Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19

David Nurenberg; Liana Tuller

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

| Peer-Reviewed

Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19

David Nurenberg, Liana Tuller

Published in International Journal of Education, Culture and Society (Volume 7, Issue 1)

Received: 21 February 2022 Published: 25 February 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020 forced a sudden and unexpected disruption of the usual modes of schooling around the world. In the United States, lack of federal, state and district leadership left most teachers to negotiate the chaotic early months of the pandemic on their own. This study attempted to discover to what extent some US teachers used this crisis as an opportunity to jettison traditional teaching methods in favor of more engaging, student-centered practices, and examined whether teacher self-efficacy and facility with technology were related to that decision. Analysis of survey data from PK-12 teachers (n=178) found a near-universal reduction in use of student-centered teaching methods (SCMs) during the onset of COVID-19, especially among teachers who reported higher self-efficacy before the crisis (age and experience were insulating factors). On average, greater self-confidence before COVID-19 was associated with a greater decrease in the use of SCMs during the crisis. While TSE during the crisis was positively correlated with use of student-centered methods, the direction of the influence between those two variables could not be determined. In our analysis, the data seem to better support the theory that use of SCMs builds a sense of efficacy, rather than the traditional understanding that it is high TSE that empowers a teacher to use innovative pedagogy, but more study is needed to strengthen that theory. Technology versatility was correlated weakly with TSE in the COVID Onset Period, but we found no evidence of any correlation between technology versatility and SCM usage. The authors recommend further exploration through surveying a wider population and adding data sources beyond teacher self-reports.

Published in	International Journal of Education, Culture and Society (Volume 7, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
Page(s)	52-62
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Pedagogy, Student-centered Methods, COVID-19, Teacher Self-efficacy

