Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 4 no. 11 (2023)

An investigation of Teachers' Attitudes towards Low academic achievers: A perspective of Diagnostic Remedial Teaching at Federal Government Educational Institutions

Muhammad Sheer | Fawad Ullah | Luqman Hakeem

 

Abstract:

Quality teaching methods such as Diagnostic Remedial Teaching (DRT) and the positive attitude of teachers significantly enhance the academic achievement of the students. This study investigates whether traditional teaching methods and negative attitudes of teachers play any significant role in the poor performance of low academic achievements. The study's objectives were to determine teachers' attitudes toward low academic achievers, Diagnostic Remedial Teaching (DRT), and the problems involved in implementing DRT in the classrooms. The sample size covers 42 Federal Government Educational Institutes (FGEI) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, involving 230 teachers and 22 principals. Findings reveal that the teachers hold a positive attitude toward implementing Diagnostic Remedial teaching (DRT) in the classroom. Still, inadequate training and heavy workloads of the teachers were the primary challenges. In addition, their attitudes toward low academic achievers were positive. However, they held negative attitudes towards those students who enrolled in the institutes without qualifying for the admission test standard criteria.



References:

  1. Asonitou, S. (2015). Employability skills in higher education and the case of Greece. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 175, 283-290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9725-1
  2. Axelson, R. D., & Flick, A. (2010). Defining stu-dent engagement. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 43(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.533096
  3. Balwant, P. T. (2018). The meaning of student engagement and disengagement in the classroom context: Lessons from organi-sational behaviour. Journal of further and higher education, 42(3), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1281887
  4. Bowen, T. (2020). Work-Integrated Learning Placements and Remote Working: Expe-riential Learning Online. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(4), 377-386. (available through ERIC system)
  5. Burch, G. F., Heller, N. A., Burch, J. J., Freed, R., & Steed, S. A. (2015). Student engage-ment: Developing a conceptual frame-work and survey instrument. Journal of Education for Business, 90(4), 224-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2015.1019821
  6. Coates, H. (2007). A model of online and gen-eral campus‐based student engagement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Edu-cation, 32(2), 121-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801878
  7. Conrad, R. M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2012). Con-tinuing to engage the online learner: More activities and resources for creative instruction (Vol. 35). John Wiley & Sons.
  8. Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2020). Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Opportunities and challenges in emer-gency situations. Societies, 10(4), 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040086
  9. Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student en-gagement: What is it? Why does it mat-ter?. In Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 97-131). Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007 /978-1-4614-2018-7_5
  10. Fletcher, A. (2015). Defining student engage-ment: A literature review. Sound out: Promoting Meaningful Student Involve-ment, Student Voice and Student En-gagement. https://soundout.org/2015/03/29/defining-student-engagement-a-literature-review/
  11. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unob-servable variables and measurement er-ror. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  12. Freire, P. (1970a). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herter and Herter.
  13. Freire, P. (1970b). Cultural action and consci-entization. Harvard educational review, 40(3), 452-477. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.40.3.h76250x720j43175
  14. Gardner, M. E., Bodiya, E. C., & Subramanian, S. (2021). Remote learning barriers and op-portunities for graduate student and postdoctoral learners in career and pro-fessional skill development: a case study. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Educa-tion, 22(1), 10-1128. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2451
  15. Groccia, J. E. (2018). What is student engage-ment? New directions for teaching and learning, 2018(154), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20287
  16. Kitchenham, A. (2008). The evolution of John Mezirow's transformative learning theo-ry. Journal of transformative education, 6(2), 104-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344608322678
  17. Kock, N. (2015). WarpPLS 5.0 User Manual. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.
  18. Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of stu-dent engagement: Conceptual and empir-ical foundations. New directions for insti-tutional research, 141, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283
  19. Lin, L. C., Hung, I. C., Kinshuk, & Chen, N. S. (2019). The impact of student engage-ment on learning outcomes in a cyber-flipped course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 1573-1591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09698-9
  20. Luo, Qin, Lunchao Chen, Dongfang Yu, and Ke Zhang. "The Mediating Role of Learning Engagement Between Self-Efficacy and Academic Achievement Among Chinese College Students." Psychology Research and Behavior Management (2023): 1533-1543. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S401145
  21. Mezirow, J. (1978a) Education for Perspective Transformation: Women’s Re-entry Pro-grams in Community Colleges, New York: Teachers College, Columbia University (available through ERIC system).
  22. Mezirow, J. (1978b). Perspective transfor-mation. Adult education, 28(2), 100-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171367802800202
  23. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, 350 San-some Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310.
  24. Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New directions for adult and continuing education, 1997(74), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401
  25. Nienaber, H., & Martins, N. (2020). Explorato-ry study: Determine which dimensions enhance the levels of employee engage-ment to improve organisational effec-tiveness. The TQM Journal, 32(3), 475-495. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-05-2019-0151
  26. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
  27. Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psy-chometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  28. Roldán, J. L., & Sánchez-Franco, M. J. (2012). Variance-based structural equation mod-eling: Guidelines for using partial least squares in information systems research. In Research methodologies, innovations and philosophies in software systems en-gineering and information systems (pp. 193-221). IGI global.
  29. Salas Velasco, M. (2014). Do higher education institutions make a difference in compe-tence development? A model of compe-tence production at university. Higher Education, 68, 503-523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9725-1
  30. Slavich, G. M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2012). Trans-formational teaching: Theoretical under-pinnings, basic principles, and core methods. Educational psychology review, 24, 569-608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9199-6
  31. Vergara, R.A.G. (2022). Delivering A Trans-formational Learning Experience Online. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 3(12), 2726-2737. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.03.12.24
  32. Vergara, R.A.G. (2023a). Transformative learn-ing in the online classroom: A marketing educator’s autoethnographic account. In-ternational Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(7), 2444-2451. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.07.24
  33. Vergara, R.A.G. (2023b). The value of experi-ential lessons in event marketing educa-tion. Philippine Academy of Management E-Journal, 6(2), 66-75.
  34. Vergara, R.A.G., & Vergara, K.C.S (2023a). Learning Co-Creation and Self-Determination: Lessons from Teaching Event Marketing. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(7), 2566-2573. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.07.33
  35. Vergara, R.A.G., & Vergara, K.C.S. (2023b). Sto-rytelling in the Classroom: Why it Matters in Event Marketing Education. Interna-tional Journal of Multidisciplinary: Ap-plied Business and Education Research, 4(8), 2847-2852. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.08.22

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic