A survey of the opinions of former students of Garnett College of Education (Technical) concerning their course of teacher training

The Vocational Aspect of Education ISSN: 0305-7879 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjve19 A survey of the opinions of former students of Garnett College of Education (Technical) concerning their course of teacher training D.I. McCallum To cite this article: D.I. McCallum (1974) A survey of the opinions of former students of Garnett College of Education (Technical) concerning their course of teacher training, The Vocational Aspect of Education, 26:64, 43-52, DOI: 10.1080/10408347308000291 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347308000291 Published online: 28 Feb 2007. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 209 View related articles Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalinformation?journalcode=rjve19 Download by: [37.44.207.102] Date: 30 November 2017, At: 08:47

The Vocational Aspect of Education (Summer 1974) Volume XXVl, No. 64, pp. 43-52 A Survey of the Opinions of Former Students of Garnett College of Education (Technical) Concerning their Course of Teacher Training" By D. I. McCALLUM Principal Lecturer in Education, Garnett College of Education (Technical) Introduction Colleges of Education are particularly vulnerable to criticism of the quality and relevance of the courses which they provide. Part of this vulnerability arises from the difficulties involved in evaluating the teaching performance of the teachers they train. Even if this performance could be evaluated it would be extremely difficult to assess the contribution which could be attributed to teacher training. A mediocre teacher may have derived considerable benefit from his training while, a gifted and successful colleague may have become so in spite of, rather than because of, a similar course. One way of circumventing some of the difficulties involved in evaluating the effectiveness of teacher training is to seek the opinions of recently qualified teachers regarding the effectiveness of the course in preparing them for their role as teachers. Such an enquiry may be criticized because there is no satisfactory way of validating items in a questionnaire which are intended to measure opinions concerning a range of subjects. In spite of these objections it was decided to undertake a survey of the attitudes of recently qualified teachers who had attended a course of training at Garnett College of Ec~ucation (Technical). The survey was undertaken because of apparent dissatisfaction with the course expressed * I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr I. Macfarlane Smith, Head of the ILEA Research Unit in Further Education, for his detailed and constructive advice, given at each stage of the work associated with this survey. at the time by a vocal section of the students' union, and it was hoped to find if this dissatisfaction was representative of the views of a majority of students. It was also considered that a knowledge of the opinions of former Garnett College students concerning their course of teacher training would be of value for the following reasons: (a) They could draw attention to features of the course which may need to be modified in the light of the needs of newly qualified teachers. (b) They could indicate features of the course which teachers have found to be of particular value and which should probably be retained or strengthened. (c) They could indicate attitudes developed during the course which may or may not be appropriate to the work of the College. It should be recognized that however widely some attitudes may be held among former students, this cannot be regarded as adequate grounds for the retention, rejection or modification of any aspects of the course. Decisions regarding course structure or content are, of course, matters for professional judgement, although it is important that they should be made in the light of information concerning the attitudes which may be engendered by the course. The questionnaire A copy of the questionnaire is included (Appendix I). Questions 2, 5, 6 and 8 incorporate material from questionnaires sent by the ILEA's Research

