th e tr a dition a l
th in k in g th a t focu ses m a in ly on th e in dividu a l level of tea ch er or stu den t a n d ign or es th e
m u ltiplicity of per for m a n ce of tea ch er s a n d
stu den ts. Th e n ew con cept is ca lled tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess beca u se it ca n pr ovide a
h olistic pictu r e of th e n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Layers of teacher effectiveness
As sh ow n in F igu r e 1, tea ch er effectiven ess is
r ela ted to th e tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g pr ocess
involvin g th e tea ch er com peten ce layer,
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer, stu den t exper ien ce layer, a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e
layer. Th e tea ch er com peten ce layer is th e
tota l beh avior a l, a ffective, a n d cogn itive com peten ce of tea ch er s a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p,
a n d sch ool levels. Th is layer r epr esen ts th e
tota l sta tic qu a lity of tea ch er s. Th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer is th e tota l per for m a n ce of
tea ch er s in th e th r ee dom a in s a t th e th r ee
levels. It r epr esen ts th e dyn a m ic qu a lity of
tea ch er s in th e tea ch in g pr ocess. In a ddition ,
th e r ela tion sh ip between th ese two layer s ca n
be m oder a ted by th e in fl u en ce of th e exter n a l
tea ch in g con text (e.g. or ga n iza tion a l fa ctor s,
lea der sh ip, a n d sch ool en vir on m en t, etc.).
Th e stu den t exper ien ce layer r epr esen ts th e
tota l lea r n in g exper ien ce of stu den ts in th e
th r ee dom a in s a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d
sch ool levels. An d th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer r epr esen ts th e tota l lea r n in g
ou tcom es of stu den ts in th e th r ee dom a in s a t
th e th r ee levels. In gen er a l, th e qu a lity of th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer a s a wh ole h a s a
positive im pa ct on th e qu a lity of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce layer a n d th e la tter h a s a
positive r ela tion sh ip w ith th e qu a lity of th e
stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer. Aga in , th ese
r ela tion sh ips m ay be a ffected by th e ch a r a cter istics of th e in ter n a l tea ch in g con text
(in clu din g stu den t su bcu ltu r e, cla ssr oom
clim a te, stu den t a bility gr ou pin g, lea r n in g
en vir on m en t, etc.) a n d pr e-existin g stu den t
ch a r a cter istics (su ch a s IQ, fa m ily
ba ck gr ou n d, etc.). Th e a ssessm en t of tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess is m a in ly ba sed on th e
qu a lity of th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer,
ta k in g th e tea ch er com peten ce layer a n d
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer in to con sider a tion . Th er e m ay be feedba ck loops du r in g
a ssessm en t fr om th e la tter layer s to th e
for m er layer s.
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Figure 1
The struc ture o f to tal te ac he rs’ e ffe c tive ne ss
Te ac hing
Te ac he r
c o mpe te nc e
laye r
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Te ac he r
pe rfo rmanc e
laye r
Le arning
Stude nt
e xpe rie nc e
laye r
Stude nt
le arning
o utc o me s
laye r
Co gnitive do main
Affe c tive do main
Be havio ral do main
Individual le ve l
Gro up le ve l
Sc ho o l le ve l
Teac her development c yc le
Teac her development c yc le
Te ac he r
Stude nt
Exte rnal
Inte rnal
Pre -e xisting
Te ac hing Co nte xt
Te ac hing Co nte xt
Stude nt Charac te ristic s
(Adapted from Cheng and Tsui, 1 9 9 6 )
Units of research and research
strategies
Th e con ception of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
ca n pr ovide a power fu l fr a m ewor k for con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch a n d developin g r esea r ch
str a te gies. Sin ce th e con ception of tea ch er
effectiven ess is differ en t fr om tr a dition a l
th in k in g, th e im plica tion s a n d str a te gies
a dva n ced for r esea r ch m ay be m or e com pr eh en sive a n d soph istica ted.
