What Hong Kong tertiary students say
about ‘effective teaching’
Winnie (Wong) JENKINS
Background and Objectives
In 1997, this writer, together with Mavis Kelly and Dan Pratt, collaborated on a UGC- funded research project entitled “Informing the Evaluation of Teaching: Does Culture Matter when Assessing Effective Teaching?” The project aimed at identifying conceptions of ‘effective’ teaching held by Hong Kong Chinese university undergraduate students and Hong Kong Chinese and Western expatriate university teachers. We then identified epistemic beliefs and social norms that must be considered when evaluating teaching effectiveness within the field of higher education in Hong Kong. Some of the major findings of the project have been published in the International Journal of Lifelong Education (Vol. 18, No. 4, July-August 1999, pp. 241-258).
Following article will focus on what Hong Kong tertiary students saw as ‘effective teaching’ and elaborate on other findings not yet reported. The purpose is to help our instructor-readers to perceive ‘effective teaching’ from their students’ perspectives since understanding this is a prerequisite for inducing change, both in students and instructors.
Methodology
An open-ended survey was administered to students from seven different departments at four universities, and four focus group discussions were held with students from different
The study took a qualitative approach in searching out emerging themes. Findings (Please click hyperlinks for full description.)
1. Students’ have two major orientations towards their university education. Half saw learning as an end itself and said that they would like to acquire knowledge (professional and generic knowledge) and develop related skills, without mentioning the application of acquired skills. The other half saw their university education as a means to achieve their goals. These were expressed as career-related, study-career-related, instrumental or social in nature.
2. Students mentioned nine broad categories of effective teaching behavior. These behavior categories reflected two dimensions of the teachers’ function—concern for the task and concern for people (students).
3. In the ‘task’ dimension, three discrete types of behavior were identified— knowledge transmission, knowledge application and knowledge construction. 4. In the ‘people’ dimension, three conceptions of care and concern were
experienced—available and approachable, friendly and helpful, mentoring/demanding.
5. There was a strong emphasis on the ‘people’ function by the focus groups who gave a variety of vivid examples of effective and ineffective teachers.
6. Half the student-respondents saw effective teachers as discrete types and half held more complicated conceptions of effective teaching. Some referred to the two aforementioned dimensions and others saw effective teaching behavior in a ‘stag-up’ hierarchy.
7. Students identified many aspects of people and things that would help them learn. These included:
a) Instructor’s effectiveness in teaching and attitude towards teaching b) Tutor’s effectiveness in helping students learn
c) Assignments d) Workload
e) Students’ effort, prior knowledge, abilities and attitude towards learning f) Peer learning
g) Effective communication of shared teaching-learning goals and values h) Students’ feedback to instructor’s teaching
i) Exam-driven learning and the backwash effect of continuous assessment j) Availability of elective subject and freedom of choice
k) Grant and loan and students working part-time l) Dormitory
m) Facilities
n) Sense of belonging
o) Family support
p) Impact of local university system
Discussion and questions for thought
Concluding remarks
Methodology
The project began with an open-ended survey of students. 405 copies of the survey questionnaire were distributed to second- and third-year students from seven different departments, spread over four Hong Kong universities. Responses were received from 98 per cent (n = 397) of the students.
The survey asked about three things: (1) the goals of undergraduate teaching and learning; (2) qualities of effective teachers; and (3) factors that contribute to effective teaching/learning. While analyzing our survey data we also began conducting a series of focus groups to help clarify and elaborate upon comments received in the surveys. Four groups were conducted with students from different universities, in Cantonese.
We exerted great care in data analysis since our survey data ranged from extended comments to brief, one- or two- word responses on each question. We avoided focusing too quickly on individual questions but moved from the part to the whole and returned to the part as we interpreted each person’s survey questionnaire. Only then did we cluster responses to
individual questions across respondents and looked for indications of how student-respondents conceptualized effective teaching.
Findings
Students’ orientations towards university education
In response to the Question “What are the main things you are trying to accomplish in your UG study?” 47% of the respondents mentioned that they would like to acquire knowledge and develop related skills. Typical answers were: “to improve understanding and mastery of
knowledge” or “to gain adequate knowledge about a discipline”. Students mentioned two major types of knowledge—discipline-related professional knowledge and ‘generic’ ‘wisdom’ such as problem solving, high order thinking and analytical skills, time management, and so on.
Male and female respondents answered alike.
To this group, learning seemed to be an end itself. There was no mention of how the acquired knowledge and skills were being used.