References

[1]	C. A. Francisco, “Understanding the US failure on coronavirus—an essay by Drew Altman”, 2020. bmj, 370, m3417.
[2]	P. Aubrecht, J. Essink, M. Kovac, and A. S. Vandenberghe. Centralized and decentralized responses to COVID-19 in federal systems: US and EU comparisons. Available at SSRN 3584182, 2020.
[3]	D. Nurenberg and S. Siegel. “Something doesn’t add up: Math teachers and student centered pedagogy.” In P. M. Jenlik, The Language of Mathematics: How the Teacher's Knowledge of Mathematics Affects Instruction. Rowman & Littlefield, 2020, pp. 83-113.
[4]	D. Newton, “Most teachers say they are “not prepared’ to teach online,” Forbes, 2020. https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton/2020/03/26/most-teachers-say-they-are-not-prepared-to-teach-online/#4a02da457f2c
[5]	B. Herold, “The scramble to move America’s schools online.” Education Week, 2020. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/03/26/the-scramble-to-move-americas-schools-online.html
[6]	J. Mehta & S. Fine, In search of deeper learning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2019, pp. 7.
[7]	M. Tschannen-Moran and A. W. Hoy, “Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 2001, 17 (7), 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
[8]	E. Dorn, B. Hancock, J. Sarakatsannis, and E. Viruleg, “COVID-19 and learning loss – disparities grow and children need help.” McKinsey & Company, 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-learning-loss-disparities-grow-and-students-need-help
[9]	H. Crompton, ISTE standards for educators: A guide for teachers and other professionals. International Society for Technology in Education, 2017, pp. 1.
[10]	P. Jablon and M. Nye, The synergy of inquiry: Engaging students in deep learning across the content areas. Shell Education, 2014.
[11]	R. Van der Veer and J. Valsiner, Understanding Vygotsky: A quest for synthesis. Blackwell Publishing, 1991.
[12]	J. Dewey, How we think. Henry Regnery, 1933.
[13]	A. J. Rotherham and D. Willingham, 21st century. Educational leadership, 2009, 67 (1), 16-21. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept09/vol67/num01/21st-Century-Skills@-The-Challenges-Ahead.aspx, para. 20.
[14]	J. T. Guthrie, A. Wigfield, & C. VonSecker, “Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 2000, 92 (2), pp. 331–341. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.331
[15]	Y. Nie and S. Lau, “Differential relations of constructivist and didactic instruction to students’ cognition, motivation, and achievement.” Learning and Instruction, 2010, 20 (5), pp. 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.04.002
[16]	M. Baeten, F. Dochy, & K. Struyven, “The effects of different learning environments on students’ motivation for learning and their achievement.” British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83 (3), pp. 484-501.
[17]	S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth, “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014, 111 (23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
[18]	M. Prince, “Does active learning work? A review of the research.” Journal of Engineering Education, 2004, 93 (3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
[19]	J. A. Lerner, Improving beginning teacher effectiveness: The most important and difficult competencies and how they differ in low-income schools. University of Denver, 2019. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1549. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/1549
[20]	L. Esdal, “Clearing policy barriers to student-centered learning: Recommendations for a more relevant, personalized, and equitable Minnesota education system.” Education Evolving, 2017.
[21]	G. Reinmann-Rothmeier and H. Mandl, “Teaching in adulthood: Concepts of teaching and learning, principles and methods.” In F. E. Weinert / H. Mandl (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology: psychology of adult education. Göttingen: Hogrefe, 1997, pp. 355-390.
[22]	M. Brooks and J. Brooks, “The courage to be constructivist.” The Constructivist Classroom, 1999, 57 (3), 18-24. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov99/vol57/num03/The-Courage-to-Be-Constructivist.aspx, para. 13-15.
[23]	A. Owens and G. L. Sunderman, “School accountability under NCLB: Aid or obstacle for measuring racial equity?” The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, 2006. https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/school-accountability-under-nclb-aid-or-obstacle-for-measuring-racial-equity/owens-school-accountability-under-nclb-2006.pdf
[24]	W. Au, “High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis.” Educational Researcher, 2007, 36 (5), pp. 258–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07306523
[25]	Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44 (3), 519–558. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207306859
[26]	C. Gewertz, “See which states have cancelled spring tests because of coronavirus.” Education Week, 2020. https://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teaching_now/2020/03/which_states_have_cancelled_spring_tests_because_of_coronavirus.html
[27]	D. St. George, “Letter grades get erased from school, with little consensus on how to replace them.” The Washington Post, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/montgomery-county-grades-coronavirus/2020/04/25/7bbfd8ce-7b3d-11ea-b6ff-597f170df8f8_story.html
[28]	K. Korb, S. Kulakow, and D. Raufelder, “Enjoyment benefits adolescents’ self-determined motivation in student-centered learning.” International Journal of Educational Research, 2020, 103, 101635.
[29]	D. Amor, P. Conroy-Oseguera, M. Cox, N. King, L. McDonnell, A. Pascal, E. Pauly, and G. Zellman, “Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority schools.” Santa Monica: Rand Corporation, 1976.
[30]	A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.” Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1977, pp. 191-215.
[31]	J. C. Richards, “Second language teacher education today.” RELC Journal, 2008, 39 (2), pp. 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092182
[32]	A. E. Woolfolk and W. K. Hoy, “Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 1990, 82 (1), pp. 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.81
[33]	M. Zee, and H. M. Y. Koomen, “Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research.” Review of Educational Research, 2016, 86 (4), pp. 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801
[34]	H. N. Perera, C. Calkins, and R. Part, “Teacher self-efficacy profiles: Determinants, outcomes, and generalizability across teaching level.” Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2019, 58, pp. 186–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.006
[35]	R. M. Klassen and M. M. Chiu, “Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress.” Journal of educational Psychology, 2010, 102 (3), pp. 741.