As sh ow n in F igu r e 1, th e str u ctu r e of
tea ch er effectiven ess is com pr ised of fou r
layer s a n d ea ch layer cou ld be br ok en dow n
Table I
Example s o f re se arc h units: c e ll, array and laye r
Teacher competence
layer
A
B
C
I
G
S
X
Teacher performance Student learning
layer
experience layer
A
B
C
A
B
C
L1
Student learning
outcomes layer
A
B
C
L2
P
Note:
I: individual level; G: group level; S: sc hool level; A: affec tive domain; B: behavioral domain;
C: c ognitive domain; X: an example of a c ell; L1 and L2: two examples of a array;
P: an example of a layer
in to th r ee a r r ays. An d ea ch a r r ay cou ld be
fu r th er divided a s th r ee in dividu a l cells su ch
th a t th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e
is com posed of 36 differ en t cells. In Ta ble I,
som e exa m ples of cells, a r r ays, a n d layer s a r e
given . Cell X r epr esen ts a n in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s com peten ce in th e beh avior a l
dom a in . Ar r ay L1 r epr esen ts a n in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s per for m a n ce in a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s. Ar r ay L2 r epr esen ts th e beh avior a l lea r n in g exper ien ce of
stu den ts a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p, a n d sch ool
levels. Layer P r epr esen ts th e tota l stu den ts’
edu ca tion a l ou tcom es in th r ee dom a in s a t
th r ee levels.
Th e cell u n it, a r r ay u n it, a n d layer u n it ca n
be u sed a s bu ildin g u n its to con ceptu a lize
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch a n d develop
r esea r ch str a te gies. Ba sed on a differ en t
ch oice of r esea r ch u n its, r esea r ch str a te gies
developed m ay be ver y differ en t a n d th eir
im plica tion s for pr a ctice a n d im pr ovem en t
m ay be ver y differ en t too.
F r om th e str u ctu r e in F igu r e 1 a n d th e
a bove r esea r ch u n its, th e str a te gies a dva n ced
for con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch ca n be cla ssified
a s th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies,
th e w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip, th e between layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies, a n d th e wh ole
str u ctu r e str a te gy.
[ 41 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Individual unit description
strategies
Th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies
r efer to r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on ly
on a descr iption of th e ch a r a cter istics of a n
in dividu a l u n it of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. Th ey ca n be fu r th er cla ssified
a s follow s:
The individual cells approach
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e ch a r a cter istics of
ch osen in dividu a l cells of th e tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy
pr ofession a l com m itm en t (i.e. a ffective
dom a in ) of in dividu a l tea ch er s (i.e. in dividu a l level) in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer. Or,
in a n oth er ca se, to iden tify th e cla ssr oom
m a n a gem en t sk ills (i.e. beh avior dom a in )
u sed by a gr ou p of E n glish la n gu a ge tea ch er s
(i.e. gr ou p level) in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce
layer.
The individual arrays approach
Th e r esea r ch descr ibes m a in ly th e ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l a r r ays of th e tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy
th e ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l tea ch er s’
a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce (i.e. th r ee dom a in s a t th e in dividu a l
level in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) is a
popu la r a r ea for tea ch er stu dy. For a n oth er
exa m ple, to investiga te th e pa tter n a n d sta n da r d of stu den ts’ m a th em a tics com pu ta tion
sk ills a t th e in dividu a l, gr ou p (or cla ss), a n d
sch ool levels (i.e. beh avior a l dom a in a t th r ee
levels in th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom es layer )
in a sa m ple of pr im a r y sch ools. Th is is a lso a
com m on topic in eva lu a tin g effectiven ess of
tea ch er s a n d sch ools.
The individual layers approach
Th e r esea r ch a im s a t descr ibin g th e ch a r a cter istics of th e in dividu a l layer in th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. For exa m ple,
to explor e th e over a ll ch a r a cter istics of th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer in clu din g th r ee
dom a in s a n d th r ee levels. Th e oth er layer s for
r esea r ch a r e th e tea ch er com peten ce layer,
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer, a n d stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e layer.
In gen er a l, in dividu a l u n it descr iption
str a te gies pr ovide a system a tic w ay to
descr ibe cer ta in a spects of th e tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. However, th e fi n din gs of
stu dies ba sed on th ese str a te gies a r e often
su per ficia l, sim plistic, a n d fr a gm en ta r y
beca u se th ey on ly descr ibe cer ta in
ch a r a cter istics of in dividu a l u n its a n d ign or e
or ga n ic r ela tion sh ips between dom a in s,
between levels, a n d between layer s in th e
[ 42 ]
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. Obviou sly,
th is k in d of stu dy does n ot con tr ibu te ver y
m u ch to th e u n der sta n din g of th e com plex
n a tu r e of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Within-layer relationship strategies
With in -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies r efer to
th e r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on r ela tion sh ips between u n its w ith in a n y on e layer
of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e.
Th ese str a te gies ca n be fu r th er cla ssified in to
th e follow in g k in ds:
The cell-cell approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ips
between sepa r a te cells in on e layer. For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip between job
sa tisfa ction a n d job effor t of in dividu a l tea ch er s (i.e. a ffective dom a in vs beh avior a l
dom a in a t th e in dividu a l tea ch er level, or, two
cells a t th e in dividu a l level of tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ). For a n oth er exa m ple, to explor e
th e r ela tion sh ip between in dividu a l tea ch er ’s
job beh avior a n d wh ole sch ool tea ch er s’
socia l beh avior a l n or m s (i.e. beh avior a l per for m a n ce a t in dividu a l level vs a t sch ool level
in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) is a typica l
topic in pa st or ga n iza tion a l clim a te stu dies
(Ash for th , 1985; Ch en g, 1986; Ha lpin , 1966).
The cell-array approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e a r r ay w ith in a n y
on e layer of th e tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
str u ctu r e. For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip between wh ole sch ool beh avior a l n or m s
(i.e. on e cell a t th e sch ool level) a n d in dividu a l tea ch er ’s a ffective, beh avior a l a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce (i.e. on e a r r ay a t th e in dividu a l level) (see F igu r e 2).
The array-array approach within one layer
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between two sepa r a te a r r ays w ith in on e layer.
For exa m ple, to stu dy th e r ela tion sh ip
between over a ll in dividu a l tea ch er per for m a n ce (i.e. on e a r r ay a t in dividu a l level) a n d
over a ll gr ou p per for m a n ce in th e a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s (i.e. on e
a r r ay a t gr ou p level) is on e typica l ca te gor y of
r esea r ch wh ich focu s often on th e in fl u en ce of
gr ou p dyn a m ics on tea ch er s’ job effectiven ess
(see F igu r e 3).
Inc luding c o nte xtual fac to rs in studying
re latio nships within laye r
As m en tion ed pr eviou sly, th er e a r e poten tia l
in fl u en ces fr om th e exter n a l a n d in ter n a l
tea ch in g en vir on m en ts a n d pr e-existin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics on th e tea ch in g a n d
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
lea r n in g pr ocesses. Th er efor e, ea ch of th e
a bove a ppr oa ch es to in vestiga tin g th e r ela tion sh ips w ith in layer s m ay a lso ta k e th ese
con textu a l in fl u en ces in to con sider a tion in
or der to deepen th e u n der sta n din g of h ow
th ese r ela tion sh ips a r e con tin gen t on differ en t con textu a l fa ctor s.
Figure 2
Within-laye r re latio nship strate gy: an e xample o f the c e ll-array appro ac h
within o ne laye r
C
B
B
S
A
I
A = Affec tive Domain, B = Behavioral Domain, C = Cognitive Domain
Figure 3
Within-laye r re latio nship strate gy: an e xample o f the array-array appro ac h
within o ne laye r
C
C
B
Between-layer relationship
strategies
Th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies
r efer to r esea r ch str a te gies wh ich focu s on
th e r ela tion sh ip between two r esea r ch u n its
th a t a r e on two differ en t layer s. If th e ch osen
two layer s a r e a dja cen t (e.g. tea ch er com peten ce layer a n d per for m a n ce layer ; or tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer a n d stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ; or stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer a n d lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ), th e r ela tion sh ip between two r esea r ch u n its to be
stu died m ay be per ceived a s a dir ect r ela tion sh ip. If th e ch osen two layer s a r e n ot a dja cen t,
th e r ela tion sh ip to be stu died m ay be per ceived a s a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip. For exa m ple, th e r ela tion sh ip between a tea ch er ’s
tea ch in g style (i.e. in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) a n d stu den ts’ feelin g of
in ter est in lea r n in g (i.e. in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ) m ay be a dir ect r ela tion sh ip. Bu t th a t between a tea ch er ’s a ca dem ic
qu a lifi ca tion (i.e. in th e tea ch er com peten ce
layer ) a n d stu den ts’ sa tisfa ction in lea r n in g
(i.e. in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer )
m ay be a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip.
Accor din g to th e ch oice of r esea r ch u n its on
layer s, th er e m ay be differ en t a ppr oa ch es to
con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch , a s follow s:
B
A
S
be im por ta n t wh en con ceptu a lizin g r esea r ch
on tota l tea ch er effectiven ess.
