Teacher clarity strategies of highly effective teachers

Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2019 Teacher Clarity Strategies of Highly Effective Teachers Megan Olivia Hall Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.edu/dissertations Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration Commons, and the Secondary Education and Teaching Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact ScholarWorks@waldenu. Walden University College of Education This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Megan Hall has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made.

Review Committee Dr. Cheri Toledo, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty Dr. Gladys Arome, Committee Member, Education Faculty Dr. Narjis Hyder, University Reviewer, Education Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.

Walden University 2019 Abstract Teacher Clarity Strategies of Highly Effective Teachers by Megan Olivia Hall MA, St. Catherine University, 2003 BA, Macalester College, 2000 Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education Specialization: Learning, Instruction, and Innovation Walden University May 2019 Abstract Teacher clarity supports both cognitive and affective learning for all learners. The scholarly literature lacks research related to teacher clarity in nonlecture learning environments. The purpose of this qualitative study was to discover teacher clarity strategies that effectively promote student learning, particularly in nonlecture learning environments.

The conceptual framework involved cognitive load theory and constructivism. The research questions explored how highly effective teachers experience clarity to promote student learning in nonlecture learning environments and what innovative strategies highly effective teachers practice to ensure clarity in nonlecture learning environments. For this in-depth qualitative interview study, data were collected through virtual synchronous focus groups and interviews with 10 State Teachers of the Year and State Teacher of the Year finalists and analyzed using manual and digital coding of emergent themes. Key nonlecture teacher clarity strategies discovered emphasized the importance of interaction, facilitation, and responsiveness through the establishment of safe and inclusive learning environments, active monitoring of student work and understanding, individualized application of strategic ambiguity, and utilization of technology tools.

Further research is recommended in strategic ambiguity, interaction through facilitation, safe and inclusive environments, and teacher clarity through technology tools. By contributing to the body of knowledge of educational practices that improve student learning, my study has the potential to empower individual teachers to benefit all learners, and to support organizations in delivering equitable instruction in diverse secondary school settings. Teacher Clarity Strategies of Highly Effective Teachers by Megan Olivia Hall MA, St. Catherine University, 2003 BA, Macalester College, 2000 Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education Specialization: Learning, Instruction, and Innovation Walden University May 2019 Dedication This study is dedicated to my children, Dylan and Rosalea, who shared me with the world of ideas for five long years; to my mother, Dr.

Lea Hall, who drew me a map to this world by earning her Ph. when I was a young girl; and to my husband, Leo, who made sure I had a nutritious lunch packed for every day of the journey. Acknowledgments With heartfelt gratitude, I would like to thank my fabulous dissertation committee: Dr. Cheri Toledo for her tireless academic and emotional coaching, Dr.

Gladys Arome for her dynamic methodology feedback, and Dr. Narjis Hyder for meticulous attention to detail. The incredible spirit of inquiry and collaboration at the National Network of State Teachers of the Year was foundational to this study, and I would like especially to thank NNSTOY staff members Katherine Basset, Laurie Calvert, Eric Isselhardt, Megan Allen, and Lauren Cantell for their warm encouragement and logistical support. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the 10 exemplary teachers who elevated my understanding of great teaching by sharing their experiences and expertise as participants in this study.

Table of Contents List of Tables. iv List of Figures. v Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study. 1 Background of the Study.

4 Purpose of the Study. 6 Nature of the Study. 9 Scope and Delimitations. 11 Significance of the Study.

14 Chapter 2: Literature Review. 18 Literature Search Strategy. 19 Teacher Clarity and Cognitive Learning. 34 i Teacher Clarity and Affective Learning.

40 Teacher Clarity and Race. 47 Teacher Clarity and Technology. 49 A Qualitative Approach to Teacher Clarity Research. 52 Chapter 3: Research Method.

54 Research Design and Rationale. 55 Phenomenon of Interest. 56 Role of the Researcher. 59 Participant Selection Logic.

63 Data Analysis Plan. 69 Issues of Trustworthiness. 80 Evidence of Trustworthiness. 141 Chapter 5: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations.

142 Interpretation of the Findings. 143 Limitations of the Study. 158 Appendix A: Interview Guide. 172 Appendix B: Background Information Survey Questions.

183 iii List of Tables Table 1. Alignment of Research Questions within Conceptual Framework. Professional Settings of Study Participants. Alignment of Research Questions with Conceptual Framework, Focus Group Questions, and Individual Interview Questions.

174 iv List of Figures Figure 1. Main research question and emergent themes. Research Question 1, Theme 1 (straightforward) with subthemes. Research Question 1, Theme 2 (efficient) with subthemes.

Research Question 1, Theme 3 (coherent) with subthemes. Research Question 1, Theme 4 (structured) with subthemes. Research Question 1, Theme 5 (interactive) with subthemes. Research Question 2, Theme 1 (cognitive learning) with subthemes.

Research Question 2, Theme 2 (affective learning) with subthemes. Research Question 2, Theme 3 (race, culture, and ethnicity) with subthemes. Research Question 2, Theme 4 (technology) with subthemes. 140 v 1 Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study Through in-depth qualitative interviews with State Teachers of the Year and State Teacher of the Year finalists, I explored teacher clarity strategies that effectively promote student learning, particularly in nonlecture learning environments.

