Home⇛DMMMSU Research and Extension Journal⇛vol. 4 no. 1 (2020)

Understanding the Pedagogical Dilemma Using the KAP (Knowledge, Attitude and Practice) Approach: “What Will You Use?”

Jomar L Aban

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The complex nature of the teaching and learning process implies tremendous diversity of teaching pedagogies. Using the KAP analysis, this study undermined the awareness, attitudes and utilization of the BSED (Bachelor in Secondary Education) educators in the four most commonly perceived teaching pedagogies in the tertiary level namely: lecture method, cooperative learning, inquiry-based learning, and learning with emphasis on communication skills. The respondents were highly aware of the three learner-centered pedagogy but was ironically moderately aware of the traditional lecture method. It was also recognized that BSED educators were highly engaged to the cooperative learning pedagogy, both in attitude and in practice. The KAP analysis was triangulated to come up with a synergistic educational pedagogy that can be used by the BSED educators in the tertiary level.



References:

  1. Aban, J. L., Abubo, R. P. & Sario, C. G. (2020). Knowledge, attitudes, and practices on the six common teaching strategies of tertiary level teachers and students: A brief cross sectional case report. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Studies, 15(2), 83-97.
  2. Amery, J., & Lapwood, S. (2004). A study into the educational needs of children's hospice doctors: a descriptive quantitative and qualitative survey. Palliative medicine, 18(8), 727-733.
  3. Amir, H. S., & Jakob, J. C. (2020). Male and Female Teachers’ Turn Taking Strategies in EFL Classroom Interaction. Available at SSRN 3559128.
  4. Andersen, M H. (2011). Knowledge, attitudes, and instructional practices of Michigan Community College Math Instructors: The Search for a KAP Gap in Collegiate Math. PhD Dissertation Western Michigan University.
  5. Ball, D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of teacher education, 51(3), 241-247.
  6. Baker, C. R. (2001). Role strain in male diploma nursing students: A descriptive quantitative study. Journal of Nursing Education, 40(8), 378-380.
  7.  
  8. Behr, A. L. (1988). Exploring the lecture method: An empirical study. Studies in Higher Education, 13(2), 189-200. doi.org/10.1080/03075078812331377866
  9. Bocquier, A., Verger, P., Basdevant, A., Andreotti, G., Baretge, J., Villani, P., & Paraponaris, A. (2005). Overweight and obesity: knowledge, attitudes, and practices of general practitioners in France. Obesity research, 13(4), 787-795.
  10. Covill, A. E. (2011). College students' perceptions of the traditional lecture method. College Student Journal, 45(1), 92-102.
  11. De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2007). Job insecurity in temporary versus permanent workers: Associations with attitudes, well-being, and behaviour. Work & Stress, 21(1), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370701229050
  12. Danaei, S. M., Zarshenas, L., Oshagh, M., & Khoda, S. M. O. (2011). Which method of teaching would be better; cooperative or lecture?. Iranian journal of medical education, 11(1).
  13. DiPiro, J. T. (2009). Why do we still lecture?. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(8). doi: 10.5688/aj7308137
  14. Fernandez, C. (2014). Knowledge base for teaching and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Some useful models and implications for teachers’ training. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 60, 79.
  15. Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of educational psychology, 101(3), 705.
  16. Goh, M. L., Ang, E. N., Chan, Y. H., He, H. G., & Vehviläinen-Julkunen, K. (2016). A descriptive quantitative study on multi-ethnic patient satisfaction with nursing care measured by the Revised Humane Caring Scale. Applied Nursing Research, 31, 126-131.
  17. Gudmundsdottir, S., & Shulman, L. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge in social studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 31(2), 59-70.
  18. Howey, K. R., & Grossman, P. L. (1989). A study in contrast: Sources of pedagogical content knowledge for secondary English. Journal of teacher education, 40(5), 24-31.
  19. Jiang, Y., Ong, M. K., Tong, E. K., Yang, Y., Nan, Y., Gan, Q., & Hu, T. W. (2007). Chinese physicians and their smoking knowledge, attitudes, and practices. American journal of preventive medicine, 33(1), 15-22.
  20. Johnson, B. (2001). Toward a new classification of nonexperimental quantitative research. Educational Researcher, 30(2), 3-13.
  21. Kahl Jr, D. H., & Venette, S. (2010). To lecture or let go: A comparative analysis of student speech outlines from teacher-centered and learner-centered classrooms. Communication Teacher, 24(3), 178-186.
  22. Kowalczuk-Walędziak, M., Lopes, A., Menezes, I., & Tormenta, N. (2017). Teachers pursuing a doctoral degree: motivations and perceived impact. Educational Research, 59(3), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2017.1345287
  23. Ladson‐Billings, G. (1995). But that's just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into practice, 34(3), 159-165.
  24. Laxman, T. S. (2017). Job Satisfaction and Occupational Stress among Permanent and Temporary School Teachers. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 4(2), 82-88.
  25. Li, G. (2012). Culturally contested pedagogy: Battles of literacy and schooling between mainstream teachers and Asian immigrant parents. Suny Press.
  26. Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting Active Learning. Strategies for the College Classroom. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
  27. Millot, B., & Lane, J. (2002). The efficient use of time in education. Education economics, 10(2), 209-228.
  28. Millstein, P., & Maya, A. (2001). An evaluation of occlusal contact marking indicators: A descriptive quantitative method. The Journal of the American Dental Association, 132(9), 1280-1286.
  29. Philip, T., & Garcia, A. (2013). The importance of still teaching the iGeneration: New technologies and the centrality of pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 300-319. doi.org/10.17763/haer.83.2.w221368g1554u158
  30. Raymond, A. M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning elementary school teacher's mathematics beliefs and teaching practice. Journal for research in mathematics education, 28(5), 550-576. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.28.5.0550
  31. Recena, M. C. P., Caldas, E. D., Pires, D. X., & Pontes, E. R. J. (2006). Pesticides exposure in Culturama, Brazil—knowledge, attitudes, and practices. Environmental Research, 102(2), 230-236.
  32. Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. (2009). Measuring teachers' pedagogical content knowledge in primary technology education. Research in Science & Technological Education, 27(3), 327-338.
  33. Schwartz, N. E. (1975). Nutritional knowledge, attitudes, and practices of high school graduates. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 66(1), 28-31.
  34. Slavin, R. E. (1999). Comprehensive approaches to cooperative learning. Theory into practice, 38(2), 74-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543835
  35. Taylor, M. (2010). Teaching generation next: A pedagogy for today’s learners. A collection of papers on self-study and institutional improvement, 3, 192-196.
  36. Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673-695.

Tools


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