A
I
A = Affec tive Domain, B = Behavioral Domain, C = Cognitive Domain
Com pa r ed w ith th e in dividu a l u n it descr iption str a te gies, th e w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip
str a te gies seem to be m or e power fu l beca u se
th e stu dies ba sed on th ese str a te gies m ay
pr ovide m or e k n ow ledge a bou t th e r ela tion sh ip a m on g u n its of on e layer of th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e. However,
th ese str a te gies wh ich focu s on on ly on e layer
yield r esea r ch fin din gs wh ich still h ave lim ita tion s for en h a n cin g tea ch er effectiven ess.
Th ey ca n n ot pr ovide a n y k n ow ledge a bou t
h ow tea ch er com peten ce a ffects tea ch er per for m a n ce, h ow tea ch er per for m a n ce in fl u en ces stu den ts’ lea r n in g exper ien ce, a n d h ow
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce r ela tes to lea r n in g ou tcom es. Th er efor e, ta k in g between layer r ela tion sh ip in to con sider a tion sh ou ld
The cell-cell approach between two layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between two cells on two sepa r a te layer s. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow in dividu a l tea ch er ’s
job com m itm en t (i.e. a cell in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to th e lea r n in g
a ttitu des of a gr ou p (cla ss) of stu den ts (i.e. a
cell in th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ).
The cell-array approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch explor es th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e a r r ay on two sepa r a te layer s. For exa m ple, to stu dy h ow
in dividu a l tea ch er ’s job com m itm en t (i.e. a
cell) r ela tes to in dividu a l stu den t’s a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce in
lea r n in g a ctivities (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e stu den t lea r n in g per for m a n ce layer ).
The array-array approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch focu ses on th e r ela tion sh ip
between two a r r ays on two sepa r a te layer s.
For exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e a ffective,
beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a
gr ou p of m a th em a tics tea ch er s (i.e. a n a r r ay
[ 43 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to
th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a cla ss of stu den ts in lea r n in g
a ctivities (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e stu den t lea r n in g per for m a n ce layer ).
The cell-layer approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e cell a n d on e sepa r a te layer. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e in dividu a l
tea ch er ’s com m u n ica tion sk ills a ch ieved in a
tr a in in g cou r se (i.e. a cell in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer ) r ela tes to th e over a ll per for m a n ce of th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce
layer. Obviou sly, th is is a lso a n exa m ple to
illu str a te th e in dir ect r ela tion sh ip between a
cell a n d a layer.
The array-layer approach between two
layers
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e r ela tion sh ip
between on e a r r ay a n d on e sepa r a te layer. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive per for m a n ce of a gr ou p of
la n gu a ge tea ch er s (i.e. a n a r r ay in th e tea ch er
per for m a n ce layer ) r ela tes to th e over a ll
a ch ievem en t of stu den ts a t th r ee levels in th e
th r ee dom a in s (i.e. th e stu den t lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ).
The layer-layer approach
Th e r esea r ch in vestiga tes th e over a ll r ela tion sh ip between two sepa r a te layer s. For
exa m ple, to stu dy h ow th e ch a r a cter istics of
th e wh ole tea ch er per for m a n ce layer r ela te to
th e over a ll a ch ievem en t of stu den ts a t th r ee
levels in th e th r ee dom a in s (i.e. th e stu den t
lea r n in g ou tcom e layer ).
Som e exa m ples of th e a bove a ppr oa ch es a r e
a lso illu str a ted in F igu r es 4 a n d 5. Com pa r a tively, th e fin din gs of a dir ect r ela tion sh ip
stu dy sh ou ld be m or e u sefu l th a n th ose of a n
in dir ect r ela tion sh ip stu dy beca u se th e
r esu lts of a n in dir ect r ela tion sh ip stu dy m ay
be com plica ted by m iddle layer (s) existin g
between th e in vestiga ted layer s.