[36]	A. M. Sorrells, J. Schaller, and N. K. Yang, “Teacher efficacy ratings by African American and European American preservice teachers at a Historically Black University.” Urban Education, 2004, 39 (5), pp. 509–536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085904266917
[37]	Y. Nie, G. H. Tan, A. K. Liau, S. Lau, and B. L. Chua, “The roles of teacher efficacy in instructional innovation: Its predictive relations to constructivist and didactic instruction.” Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 2013, 12 (1), pp. 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-012-9128-y
[38]	G. Ghaith and H. Yaghi, “Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation.” Teaching and Teacher education, 1997, 13 (4), pp. 451-458.
[39]	Achurra, C., & Villardón, L. (2012). Teacher’s self-efficacy and student learning. The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences. PP. 367.
[40]	L. Prieto-Navarro, “La autoeficacia en el contexto académico.” Exploración bibliográfica comentada. University of Kentucky, 2003, https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/prieto.PDF
[41]	S. K. Khanshan and M. H. Yousefi, “The relationship between self-efficacy and instructional practice of in-service soft disciplines, hard disciplines and EFL teachers.” Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 2020, 5 (1), pp. 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-0080-8
[42]	J. Choi, J. H. Lee, and B. Kim, “How does learner-centered education affect teacher self-efficacy? The case of project-based learning in Korea.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 2019, 85, pp. 45-57.
[43]	N. Lee, S. Cawthon, and K. Dawson, “Elementary and secondary teacher self-efficacy for teaching and pedagogical conceptual change in a drama-based professional development program.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 2013, 30, pp. 84–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.10.010
[44]	R. C. Clark and R. E. Mayer, E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (Fourth edition). Wiley, 2016, pp. 7.
[45]	D. S. Knowlton, “A theoretical framework for the online classroom: A defense and delineation of a student-centered pedagogy,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2000 (84), pp. 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.841
[46]	R. M. Bernard, P. C. Abrami, E. Borokhovski, C. A. Wade, R. M. Tamim, M. A. Surkes, and E. C. Bethel, “A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education.” Review of Educational Research, 2009, 79 (3), pp. 1243–1289. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844
[47]	M. Niess, “Supporting instructors in redesigning online instruction toward student-centered, problem based learning.” In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 504-508). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 2019. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/207689/
[48]	F. Ouyang, Y.-H. Chang, C. Scharber, P. Jiao, and T. Huang, “Examining the instructor-student collaborative partnership in an online learning community course.” Instructional Science, 48 (2), 2020, pp. 183–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09507-4
[49]	C. Steel, “Fitting learning into life: Language students’ perspectives on benefits of using mobile apps.” In M. Brown, M. Hartnett, & T. Stewart (Eds.), Future challenges, sustainable futures (pp. 875-880). Wellington, 2012.
[50]	L. Sha, C.-K. Looi, W. Chen, and B. H. Zhang, B. H, “Understanding mobile learning from the perspective of self-regulated learning: Self-regulation in mobile learning.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2012, 28 (4), pp. 366–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00461.x
[51]	H. Morgan, “Best practices for implementing remote learning during a pandemic.” The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 2020, 93 (3), pp. 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2020.1751480
[52]	International Society for Technology in Education. (2019). Better edtech buying for educators: A practical guide.
[53]	R. J. Chen, “Investigating models for preservice teachers’ use of technology to support student-centered learning.” Computers & Education, 2010, 55 (1), pp. 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.015
[54]	L. Wozney, V. Venkatesh, and P. Abrami, “Implementing Computer Technologies: Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices.” Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2006, 14 (1), pp. 173–207.
[55]	P. Smith, P. Rudd, and M. Coghlan, M. Harnessing Technology Schools Survey 2008 [Data set], 2008.
[56]	S. Grand-Clement, Digital learning: Education and skills in the digital age. RAND Corporation, 2017, pp. 8.
[57]	C. Riegel, and Y. Tong, Educational Technology and Teacher Education Programs: A Geographic Information Systems Study. Teacher Education and Practice, 2017, 30 (4), pp. 662 – 682.
[58]	J. Greenberg, K. Walsh, and A. Mckee, “2014 teacher prep review: A review of the nation’s teacher preparation programs.” National Council on Teacher Quality, 2015. http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Teacher_Prep_Review_2014_Report
[59]	L. Black-Fuller, S. Taube, A. Koptelov, and S. Sullivan, S, “Smartphones and pedagogy: digital divide between high school teachers and secondary students.” US-China Educ Rev, 2016, 6 (2), pp. 124-31.
[60]	Hodges, C. B. (2008). Self-efficacy in the context of online learning environments: A review of the literature and directions for research. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20 (3–4), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.20001 pp.1
[61]	Hoy, A. W., & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and teacher education, 21 (4), 343-356. pp. 354.
[62]	S. M. Koziol, Jr., and P. Burns, The Journal of Educational Research Vol. 79, No. 4 (Mar. - Apr., 1986), pp. 205-209.
[63]	K. A. Korb, “Self-report questionnaires: Can they collect accurate information?” Journal of Educational Foundations, 2011, 1, pp. 5-12.
[64]	F. Liu, A. D. Ritzhaupt, K. Dawson, and A. E. Barron, “Explaining technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A multilevel path analysis model.” Educational Technology Research and Development, 2017, 65 (4), pp. 795-813.
[65]	C. Kiili, M. Kauppinen, J. Coiro, and J. Utriainen, “Measuring and supporting pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy towards computers, teaching, and technology integration.” Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 2016, 24 (4), pp. 443–469.
[66]	National Center for Education Statistics, Back to school statistics [Data set], 2019. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372
[67]	Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), 2019. “2018-2019 Race/Ethnicity and gender staffing report (district) by full-time equivalents.” Retrieved June 30, 2020, from http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/state_report/teacherbyracegender.aspx
[68]	National Center for Education Statistics, “Characteristics of public school teachers,” 2020. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_clr.asp