Another half (53%) saw their attending university as a means to achieve their second level goals, like “work in a particular discipline”(28%); “earn more money”(11%); “serve society” (4%) and “prepare them for further studies” (2%).
Effective teaching behavior
Students provided multiple answers to the survey questions on qualities of effective teaching. The nine broad categories of teachers’ behavior most frequently mentioned as “effective” were:
1. Effective Presentation/Delivery 64% 2. Motivate/stimulate interest among students 29% 3. Personality traits, e.g. enthusiasm, patience 28%
4. Preparation 26%
5. Care/Guide/Help students 24%
6. Knowledge 12%
7. Develop/stimulate students’ thinking 10%
8. Ensure understanding 7%
Two dimensions of teachers’ function
A thorough examination of the students’ responses to the questions (from both the survey and focus groups) showed that they were commenting on two distinctive dimensions of the teachers’ function—concern for the task and concern for people.
The “task” dimension could be sub-divided into three models that reflected different learning orientations: knowledge transmission, knowledge application and knowledge construction.
1. Knowledge transmission (KT)
Effective behavior included: good preparation (Cat. 4), organized presentation and effective explanations, complete handouts, accurate and up-to-date information, emphasis on important points, step-by-step teaching, (Cat. 1) with model answers, with exam guidelines, homework/exercises related to textbook, and teacher forced students to work/pay attention. (Cat. 8), clear orientation to content and unambiguous answers to students’ questions. Good language skills was also mentioned.
2. Knowledge application (KA)
Teachers were aware of students’ learning abilities and so adapted content to their level of understanding. They generated meaningful (to students) examples, analogies, metaphors, etc. to enhance learning and used a variety of media to stimulate interest. (Cat.2) They linked content to application and engaged students in activities that built understanding. They were knowledgeable in the subject matter with professional experience. (Cat. 6)
3. Knowledge construction (KC)
Teachers went beyond the syllabus and provided multiple perspectives on knowledge. They encouraged students to ask questions; stimulated thinking, discussion and intellectual curiosity. (Cat. 7) They appreciated students’ opinions and never imposed their own perspectives on students. They encouraged independent learning and made students take responsibility for their own learning.
The “people” dimension emerged with three conceptions of care and concern as experienced by students.
1. Available and approachable (AA)
Teachers were always available both inside and outside class for consultation. They were approachable and would provide help as needed. They also attended to students’ feedback and were fair to all students. They showed patience to students’ questions. (Cat. 8)
2. Friendly and helpful (FH)
Teachers took the initiative to build up a relationship with students. They were concerned about students’ progress, sensitive to students’ learning problems, and helped them with learning skills (Cat. 5). They were enthusiastic in their teaching “that makes me work hard in response”. They acted as role models for their students. (Cat. 2) 3. Mentoring/demanding (MD)
Teachers showed interest in students as individuals by engaging in personal-level conversations and interactions that included guidance, encouragement, support, challenge and inspiration. They were concerned with a student’s level of achievement and would go out of their way to contact the student to deal with a potential problem. Some mentors were friendly and open to their students while others could be stern and strict. Both set high standards for students and urged them to succeed. (Cat. 9) In both cases, students did feel the “heart” and “concern” of their teachers and acknowledged that their teachers were doing them good and were motivated to study hard.
Focus groups placed strong emphasis on the “people” function
It is surprising to find so many discussions on this topic and the richness of their content. Different types of “caring” teachers were discussed. However, many times, group respondents came out with elaborate examples of ineffective teacher-student relationships that had a profound impact on students’ learning. A question we raised was: why negative examples and not positive ones, since the discussion question was asking for examples of effective teachers?