Inc luding the c o nte xtual fac to rs in
studying re latio nships be twe e n laye rs
As sh ow n in th e str u ctu r e of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess (F igu r e 1), th e exter n a l a n d
in ter n a l tea ch in g con texts a n d th e pr e-existin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics m ay h ave in fl u en ces on th e dir ect or in dir ect r ela tion sh ips
between layer s. Th er efor e, it is im por ta n t to
in clu de th ese con textu a l fa ctor s in r esea r ch
a n d in vestiga te h ow th ey m oder a te or in ter fer e w ith th e r ela tion sh ips between layer s. In
oth er wor ds, th e in clu sion of con textu a l fa ctor s in th e a bove a ppr oa ch es ca n deepen th e
[ 44 ]
u n der sta n din g of th e con tin gen t n a tu r e of
tea ch er effectiven ess.
Obviou sly, th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip
str a te gies a r e m or e power fu l th a n th e oth er
str a te gies beca u se stu dies ba sed on th ese
str a te gies ca n pr ovide m or e in for m a tion a n d
k n ow ledge a bou t th e lon gitu din a l r ela tion sh ips between com pon en ts of th e tota l
tea ch er effectiven ess str u ctu r e, a s sh ow n in
F igu r e 1, a n d th e fin din gs ca n be m or e u sefu l
to en h a n cem en t of tea ch er effectiven ess.
Th er efor e, in tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch ,
th ese str a te gies sh ou ld be str on gly r ecom m en ded.
The whole structure strategy
In a ddition to th e a bove str a te gies, we m ay
a dopt th e wh ole str u ctu r e of tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess to con ceptu a lize r esea r ch . Th is
is th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy wh ich ta k es
a ll th e layer s, a r r ays, a n d cells in to con sider a tion a n d ca n pr ovide a m or e com pr eh en sive
u n der sta n din g of tota l tea ch er effectiven ess
in stea d of on ly con sider in g fr a gm en ta r y
r ela tion sh ips between sepa r a te u n its. Of
cou r se, sin ce it in volves so m a n y fa ctor s a n d
com pon en ts, it wou ld be qu ite difficu lt in
r esea r ch design pa r ticu la r ly in u sin g th e
qu a n tita tive a ppr oa ch . Th er efor e, ca se stu dy
or qu a lita tive m eth ods wou ld be pr efer a ble in
u sin g th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy to con du ct
tea ch er effectiven ess r esea r ch .
Research on the concept of
congruence
Accor din g to th e con cept of con gr u en ce in
system s (Ch en g, 1996a ; N a dler a n d Tu sh m a n ,
1983), wh eth er tea ch er com peten ce is con gr u en t a cr oss th e a ffective, beh avior a l, a n d cogn itive dom a in s a n d a cr oss th e in dividu a l,
gr ou p, a n d sch ool levels (i.e. con gr u en ce
w ith in th e tea ch er com peten ce layer ) ca n
a ffect th e con tr ibu tion of th e tea ch er com peten ce layer to th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer.
Th e con gr u en ce a cr oss dom a in s r epr esen ts
th e exten t to wh ich a ffective com peten ce,
beh avior a l com peten ce, a n d cogn itive com peten ce of tea ch er s a r e m u tu a lly su ppor ted a n d
r ein for ced in con tr ibu tin g to tea ch er s’ a ction
a n d per for m a n ce. Th e con gr u en ce a cr oss
levels r epr esen ts th e exten t to wh ich th e
com peten ce of in dividu a l tea ch er s, gr ou ps of
tea ch er s, a n d wh ole sch ool tea ch er s is m u tu a lly su ppor ted a n d r ein for ced in con tr ibu tin g
to tea ch er s’ a ction a n d per for m a n ce. Ba sed
on th e con cept of con gr u en ce, th er e a r e som e
im por ta n t pr oposition s th a t ca n be tested in
th e r esea r ch on tea ch er effectiven ess pa r ticu la r ly by th e between -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te-
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
gies a n d th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gies. Th ey
a r e listed, a s follow s:
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of tea ch er com peten ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d a cr oss levels, th e
m or e th e con tr ibu tion of th e tea ch er com peten ce layer to th e tea ch er per for m a n ce
layer.
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of tea ch er per for m a n ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d a cr oss levels
(i.e. con gr u en ce w ith in th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer ), th e m or e th e con tr ibu tion of
th e tea ch er per for m a n ce layer to th e stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer.