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

David Nurenberg, Liana Tuller. (2022). Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. International Journal of Education, Culture and Society, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

ACS Style

David Nurenberg; Liana Tuller. Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. Int. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2022, 7(1), 52-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

AMA Style

David Nurenberg, Liana Tuller. Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. Int J Educ Cult Soc. 2022;7(1):52-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18,
  author = {David Nurenberg and Liana Tuller},
  title = {Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19},
  journal = {International Journal of Education, Culture and Society},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {52-62},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  abstract = {The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020 forced a sudden and unexpected disruption of the usual modes of schooling around the world. In the United States, lack of federal, state and district leadership left most teachers to negotiate the chaotic early months of the pandemic on their own. This study attempted to discover to what extent some US teachers used this crisis as an opportunity to jettison traditional teaching methods in favor of more engaging, student-centered practices, and examined whether teacher self-efficacy and facility with technology were related to that decision. Analysis of survey data from PK-12 teachers (n=178) found a near-universal reduction in use of student-centered teaching methods (SCMs) during the onset of COVID-19, especially among teachers who reported higher self-efficacy before the crisis (age and experience were insulating factors). On average, greater self-confidence before COVID-19 was associated with a greater decrease in the use of SCMs during the crisis. While TSE during the crisis was positively correlated with use of student-centered methods, the direction of the influence between those two variables could not be determined. In our analysis, the data seem to better support the theory that use of SCMs builds a sense of efficacy, rather than the traditional understanding that it is high TSE that empowers a teacher to use innovative pedagogy, but more study is needed to strengthen that theory. Technology versatility was correlated weakly with TSE in the COVID Onset Period, but we found no evidence of any correlation between technology versatility and SCM usage. The authors recommend further exploration through surveying a wider population and adding data sources beyond teacher self-reports.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19
AU  - David Nurenberg
AU  - Liana Tuller
Y1  - 2022/02/25
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
T2  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JF  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JO  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
SP  - 52
EP  - 62
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3363
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
AB  - The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020 forced a sudden and unexpected disruption of the usual modes of schooling around the world. In the United States, lack of federal, state and district leadership left most teachers to negotiate the chaotic early months of the pandemic on their own. This study attempted to discover to what extent some US teachers used this crisis as an opportunity to jettison traditional teaching methods in favor of more engaging, student-centered practices, and examined whether teacher self-efficacy and facility with technology were related to that decision. Analysis of survey data from PK-12 teachers (n=178) found a near-universal reduction in use of student-centered teaching methods (SCMs) during the onset of COVID-19, especially among teachers who reported higher self-efficacy before the crisis (age and experience were insulating factors). On average, greater self-confidence before COVID-19 was associated with a greater decrease in the use of SCMs during the crisis. While TSE during the crisis was positively correlated with use of student-centered methods, the direction of the influence between those two variables could not be determined. In our analysis, the data seem to better support the theory that use of SCMs builds a sense of efficacy, rather than the traditional understanding that it is high TSE that empowers a teacher to use innovative pedagogy, but more study is needed to strengthen that theory. Technology versatility was correlated weakly with TSE in the COVID Onset Period, but we found no evidence of any correlation between technology versatility and SCM usage. The authors recommend further exploration through surveying a wider population and adding data sources beyond teacher self-reports.
VL  - 7
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

