Pedagogical beliefs and classroom practices in East Asian countries: Within-country variation and instructional differentiation

• In Event: Curriculum and pedagogy

Proposal

*Background
Repeated success of East Asian students in international assessments has triggered international curiosity about education in East Asian countries. A recurring pattern in Asian secondary classrooms involved emphasis on whole-class instruction, procedural knowledge, and passive students (Rohlen 1983, Paine 1990, Stevenson and Lee 1995, Rohlen and LeTendre 1996); an environment that is in sharp contrast with what is believed to be conducive to learning in Western literature. Smaller scale studies have given various accounts on the mismatch between the prevalence of didactic instruction and the high achievement of Asian countries, providing us with a more contextualized understanding of the historical, social, and cultural value and meaning of the instructional practices prevalent in Asian classrooms (Watkins and Biggs 1996, Leung 2006, Mok 2006).
While scholars have started looking at between-classroom differences within Asian countries, there is still limited understanding about how instructional practices are distributed within these nations and whether exposure to different types of instruction is differentiated by student background.

*Conceptual framework
Substantial body of cross-national classroom research finds unique national cultural values to be the main factor that shapes schooling and instructional practices (Anderson et al. 1989; Tobin, Wu, and Davidson 1989; Stigler and Hiebert 1999; Alexander 2000; Anderson-Levitt 2002; Hiebert et al. 2003; Andrews 2007; Clarke and Xu 2008;). Within this context, the distinctive schooling patterns in high-achieving Asian countries are commonly attributed to their shared cultural and historical backgrounds, including Confucian cultural heritage (Leung 1995; Li 2002) or the long history of examination systems (Rohlen and LeTendre 1996; Zeng 2001; Wong 2004). Even with the worldwide spread of global models of student-centered and complex instruction (Bromley, Meyer, and Ramirez 2011a; Vavrus and Bartlett 2012; Schweisfurth 2013), classrooms in East Asian countries tend to remain largely teacher-centered and employ traditional forms of practices (Author 2018).
While much studies on East Asian classrooms have focused on national patterns, we know little about how classrooms practices differ across classrooms within the countries (see, for exception, Author 2018). We know even less about whether and how teaching is differentiated based on students’ family SES and achievement levels in East Asian countries. Much U.S.-based studies have shown the opportunity gap in access to different type of instructional practices. For example, studies find that teachers of low-performing students or those from low socioeconomic background tend to spend more time on procedural learning, while teachers of affluent or high-achieving students tend to present more complex material and emphasize problem-solving skills (Bodovski & Farkas, 2007; Desimone & Long, 2010). This study examines whether and how teaching is differentiated based on students’ family SES and achievement levels in East Asian countries, given their egalitarian and comprehensive school systems and cultural orientation toward instructional practices.
This study uses a nationally representative sample of teachers in Korea and Japan to examine how teachers’ beliefs and practices vary within the countries and how these beliefs and practices are related to the characteristics of the student body in the classroom. By doing so, this study is able to unearth educational assumptions that link certain instructional approaches to certain type of students.

*Data and Methods
This study uses the newest wave of the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2013. TALIS 2013 collected teacher and school surveys from 33 countries in their primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary schools. This study focuses on teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and preferred teaching strategies and examines to what extent teachers in two East Asian countries (Japan and Korea) differed from those in the other 33 nations.
Key variables were selected based on prior research on classrooms in East Asian countries. Four questions asked about teachers’ personal beliefs on teaching and learning : (a) my role is to facilitate students’ own inquiry, (b) students learn best by solving problems on their own, (c) students should be allowed to think of solutions before the teacher shows how they are solved, and (d) thinking and reasoning processes are more important than specific curriculum content. Questions that asked about teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs related to their instruction were included. They were asked to what extend they can do the following: (a) craft good question for students, (b) have students to think critically, (c) provide an alternative explanation for examples, and (d) implement alternative instructional strategies. Teachers were also asked how often they employ a list of instructional practices in their classrooms. I include six measures from the list: (a) present a summary of learned content, (b) have students work in small groups, (c) give different work to students by ability, (d) refer to problem from everyday life, (e) let students practice similar tasks, and (f) have students work on projects that require at least one week.
First, I examine the country means and within-country variations in instructional beliefs and practices in the two Asian countries compared to the other 32 non-Asian countries. Then, I focus on the Asian countries to investigate how teachers’ instructional approaches and beliefs vary by characteristics of the student body. Measures including school location (e.g., city, town, rural), school type, and classroom compositions related to student SES background, academic achievement, and academically gifted students are considered.

*Significance of the study
Preliminary findings show that teachers in Japan and Korea were the most likely among teachers in other nations to believe that students learn best by solving problems on their own and significantly more likely that others to believe that students should be allowed to think of solutions themselves before the teacher presents the solution. However, teachers in Japan and Korea tend to have significantly lower level of self-efficacy beliefs in helping students think critically or crafting good questions for the students.
More results on within-country variation of classroom instruction will be presented. These results will help unpack to what extent classroom practice correspond with social class or academic performance of students. Findings will help gain a more holistic understanding of classroom life and instructional practice in Asian countries and how educational beliefs and value may be reflected in differentiation of instructional practices. This contributes to previous literature that generally focused on gross national comparison of classroom instruction in Asian countries.

Author

• Yoonjeon Kim, University of California, Berkeley