Figure 4
Be twe e n-laye r re latio nship strate gy, e xample s o f dire c t re latio nships
Units on Teacher Competence Layer
Teacher Performance Layer
Ce ll-Ce ll Appro ac h
B
I
Ce ll-Array Appro ac h
C
B
C
A
I
G
Array-Array Appro ac h
C
C
B
B
A
I
In a ddition to testin g th ese pr oposition s,
stu dyin g h ow to en su r e con gr u en ce w ith in
th e tea ch er com peten ce layer, w ith in th e
tea ch er per for m a n ce layer, a n d w ith in th e
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer to br in g
a bou t tea ch er effectiven ess is a lso a n im por ta n t a r ea for r esea r ch . Th is con gr u en ce
a ppr oa ch is ver y differ en t fr om th e tr a dition a l r esea r ch th a t focu ses on ly on fr a gm en ta r y a n d over t a spects of tea ch er
per for m a n ce w ith ou t ta k in g tota lity a n d
con gr u en ce in to con sider a tion .
Conclusion
A
I
• Th e m or e th e con gr u en ce of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce a cr oss dom a in s a n d
a cr oss levels (i.e. con gr u en ce w ith in th e
stu den t lea r n in g exper ien ce layer ), th e
m or e th e con tr ibu tion of th e stu den t
lea r n in g exper ien ce layer to th e stu den t
lea r n in g ou tcom es layer.
A
S
A = Affe c tive Do main, B = Be havio ral Do main, C = Co gnitive Do main
I = Individual Le ve l, G = Gro up Le ve l, S = Sc ho o l Le ve l
To a gr ea t exten t, th e a bove str a te gies r epr esen t differ en t de gr ees of com plexity of
r esea r ch con ception . Com pa r a tively, th e
con ception com plexity of r esea r ch u n its
va r ies w ith th e cell a s th e lea st, th e a r r ay a s
th e secon d, a n d th e layer a s th e m ost com plex. Th e con ception com plexity of str a te gies
a lso follow s a h ier a r ch y w ith th e in dividu a l
u n it descr iption str a te gies a s th e lea st, th e
w ith in -layer r ela tion sh ip str a te gies a s th e
secon d, th e between -layer str a te gies a s th e
th ir d a n d th e wh ole str u ctu r e str a te gy a s th e
m ost com plex. Obviou sly, in clu sion of th e
in ter n a l a n d exter n a l con texts a n d pr eexistin g stu den t ch a r a cter istics in to r esea r ch
w ill in cr ea se th e con ception com plexity of
ea ch str a te gy. F u r th er m or e, in clu sion of th e
con cept of con gr u en ce between dom a in s a n d
between levels in to r esea r ch w ill en r ich
r esea r ch con ception a n d su ppor t th eor y
developm en t to expla in h ow to en h a n ce
tea ch er effectiven ess. In or der to br in g a bou t
m ea n in gfu l fin din gs for im pr ovin g edu ca tion a l pr a ctice a n d en h a n cin g tea ch er effectiven ess, in evita bly m or e soph istica ted
r esea r ch con ception s a n d str a te gies a r e
n eeded. Th e str a te gies developed fr om th e
tota l tea ch er effectiven ess fr a m ewor k ca n
pr ovide a w ide r a n ge of a lter n a tives for
r esea r ch er s to con ceptu a lize th eir stu dy of
tea ch er effectiven ess a s well a s sch ool effectiven ess.
Hopefu lly, th e com in g edu ca tion a l r efor m s
ca n ben efi t fr om r esea r ch on tea ch er effectiven ess u sin g m or e soph istica ted a n d com pr eh en sive con ception str a te gies in both
loca l a n d in ter n a tion a l con texts.
[ 45 ]
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Figure 5
Be twe e n-laye r re latio nship strate gy, e xample s o f dire c t re latio nships
Units on Teacher Competence Layer
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Teacher Performance Layer
Ce ll-Laye r Appro ac h
A
I
Array-Laye r Appro ac h
C
C
B
B
A
A
I
I
G
Laye r-Laye r Appro ac h
S
C
B
A
I
G
S
A = Affe c tive Do main, B = Be havio ral Do main, C = Co gnitive Do main
I = Individual Le ve l, G = Gro up Le ve l, S = Sc ho o l Le ve l
References
Ash for th , B.E . (1985), “Clim a te for m a tion : issu es
a n d exten sion s”, A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t
R eview , Vol. 10 N o. 4, pp. 837-47.
Ca r n e gie For u m on E du ca tion a n d th e E con om y’s
Ta sk For ce on Tea ch in g a s a P r ofession (1986),
[ 46 ]
A N a tion Prepa red : T ea ch ers for th e T w en tyfi rst Cen tu r y, N ew Yor k .
Ch en g, Y.C. (1986), “Sch ool effectiven ess a s r ela ted
to or ga n iza tion a l clim a te a n d lea der sh ip
style”, Ed u ca tion a l R esea rch J ou r n a l, Vol. 1,
pp. 86-94.
Yin Che o ng Che ng and
Kwo k Tung Tsui
Re se arc h o n to tal te ac he r
e ffe c tive ne ss: c o nc e ptio n
strate gie s
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 1 [1 9 9 8 ] 3 9 –4 7
Ch en g, Y.C. (1996a ), S ch ool Effectiv en ess a n d
S ch ool-b a sed Im prov em en t: A M ech a n ism for
Dev elopm en t, F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
Ch en g, Y.C. (1996b), T h e Pu rsu it of S ch ool Effectiv en ess: R esea rch , M a n a gem en t a n d Policy,
Th e Hon g Kon g In stitu te of E du ca tion a l
Resea r ch of th e Ch in ese Un iver sity of Hon g
Kon g, Hon g Kon g, pp. 1-244.
Ch en g, Y.C. a n d Tsu i, K.T. (1996), “Tota l tea ch er
effectiven ess: n ew con ception a n d im pr ovem en t”, In ter n a tion a l J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l
M a n a gem en t, Vol. 10 N o. 6, pp. 7-17.
Cooper, B.S. a n d Con ley, S.C. (1991), “F r om bla m e
to em power m en t: cr itica l issu es in th e
tea ch er wor k en vir on m en t”, in Con ley, S.C.
a n d Cooper, B.S. (E ds), T h e S ch ool a s a Work
En viron m en t: Im plica tion s for R efor m , Allyn
& Ba con , MA, pp. 2-16.
E du ca tion Com m ission (1992), R epor t N o. 5,
Gover n m en t P r in ter, Hon g Kon g.
E lliott J . (E d.) (1993), R econ stru ctin g T ea ch er
Ed u ca tion : T ea ch er Dev elopm en t, Th e F a lm er
P r ess, Lon don .
E lm or e, R.F. (1992), “Wh y r estr u ctu r in g a lon e
won ’t im pr ove tea ch in g”, Ed u ca tion a l L ea d er sh ip, Vol. 49 N o. 7, pp. 44-8.
Gideon se, H.D. et a l. (1991), Ca ptu r in g th e V ision :
R efl ection s of N CAT E’s R ed esign Fiv e Yea rs
A fter, Am er ica n Associa tion of Colle ges for
Tea ch er E du ca tion , Wa sh in gton , DC.
Gr a ce, G.R. a n d Law n , M. (E ds.) (1991), T ea ch er
S u pply a n d T ea ch er Qu a lity: Issu es for th e
1990s, Mu ltilin gu a l Ma tter s, Clevedon , PA.
Ha lpin , A.W. (1966), T h eor y a n d R esea rch in
A d m in istra tion , Ma cm illa n , N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ka r p, H.B. (1980), “Tea m bu ildin g fr om a Gesta lt
per spective”, in P feiffer, J .W. a n d J on es, J .E .
(E ds), T h e 1980 A n n u a l Ha n d b ook for Grou p
Fa cilita tors, Un iver sity Associa tes, Sa n Die go,
CA.
Kor m a n sk i, C.L. a n d Mozen ter, A. (1987), “A n ew
m odel of tea m bu ildin g: a tech n ology for
today a n d tom or r ow ”, in P feiffer, J .W. (E d.),
T h e 1987 A n n u a l: Dev elopin g Hu m a n
R esou rces, Un iver sity Associa tes, Sa n Die go,
CA.
N a dler, D.A. a n d Tu sh m a n , M.L. (1983), “A gen er a l
dia gn ostic m odel for or ga n iza tion a l beh avior :
a pplyin g a con gr u en ce per spective”, in Ha ck m a n , R.J . et a l. (E ds), Perspectiv es on B eh a vior
in Orga n iz a tion s, McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ru ssell, T. a n d Mu n by, H. (1992), “F r a m es of r eflection : a n in tr odu ction ”, in Ru ssell, T. a n d
Mu n by, H. (E ds), T ea ch ers a n d T ea ch in g: From
Cla ssroom to R efl ection , Th e F a lm er P r ess,
Lon don , pp. 1-8.
[ 47 ]