David Nurenberg

Graduate School of Education, Lesley University, Cambridge, USA
Liana Tuller

Brudnick Center on Violence and Conflict, Northeastern University, Boston, USA

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

David Nurenberg, Liana Tuller. (2022). Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. International Journal of Education, Culture and Society, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

ACS Style

David Nurenberg; Liana Tuller. Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. Int. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2022, 7(1), 52-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

AMA Style

David Nurenberg, Liana Tuller. Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19. Int J Educ Cult Soc. 2022;7(1):52-62. doi: 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18,
  author = {David Nurenberg and Liana Tuller},
  title = {Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19},
  journal = {International Journal of Education, Culture and Society},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {52-62},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijecs.20220701.18},
  abstract = {The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020 forced a sudden and unexpected disruption of the usual modes of schooling around the world. In the United States, lack of federal, state and district leadership left most teachers to negotiate the chaotic early months of the pandemic on their own. This study attempted to discover to what extent some US teachers used this crisis as an opportunity to jettison traditional teaching methods in favor of more engaging, student-centered practices, and examined whether teacher self-efficacy and facility with technology were related to that decision. Analysis of survey data from PK-12 teachers (n=178) found a near-universal reduction in use of student-centered teaching methods (SCMs) during the onset of COVID-19, especially among teachers who reported higher self-efficacy before the crisis (age and experience were insulating factors). On average, greater self-confidence before COVID-19 was associated with a greater decrease in the use of SCMs during the crisis. While TSE during the crisis was positively correlated with use of student-centered methods, the direction of the influence between those two variables could not be determined. In our analysis, the data seem to better support the theory that use of SCMs builds a sense of efficacy, rather than the traditional understanding that it is high TSE that empowers a teacher to use innovative pedagogy, but more study is needed to strengthen that theory. Technology versatility was correlated weakly with TSE in the COVID Onset Period, but we found no evidence of any correlation between technology versatility and SCM usage. The authors recommend further exploration through surveying a wider population and adding data sources beyond teacher self-reports.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Crisis as Opportunity to Try Something New: Student-Centered Pedagogy During the Onset of COVID-19
AU  - David Nurenberg
AU  - Liana Tuller
Y1  - 2022/02/25
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
T2  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JF  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
JO  - International Journal of Education, Culture and Society
SP  - 52
EP  - 62
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3363
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijecs.20220701.18
AB  - The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020 forced a sudden and unexpected disruption of the usual modes of schooling around the world. In the United States, lack of federal, state and district leadership left most teachers to negotiate the chaotic early months of the pandemic on their own. This study attempted to discover to what extent some US teachers used this crisis as an opportunity to jettison traditional teaching methods in favor of more engaging, student-centered practices, and examined whether teacher self-efficacy and facility with technology were related to that decision. Analysis of survey data from PK-12 teachers (n=178) found a near-universal reduction in use of student-centered teaching methods (SCMs) during the onset of COVID-19, especially among teachers who reported higher self-efficacy before the crisis (age and experience were insulating factors). On average, greater self-confidence before COVID-19 was associated with a greater decrease in the use of SCMs during the crisis. While TSE during the crisis was positively correlated with use of student-centered methods, the direction of the influence between those two variables could not be determined. In our analysis, the data seem to better support the theory that use of SCMs builds a sense of efficacy, rather than the traditional understanding that it is high TSE that empowers a teacher to use innovative pedagogy, but more study is needed to strengthen that theory. Technology versatility was correlated weakly with TSE in the COVID Onset Period, but we found no evidence of any correlation between technology versatility and SCM usage. The authors recommend further exploration through surveying a wider population and adding data sources beyond teacher self-reports.
VL  - 7
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download