Although quantitative research studies conducted through collegiate institutions have shown significant correlations between teacher clarity and student cognitive and affective learning, there have been very few studies addressing teacher clarity from qualitative perspectives or in K-12 or nonlecture learning environments (Titsworth, Mazer, Goodboy, Bolkan, & Myers, 2015). Because teacher clarity is an effective instructional approach for learners of diverse backgrounds (Arends, Winnaar, & Mosimege, 2017; Phuong, Nguyen, & Marie, 2017; Titsworth et al., 2015), discovery of teacher clarity practices has the potential to meet the needs of diverse learners in K-12 American public schools and empower teachers to meet high-stakes accountability measures. Chapter 1 is a description of the background, problem statement, and purpose of this study. The research questions are presented in alignment with the conceptual framework, which I developed from cognitive load theory and constructivism.

The qualitative nature of the study is outlined, followed by operational definitions of key concepts. The assumptions, scope and delimitations, and limitations are explained. The chapter concludes with an explanation of the significance of the study and its potential contributions to social change. 2 Background of the Study Teacher clarity is a well-established strategy for promoting student learning.

Early studies in teacher clarity recognized that “being clear and easy to understand” (Bush, Kennedy, & Cruikshank, 1977, p. 53) correlated positively with cognitive learning (Fendick, 1990; Rosenshine & Furst, 1971). Teacher clarity studies in the 1970s and 1980s developed a variety of metrics for assessing teacher clarity (Bolkan, 2017a; Bush at al., 1977; Chesebro & McCroskey, 1998; Kennedy, Cruickshank, Bush, & Myers, 1978; Mazer & Graham, 2015; Titsworth et al. Although a widely accepted operational definition of teacher clarity was not developed, researchers agreed that teacher clarity consisted of the communication behaviors necessary for effective content delivery in lecture settings (Mazer & Graham, 2015).

Eventually, the definition of teacher clarity expanded to include interaction between teachers and students. Researchers began to include interactive communication behaviors in teacher clarity studies, including eliciting and responding to student clarification questions (Civikly, 1992; Simonds, 1997). Researchers also expanded the concept of the type of material involved in teacher clarity. Instead of focusing solely on the course content, researchers began addressing process clarity, which involved clear and organized instruction around course processes and procedures (Simonds, 1997).

Building on the consensus that teacher clarity encompasses the strategies and approaches that instructors use to ensure that students master course content and processes (Bolkan, 2017a; Linvill & Crammer, 2017), Bolkan (2017a) described teacher clarity as straightforward, efficient, coherent, interactive, and structured instruction. 3 Teacher clarity literature provides strong and convincing testimony for the positive influence of teacher clarity. Teacher clarity may promote cognitive learning by reducing extrinsic cognitive load (Bolkan, 2016, 2017b), providing organization guidance (Bolkan, 2017b), and helping students connect new information to prior knowledge (Bolkan, Goodboy, & Kelsey, 2016). Teacher clarity may promote affective learning through interactions with teacher immediacy (Mazer, 2013; Titsworth et al.

Clear and organized instruction appears to be necessary for the success of complementary teaching strategies, especially those that initiate deeper learning (Blaich, Wise, Pascarella, & Roksa, 2016) and critical thinking (Loes & Pascarella, 2015; Wang, Pascarella, Laird, & Ribera, 2015). While the quantitative studies cited here proposed a number of mechanisms, little is known about how or why teacher clarity works. Very little qualitative teacher clarity research has been conducted. At present, there is also a gap in the scholarly literature for teacher clarity in nonlecture learning environments, with little research regarding teacher clarity in “novel learning situations involving extensive group work or other experiential learning activities” (Titsworth, et al.

I addressed these gaps by contributing a conceptual framework of educational practice based on qualitatively explored teacher clarity experiences of highly effective teachers. By discovering effective teacher clarity strategies for nonlecture learning environments, my study has the potential to empower teachers to facilitate improved cognitive and affective growth for diverse learners. 4 Problem Statement The problem related to this qualitative study is the lack of research related to teacher clarity in nonlecture learning environments. American public education seeks to promote learning for all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, gender, or race (Sampson & Horsford, 2017), while education systems hold teachers accountable for equitable student achievement outcomes that result in accountability pressure (von der Embse, Pendargast, Segool, Saeki, & Ryan, 2016).

It is this pressure that contributes to workload and stress crises, resulting in high teacher attrition across the country (Kelchtermans, 2017; Newberry & Allsop, 2017; von der Embse et al. Teachers need evidence of effective instructional strategies that they can apply independently in order to reach all students, regardless of school programming, administrative support, or funding streams (Blaich et al. One such strategy with the possibility of increasing teacher effectiveness is teacher clarity (Blaich et al., 2016; Bolkan, 2017a; Dozoby & Dalziel 2016; Loes & Pascarella, 2015; Titsworth et al. Teacher clarity is defined as the strategies and approaches that instructors use to ensure that students master course content and processes (Bolkan, 2017a; Linvill & Crammer, 2017).

Specifically, teacher clarity involves straightforward, efficient, coherent, interactive, and structured instruction (Boklan, 2017a). Teacher clarity supports both cognitive and affective learning (Titsworth et al. This significant, positive impact on student learning occurs across diverse cultural groups (Arends et al., 2017; Phuong et al., 2017; Powell & Harville, 1990; Titsworth et al. Teacher clarity can be learned (Simonds, 1997, p.

5 287), which provides an avenue for research that explores the experiences of teacher clarity that may contribute to educational practice. More research about teacher clarity is needed. In particular, there is a gap in the scholarly literature for teacher clarity in nonlecture learning environments (Titsworth, et al. I addressed this gap by contributing to a conceptual framework of educational practice based on qualitatively explored teacher clarity experiences of highly effective teachers.

This could empower teachers to independently elevate student learning, addressing, in part, the problem of teacher shortages brought about by accountability pressures.