44 Student Opinion of Teacher Training and Statistics group to teachers on probation in the Authority's service during the academic years 1968-9, 1969-70, and 1970-1 as part era survey of professional opinion about current teacher training Ill. The sample Because the structure and content of the course is continuously evolving, it was decided to restrict the survey to the most recent year group. Consequenfly questionnaires were sent to all the past students of Garnett College who completed the course during the academic year 1970-I, less those for whom the addressee could not be traced (Table 1). A criticism frequently levelled against this type of survey is that the findings will be biased because those with unfavourable attitudes are less likely to complete and return the questionnaires. No complete answer can be made to this criticism since it would require a knowledge of responses which have not been made. Some indication of the possible relevance of this criticism to this survey may be gained by an examination of the responses made by teachers from different departments. For example 45 per cent of respondents from the Business Studies and Printing Department considered that the course prepared them 'not very well' for the role of teacher, compared with 2.8 per cent of the Engineering Department who responded in this way. It would be expected therefore that, if the response rate could be associated with attitude, there would be significant differences in the response rates from different departments. The hypothesis that there is no true difference in attitudes recorded by respondents from different departments was tested and rejected at the 0.1 per cent level of significance. No significant difference was found to exist between the response rates from different departments. Thus the response rates of teachers critical of the course and of those favourable to it are unlikely to differ significantly. Because the response rate, although within the range expected from a postal survey [2], was poorer than is desirable, the first 42 replies received from respondents who had taken the preservice course were analysed separately. Although these replies represented only 27 per cent of the preservice respondents, they included a disproportionately large proportion (43 per cent) of those who considered the course prepared them either 'not very well' or 'very badly'. In the light of these findings, taken together with the overwhelming proportions (84 per cent of preservice and 92 per cent of inservice) who responded favourably concerning their course of training it was considered that the additional expense and delay which would be incurred in any attempt to follow up non-respondents would not be justified. The overall percentages of pre-service trained and in-service trained respondents making each response have been tabulated in a copy of the questionnaire (Appendix 1). These responses were also analysed separately for each department. (Excluding replies from the clothing, food and print departments which were combined.) The replies from the pre-service trained respondents who considered that the course prepared them 'not very well' were also analysed separately. Opinions expressed about the course as a whole In response to the question 'On the whole, how well did the training course at Garnett College prepare you for your role as a teacher?' 84 per cent of pre-service and 92 per cent of the in-service students responded favourably. The proportion (15 per cent) of the unfavourable pre-service replies was considered large enough to justify their re-analysis. It would be unwise to draw firm conclusions from such a small number, nevertheless it is of interest to note that, of these 23 TABLE 1. Completed Questionnaires Business Prof Business Studies Secretarial Engineers Clothing and Allied Subjects, Food, General Science, Printing Studies Maths Total Preservice 22 19 36 21 33 22 153 (% response) (50) (49) (58) (64) (42) (46) (50) Inservice 4 7 9 10 7 5 42 (% response) (40) (54) (36) (62) (54) (62) (49)

D. I. McCALLUM 45 students, 17 came from the Business and Professional Studies and General Studies departments. 45 per cent and 21 per cent respectively of the respondents from these departments,gave unfavourable replies. The size of the unfavourable group was too small to permit clear inferences to be drawn concerning the relationship between age and attitude towards the course within each department. For the pre-service group as a whole there was no significant relationship between age and attitude to the course. A simple division of the students into those who had less than three years industrial experience and those who had more than three years indicates strongly that there is a positive relationship between industrial experience and a favourable attitude to the course. Of the students with less than three years industrial experience 31 per cent were unfavourable ~compared with 9 per cent of those with more than three years experience. The hypothesis that there is no relationship between industrial experience and attitude to the course among pre-service students can be rejected at the 1 per cent level of significance. The apparently conflicting statements that dissatisfaction with the course shows little relationship with age but is strongly associated with lack of industrial experience can be reconciled by an examination of the replies received from students previously in the Engineering Department. Among the engineers (from whom we received only one unfavourable reply) although 25 per cent were in the youngest age category, none of them had no industrial experience and only one had less than three years industrial experience. A similar, although less clear cut distribution is apparent in the replies from teachers of printing, clothing and food subjects. An examination of the replies received from teachers who considered that the course did not prepare them well indicates that their criticisms are directed fairly widely at a variety of aspects of the course and not mainly at work carried out within departments. This suggests that a prime cause of the differences in attitudes between departments lies with the students themselves rather than with particular features of departmental work. Opinions expressed about particular aspects of the course The responses to the following question have been presented diagrammatically: Ques 2 What degree of emphasis do you feel was placed on the aspects of your training listed on the left? Philosophy of education Educational psychology Social aspects of education History of education Comparative education Health education Special method Teaching practice Figure 1 (p. 46) shows a high level of agreement apparent in the attitudes of pre-service and inservice students with a strong indication of a conviction that there is too little emphasis on comparative education and special method. There is also a clear indication of a conviction that there is too little emphasis placed on health education and psychology and too much on philosophy and history. There is little indication of consistent differences in the responses to this question received from different departments. The group who felt that the course prepared them 'not very well' responded in a very similar way to the rest of the students, although a high percentage of their responses came in the 'too much' or 'too little' categories. Possible changes in the course Ques 3 What major changes, if any, would you like to see made in any two of the subject areas listed in question 2? Please be as specific as possible. Indicate the subject areas by means of the letters in brackets. Comments made in response to this question were frequently concerned with a number of different aspects of the work of the college and were therefore difficult to analyse. Some responses could be categorised and these are listed in Table 2. Some aspects of practical teaching 1. Discipline and classroom control Over half (57 per cent) of the pre-service respondents considered that training in discipline and classroom control was either 'not very helpful' or 'relevant but not included'. In some departments the percentage responding in this way was extremely large. (BS and P 77 per cent, Sc and M 68 per cent and Sec 68 per cent). A much smaller percentage of in-service respondents (12 per cent compared with 32 per cent) thought that the training was not very helpful, a large group (47 per cent) of them, however, considered that discipline and classroom control was 'relevant but not included'.

46 Student Opinion of Teacher Training Philosophy Psychology Social Aspects History Comparative Education Health Special Method Teaching Practice Fig. 1. P.S. I.S. P.S. I.S. P.S. 13. P.S. I.S. P.S. I.S. too little about right too much Rs. ~2 I.S. I)~i,5, 61.9 li ;;;~:~i i i i i i ii:~::!i~:!!!~: 28.6!i~] P.S. ItlI~;DIIIIIt IIIIII 57.7 I8:5' I.S. 1111i'9'.'5 73.8,7:iJ "'~llllll ] ' '... 62 1 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,~,~ -,: I Illl... 0,, i:io i l ~ii'" I 61.9 I ~ii~,iiii:~i:~:ii:~i!~iil P.S., ~i~1 45.8 I!iiiiiii i~ iiiii!ii iiiill ii;~i;~:~iiiiiii i!i47.iiii~ LS. I ~il 57. ~ li::,!~ii!i!iiiiii: iiiiiii~:~::~, i!iiiii35.7i~!i II[l~,z TABLE 2. Comments on the course I ~',~ i] Illl 1111~,(~,1111111111111 39.9 Iili~:51 liz ii i 60.8 ~ii~ 50.0 1:~ii18I- ~;~11111111 III 51.6 I~ii~1 I~.5.',o,';oilll[lliil II i 38.~ f,,,j-!~... ~'~ ;,, 74.5 1~3.3 111112 I ~!,~,, 69.0 l~,~ P.S. Pre-service students The Response of Students to particular aspects of the Course. I.S. In-service students Comment Pre-service In-service There should be a greater emphasis upon % % practical teaching or a closer relationship indicated between theory and practice 24.8 16.8 There should be less theory 7.8 2.4 There should be more theory 8.5 7.1 Some other change 42.5 59.5 No response 16.3 14.3

D. I. MeCALLUM 47 2. Preparation of materials An overwhelming majority (over 86 per cent) thought that this part of the course was either 'helpful' or 'very helpful', 10 per cent considered that it was 'not very helpful' and only one respondent considered it to be irrelevant. 3. Use of teaching aids Over 80 per cent of respondents found this either helpful, or very helpful. 4. Use of technical equipment associated with specialism A rather large minority (42 per cent and 38 per cent) considered this to be 'not very helpful' or 'relevant but not included'. A more disconcerting feature of the responses to this question is the large percentage, over half of students from Business and Professional, General Studies and Science and Mathematics departments who responded in this way. All the secretarial students who responded recognized that this aspect of the work had been included in the course, but 42 per cent of them found it to be 'not very helpful'. 5. Class organisation Well over half of the respondents found this to be helpful or very helpful. An interesting feature of the responses was the fact that 26 per cent of in-service students considered this to be an area of work which was relevant but not included. 6. Team teaching 53 per cent of pre-service and 71 per cent of in-service respondents considered this to be 'not very helpful' or 'relevant but not included'. Z Difficulties in present post Maintaining good discipline The problem of discipline presents some difficulty to just over one-third of pre-service respondents with a rather greater incidence (42 per cent and 48 per cent respectively) among engineers and Clothing, Food and Print department respondents. Maintaining student interest and motivation This aspect involves some difficulty for a considerable majority of respondents. Not surprisingly, the departments whose students report these difficulties most frequently are those whose students also have most difficulty in maintaining good discipline. 81 per cent of engineers and 71 per cent of clothing and allied subjects, food and printing respondents report some difficulty in maintaining the interest of their students and 80 per cent and 67 per cent of these departments report some difficulty in maintaining motivation. 79 per cent of respondents from the General Studies department also reported difficulty in maintaining student motivation. Maintaining students academic progress was recorded as offering some difficulty less frequently than the problems of maintaining either interest or motivation. Dealing with individual student problems This was felt to be the cause of some difficulty by 45 per cent of pre-service and 40 per cent of in-service respondents. Developing innovations in course content This was also felt to be the cause of some difficulty by 47 per cent of pre-service and 45 per cent of in-service respondents. Teaching methods advocated by tutor Teaching methods advocated by the tutor were thought to be appropriate by the overwhelming majority (84 per cent PS and 88 per cent IS) of respondents. (It is of interest to note that, of the respondents who considered the course prepared them 'not very well' for their present role, only 50 per cent considered that the methods advocated by their tutors were inappropriate). 41% of BS and P and 21 per cent of GS pre-service respondents considered that the methods advocated by their tutors were inappropriate. Teaching practice Almost as many pre-service respondents (18 per cent) thought that there was too much emphasis on the observation of the work of other teachers, as thought there was too little (20 per cent). It is perhaps surprising to find that one-third of the in-service respondents considered that there was too little emphasis upon this aspect of the work, compared with only 2.4 per cent (one respondent) who thought that there was too much. Rather large minorities (42 per cent and 31 per cent) thought that too little emphasis was placed on the observation of their own teaching by experienced teachers, smaller minorities (30 per cent and 24 per cent) thought similarly about observation by College staff. Of the students who thought that they were 'not very well' or 'very badly' prepared by the course 68 per cent and 45 per cent considered that there was too little observation of their teaching by 'experienced teachers' and College staff respectively. Comments Many questionnaires were returned with additional comments which either supplemented answers or referred to matters not dealt with in the question-

48 Student Opinion of Teacher Training naire. Many of the comments, particularly those in response to question 4, referred to aspects of the course met with by only a few students or they reflected the views of only a very small minority. Some of the comments which were thought to be representative of many more are included below: Pre-service students I found the course interesting and useful and realise that such a course cannot cater for everyone's needs, but I would have liked more emphasis on the 'concrete' and rather less on the 'abstract'. The course was quite well balanced up to about Easter when teaching practice finished but most students felt high and dry during the last term, not knowing what exactly was expected of them. On the whole I found the course most valuable..... A far greater emphasis should be placed on the vocational aspect... I did enjoy my last year at Garnett College even if this questionnaire does not reveal this fact. I had never taught before, yet felt confident enough to take up teaching as full-time employment after leaving the college. Most of the staff were very helpful and considerate and willing to advise and assist anybody at any time. In-service students Too much emphasis was placed on the theoretical aspects. Greater emphasis should be placed on actual teaching including teaching one's peers at Garnett. I gained much from watching other teachers and tutors' teaching methods..... I think I got most benefit from watching good teachers in action, and from seminars... More time should be given to watching other teachers at work and also for research into new methods. Summary and Conclusions A striking feature of this survey has been the close correspondence of the findings to those of the more extensive survey carried out by the ILEA's Research and Statistics group among school teachers [ 1 ]. Important differences are apparent in the attitudes towards those aspects of the course concerned with practical teaching. A greater percentage of Garnett College trained teachers found those aspects helpful compared with probationary school teachers. There were marked differences in the proportions of respondents from different departments who held favourable attitudes to the course. In contrast there were relatively few differences in the opinions expressed by pre-service and inservice students. An analysis of the replies received from 153 pre-service trained teachers and 42 in-service trained teachers led to the following conclusions: (1) The overwhelming majority (84 per cent of pre-service and 92 per cent of in-service respondents) considered that the course prepared them well for their role as teachers (2) There is a widespread belief among both in-service and pre-service trained teachers that more emphasis should be placed on aspects of the course directly related to practical teaching. (3) Half of the in-service and 41 per cent of pre-service trained teachers considered that there was too little emphasis on special method (4) There is a widespread opinion that the theoretical aspect of the course places too little emphasis on comparative education and health education. (5) There is some indication of a belief that too much emphasis is placed on philosophy and history and too little on psychology. (6) A disproportionately large percentage of respondents from some departments considered the course prepared them 'not very well'. The criticisms made by these respondents were not uniformly directed at specific areas of the work of the college. (7) Dissatisfaction shows little association with age but is inversely associated with industrial experience. (8) In-service students tend to have more favourable attitudes to the course than pre-service students. This survey has revealed a wide measure of support among newly qualified teachers for the type of teacher training course offered by Garnett College. It has also drawn attention to some of the difficulties involved in providing a course of training for people with diverse educational backgrounds. Indirectly it suggests that the outspoken criticism voiced by a section of students during their course in 1970-71 was not representative of the opinion of the majority, formed in the light of their teaching experience.

D. I. McCALLUM 49 References 1. Report No 1 (May 1971). Further and Higher 2. Oppenheim, A. N. (1966). Questionnaire design Education. Sub Committee, I.L.E.A., A ppendix, and attitude measurement, Heinemann Educapp. 45-54. tion Books Ltd., p. 34. Appendix 1. The Questionnaire The percentage of respondents in each category have been calculated (to the nearest 0.1%) and inserted. (pre-service and in-service figures in left and right hand columns respectively). A survey of the opinions of former Garnett College Students concerning the teacher training course Please read each question carefully and then place a tick in the appropriate box. 1. On the whole, how well did the training course at Garnett College prepare you for your role as a teacher? Very well 18.3 14.3 Quite well 43.8 57.1 Well 22.9 21.4 Not very well 14.4 7.1 Very badly 0.7 - If you wish to supplement your answer, please do so in the following space. 2. What degree of emphasis do you feel was placed on the aspects of your training listed on the left? Too much About right Too little (a) Philosophy of education 30.7 28.6 62.1 61.9 7.2 9.5 (b) Educationalpsychology 8.5 7.1 57.5 73.8 34 19.0 (c) Social aspects of education 10.5 21.4 64.7 61.9 24.8 16.7 (d) History of education 47.1 35.7 45.8 57.1 7.2 7.1 (e) Comparative education 10.5 7.1 39.9 26.2 49.7 66.7 (f) Health education 4.6 4.8 60.8 50.0 34.6 45.2 (g) Specialmethod 7.2 11.9 51.6 38.1 41.2 50.0 (h) Teaching practice 3.3 9.5 74.5 69.0 22.2 21.4 If you wish to supplement your answer, please do so in the following space. 3. What major changes, if any, would you like to see made in any two of the subject areas listed in question 2? Please be as specific as possible. Indicate the subject areas by means of the letters in brackets. Subject Area Change 1st choice... 2nd choice... 4. Please specify any important aspect of education which you think was omitted from the course.

50 Student Opinion of Teacher Training 5. In the light of your experience in the classroom, how helpful was your training in each of the skills listed in the left hand column? If you did not have training in some of these skills during the course, please indicate whether you think that the training was 'relevant but not included' or simply 'irrelevant'. Training No training Relevant Very Not very but not helpful Helpful helpful included Irrelevant Discipline and classroom control 3.3 2.4 Preparation of materials 30.7 28.6 Use of teaching aids 37.9 42.9 Use of technical equipment associated with specialism 9.8 16.7 Class organisation 13.1 9.5 Team teaching 5.2 2.4 32 26.2 32 11.9 25 47.6 7.2 11.9 55.6 59.5 10.5 7.1 2.6 4.8 0.7 0 42.5 42.9 18.3 9.5 1.3 4.8 0 0 37.9 38.1 26.1 28.6 16.3 9.5 9.8 7.1 43.8 45.2 29.4 11.9 13.1 26.2 0.7 7.1 38.6 21.4 41.2 59.5 11.8 11.9 3.3 4.8 6. Please indicate how much difficulty you are having in coping with the aspects of your job listed in the left hand column. Maintaining good discipline Maintaining student's interest Maintaining student motivation Maintaining student's academic progress Dealing with individual problem students Developing innovations in course content Much Some No Not difficulty difficulty difficulty relevant 4.6 0 32.7 16.7 58.2 83.3 4.6 0 3.3 0 60.1 52.4 35.9 47.6.7 5.2 0 66.7 56.5 28.1 40.5 0 0 3.3 2.4 48.4 40.5 39.9 52.4 8.5 4.8 5.9 4.8 39.2 35.7 45.8 57.1 9.2 2.4 12.4 9.5 34.6 35.7 35.3 47.6 7.6 7.2 7. How far do you think the methods of teaching advocated by your tutors at Garnett College were appropriate for your present job? Very appropriate 20.9 26.2 Appropriate 63.4 61.9 Inappropriate 15.7 11.9 If you wish to supplement your answer, please do so in the following space. 8. What degree of emphasis do you feel was placed on the aspects of teaching practice listed in the left hand column? Too About Too Not much right little relevant Observation of the work of other teachers 18.3 2.4 Observation of own teaching by experienced teachers 5.2 0 Observation of own teaching by Garnett College staff 3.9 4.8 Unsupervised teaching 17.6 7.1 60.8 35.7 20.3 33.3 0.7 28.6 46.4 40.5 41.8 31.0 6.5 28.6 65.4 69.0 30.1 23.8.7 2.4 60.8 40.5 17.0 9.5 4.6 42.9 9. How much full-time teaching experience have you had? (Include full-time experience gained before coming to Garnett College) Less than three terms 62.1 2.4 Three or more, but less than six terms 22.9 2.4 Six or more terms 15.0 95.2

D. I. McCALLUM 51 10. Indicate the Wpe of college or school in which you are teaching at present, and whether full-time or part-time. Full time Part time College of FE 27.5 26.2 2.0 4.8 Technical College 34.6 66.7 4.6 0 Polytechnic 3.9 1.7 0 School 17.0 2.4 1.3 None of these 8.5 If your answer to this question is 'none of these' please describe briefly the nature of your present appointment..................................................................................................................................................................................... 11. Indicate the level of teaching which occupies the greatest part of your timetable. Craft 20.3 21.4 Technician 13.7 19.0 'O' and 'A' level 35.9 23.8 1st year HNC or above 9.2 14.3 none of these 20.9 21.4 If your answer to this question is 'none of these' please described the level of your teaching. 12. which subject occupies the greatest part of your timetable? 13. what age were you on your last birthday? under 26 yrs. 30.7 0 26-35 37.9 31.0 36 or over 31.4 69.0 14. What is your sex? Male 60.1 76.2 Female 39.9 23.8 15. How much industrial or commercial experience did you have before attending Garnett College? None 9.2 7.1 less than 3 years 16.3 7.1 3-12 years 48.4 38.1 more than 12 years 26.1 47.6 16. Which department did you attend while at Garnett College? Business Studies (professional) 14.4 9.5 Business Studies (secretarial) 12.4 16.7 Engineering 23.5 21.4 Clothing & Allied subjects 13.7 23.8 Food studies 13.7 23.8 General studies 21.6 16.7 Printing 13.7 23.8 Science and Mathematics 14.4 11.9

52 Student Opinion of Teacher Training 17. If there are any additional comments which you would like to make about the course, you may make them in the following space. (Script received: December 19 73}