Examples of teachers who cared about students:
a. An approachable and available (AA) instructor
“When he saw most of us were falling asleep, he would find something to chat with you. He would pick someone to laugh at, something like that...Because the subject he taught is quite boring. He taught math. Students are not interested in it. In computer science department, actually half of the courses are computer courses and the other half are math. Students usually spend not much effort on math. We can observe that he cares about his students. For instance, he sometimes asked some students about their opinions of the class ... the problems they find in the lectures. Or he picked those sitting in the front. Or the students asked him questions. He was willing to spend time explaining to students. Even sometimes he has meetings (with students) He is very democratic. We are only not allowed to say no exam.” (FGA001)
b. An available but not approachable instructor
“If you ask him questions, he is happy to answer. But, in terms of teacher-student relationship, I think it’s kind of hierarchical. He gives us the impression that he is a professor (up there)!” (FGA002)
c. A friendly and peer like instructor
“ Some of the students are very close with the lecturers. We can laugh at them or pat their shoulders. We are in such a close relationship. Of course, it depends on the
attitude of the lecturers towards teaching. Some lecturers care about themselves more than teaching. Some really want to teach us something or establish close relationships with students or try to understand the next generation.” (FGC002)
d. A helpful instructor
“I don’t have the background knowledge...He gives me something to read...They help me master the knowledge.” (FGC004)
e. A nurturing teacher
“In the first class, he asked us to write down our names. And he came up to each student to get to know each of us. ... he paid a lot of effort to remember our names. And he took photos with every group. He tried to recognize the students. I think he is very good...the feeling is he is really teaching the students. ...He respected students. He wanted to know us. He was teaching us knowledge. He was not the kind of teacher who leaves immediately after class. Because I felt he respected me and he tried to know me, I will spend more effort and time to study what he would be teaching. Our relationship was better. We were more willing to spend time on learning. Besides, he would ask...he was not just lecturing. He would ask us questions. He took initiative. He was caring towards his students. For example,...he would call your name to ask you if there was anything you didn’t understand. I felt very happy if he could remember and call my name. In university, it's different. With closer relationships, students were more open to ask him questions and so we learned more.” (FGD001)
f. A demanding teacher
“Compared to other professors, he set a heavier workload. And he is demanding. His assignments are good. Although they are difficult, I am willing to do them. After doing the assignments, I understand better.” (FGA002)
Examples of ineffective teachers:
a. A “soloist” teacher who did not care if students could understand
“It seems that he is singing on his own. He is a soloist. So... talking about ineffective teaching, I think those teaching without considering the difficulties and reactions of students are ineffective teachers. They continue to present all their handouts without caring if students understand or not. They aim to finish all the slides as soon as possible. I find it disgusting. They keep turning slides.
He pointed at a certain section and said you already understand this. Then, he turned to the next page and also said you understand this. We lost our motivation for
learning. Although sometimes the lecturers expected us to understand, they still need to go through it briefly. We often encounter this problem.” (FGA001)
b. A “self-talk” teacher who did not interact with students
“I think some lecturers just talk, talk and talk from the start of the lecture to its end without caring about the students. They seem to self-talk. I think it's hard to learn in this way. He reads the information on the transparencies word by word. Actually we can read by ourselves. There's no need to listen to him.” (FGA002)
c. An approachable teacher who lacked practical examples to arouse interest in the subject
“They are very boring. The teacher was only talking about the concepts without practical examples. I think that I had nothing to ask him. In addition, we had nothing to talk to him. I think there were not many students talking with him. We only asked him questions related to the textbooks.” (FGB002)
d. The teacher who rushed to finish the set syllabus
“We don’t have enough time for lectures. The teachers just cram the information into us. It’s difficult to establish a communicative relationship. Lectures. We have three
hours of lectures a week. But we are taught several chapters per week. The lecturers tell us the information. They don’t have time to talk about examples or other things. We don’t have time to communicate with each other. They won't pay attention to us. They keep rushing the syllabus.” (FGC001)
e. The Western teacher who was insensitive to the characteristics and needs of local students
“If some lecturers were brought up in American educational system, they were trained to be creative. They will expect students to be creative. They don’t know exactly the characteristics of Hong Kong students and their ways of studying...even if they want to do something in the first year, they won’t be able to achieve it (The respondent was talking about establishing a close relationship between teacher and students). Because they can’t achieve (it) in a short period of time. Some lecturers only know that we are young adults.
“It depends on whether they really want to understand Hong Kong students. If they know students are lazy...why students are so lazy...they can talk to the students to try to understand the sources of the problem...” (FGC003)
“He did not know the HK educational system. He didn’t know what we should learn and what we already know.” (FGD003)
f. De-motivating teaching
“They did not show any concern for their students. After they finished the lecture, they left immediately. They won’t pay any attention to students’ feedback. Their facial expression tells all. They don’t care whether students understand or not. They leave immediately after class. They just aim at finishing the slides. They won’t adjust the pace to match the students. They won’t teach step by step. They go on to another topic even if students haven’t mastered the earlier one. We are afraid of asking them
questions even if we know that we must find the answers. We don’t want to be scolded... (for failing to learn independently or successfully).(FGD001)
“Teaching is not their main goal. Their goal is on research” (FGD003) g. The teacher who said “don’t insult my intelligence”
“He asks us not to ask those questions, which would insult his intelligence. Don’t ask stupid questions. Don’t waste his time. If students did not prepare in advance, don’t go to ask him. I know it’s not good without preparation. But students sometimes really have stupid questions.
His reaction will scare off the students. You won’t have courage to ask him questions because we are afraid of being scolded. This lecturer is very famous in the
department. He...we.... We really felt being insulted by him. Once in a mid-term exam, the mean of our class was very low, around 30. After the exam, he was speaking foul language in front of all students in the lecture theatres for nearly a lesson...an hour... He meant we were very stupid. Some students were very unhappy about his behavior. Some students sent emails to him and argued with him. We said he could comment on our poor results in mid-term exam, but he couldn’t call us shit...The subject was difficult and we did not understand...” (FGD003)
h. A fantastic but cool teacher
“I have a lecturer who looks fantastic on the stage of the lecture theatre. But after class, he looks cool. He won’t say hello to students. He always eats alone in the coffee shop. He is horrible. I think he’s not enjoying himself. But when he lectures...he...we can feel his enthusiasm for his profession. He is knowledgeable. We think that he is smart in the field. He is willing to teach his students. He spent a lot of effort on teaching his knowledge to his students. He is a responsible teacher. But you don’t expect him to talk to students after class or to know his students.” (FGD003)
3 Different conceptions of teaching effectiveness
There were 3 different conceptions of effective teaching among student-respondents. The first group saw effective teachers in six discrete types as mentioned above.
For example, an effective teacher was one who
”provided clear lecture outline and reading guidelines. Bilingual, i.e. clear explanation. Discussion of assignment at tutorial. Tests.” (A003) (Teacher as an effective knowledge dispenser).
“she is so enthusiastic to teach students and she is helpful and willing to solve the academic problems.” (A017) (Teacher as a friendly helper.)
The second group saw effective teachers as those who were effective in both the “task” and “people” functions of a teacher. For example:
“This teacher is well-prepared before classes. He explains clearly and systematically. After class, he is happy to help us resolve problems, so as to help us to develop interest in the subject. He is funny and humorous. He can cultivate learning atmosphere.” (C042) (A KT + FH teacher.)
“She has worked very hard to make us understand her teaching. Her teaching is not boring. She has good knowledge in the modules she teaches. She teaches us lots of things that cannot be learned from textbook. She will scold us when we are lazy. But she will encourage us to do our best.” (A074) ( A KA + MD teacher.)
The third group depicted effective teaching as having three levels of competencies: effective Knowledge Transmission (KT) at the bottom, effective Knowledge Application (KA) in the middle and effective Knowledge Construction (KC) at the top level.
To this group, a teacher who was effective in Knowledge Application would be competent in most skills mentioned at the lower level, e.g. effective communication, step-by-step teaching, clear explanation, and so on. BUT it did not stop there. S/he would push students a step forward, to apply the newly acquired knowledge and skills in solving problems.
Students’ words:
“He uses simple English instead of technical terms in helping us to understand important principles. Besides, he always makes up interesting illustrations. His teaching is detailed and clear. He can help me take initiative in learning because his seminars provide us opportunities and time to understand some problems. For example, he gave us chances to think of an ideal government…”(L002, L003)
A teacher who was effective in helping his/her students to construct their knowledge would also be skillful in the repertoire of knowledge and skills mentioned at the two lower levels BUT again push the students ahead, reaching the higher level of learning mentioned in learning taxonomy.
Students’ words:
“To explain a difficult concept in a plain way, i.e. to use simple words to explain, not making any assumptions that we already possess some kind of relevant knowledge. Emphasize the main points very clearly and in an organized way. To be able to clarify the concepts we have doubts about. Encouraged me to think critically of some issues. Expressed his/her own opinions towards some controversial issues.” (L012)
Within the first group, the ratio between the “task” and “people” functions was 2.5:1. In other words, more respondents equated effective “task” function with effective teaching than those who saw effective “people” functions as effective teaching.
In brief, these findings concur with the observations of Kember and others that there is no universal standard of effective teaching. Different students have different conceptions of effective teaching. Then comes the question of whether students’ conceptions of effective teaching are related to their goals of university education. It is reasonable to assume that those teachers who help their students to meet their educational goals would be considered as “effective”. This would be another very interesting research topic to be pursued.
Major factors that help students learn
The fourth question in the study requested student-respondents to identify major factor(s) during the teaching-learning process that helped them learn. Different issues were raised. They could be grouped into seven broad categories and respective sub-categories:
Those related to the instructor and tutor
a) Instructor’s effectiveness in teaching and attitude towards teaching
There was a general understanding that an instructor’s attitude and competency in teaching had a significant effect on students’ learning. In the students’ opinion, instructors who focused their efforts on research were likely to ignore their teaching. Instructors who did not have local experience would be likely to teach out of context with examples irrelevant to Hong Kong students. Instructors who were stern and demanding, with effective communication and presentation skills, knowledgeable and smart, were mentioned as having a bearing on students’ learning. Those who provided effective notes and pinned their teaching on students’ level of learning were also effective. Others also mentioned an effective history teacher who helped students to understand the trend of historical development from a broader perspective rather than asking students to memorize the factual information. This teaching approach was highly recommended.
Teaching material was also mentioned. One raised the issue that all textbooks were “Western-oriented” with little information related to local context.
b) Tutor’s effectiveness in helping students learn
Effective tutors were “nice, willing to help students, don’t blame students for late (submission of their) assignments if students did take the effort to work on it” and “work hard in checking plagiarism”. Ineffective tutors would “ just collect a heap of copied assignments and count the numbers. “
c) Assignments and in-class presentations that helped learning
There was much discussion of the effectiveness of assignments. Some openly acknowledged that “Assignments put learning into practice... It is helpful in the learning process. Those difficult assignments can help us learn a lot.” Others opined that “lecturers should force the students to do the assignments”.
d) Workload
Although some claimed that “Workload is heavy, we enjoy” and “Assignments with pressing deadline is good training,” many others were venting their frustrations of the on-going pressure to hand in assignments, projects, sitting for mid-term, final exams and such. The tight schedule had left students “little time to think of what we have learnt,” or “enjoy their elective courses.”
Those related to students as learners
e) Students’ effort, prior knowledge, abilities and attitude towards learning
There was a strong voice emphasizing the students’ effort in learning.
“It is due to the effort of students...If you want to learn more, lecturers cannot give you a lot. The best students are usually interested in the course. They search for
information. They can learn a lot...they spent a lot of effort and time on reading reference books after class. Sometimes they learn from external sources...You have to
find ways to make yourself acquire the knowledge. You do not necessarily learn from the lecturers”… “we should work hard. Don’t put the blame on teachers. Don’t expect too much of teachers...Try our best to study our program.”
They pinpointed the importance of “initiative in learning” and provided a counter-argument to the claim of “Western-oriented texts” and “lecturers without local experiences” that “if you are smart, you can apply US cases to Hong Kong.”
However, the fact was acknowledged that many Hong Kong students lacked the skills to study actively since they were used to “lecture-type of teaching since primary school” and “can’t change once we are admitted to university”.
f) Peer learning, a strong plus to individual learning
Quotations from the groups:
“We often study and work together...we share ideas”; ”We learn a lot from each other”;
“We get one or two top students and ask them to explain the things that we don’t understand, we can then grasp the knowledge”;
“It’s reciprocal learning”;
“You need to talk and discuss and be criticized by classmates. In that process, the solutions suddenly come up...It is through trial and error. It can leave a deep impression.”
Those related to the Communication between instructor and student
g) Effective communication of shared teaching-learning goals and values
An interesting observation from the group-- instructor and students might have different objectives to be achieved in the same class. “The teachers have to tell the students what the objectives are in this course.” Some students found certain courses “useless” because they were not properly briefed about the usefulness of the courses and they did not know why they were made to study the courses.
Another observation was about the psychological distance between the advisor and his students. “I just received email messages from the department. But my advisor never contacts me. In normal fashion, I have no reason to contact him.”
h) Students’ feedback to instructor’s teaching
All respondents acknowledged that course-end evaluation soliciting students’ feedback towards teaching effectiveness was a common practice in universities. Some pointed out that mid-term evaluation was particularly useful to help lecturers to review their teaching. But others argued that course evaluation was ineffective since it was “only an outlet for you to say something and no one will take it seriously, no matter what you write.”
The power distance between instructor and students was perceived to be the major barrier to open and honest communication between the two on the issue of effective teaching. Both parties needed a lot of courage to handle this.
Those related to the Curriculum and school policies on course choices, assessment
i) Examination-driven learning and the backwash effect of continuous assessment
Student words: “When we spend all our effort on and attention to the exams, we won’t pay much attention to lecturers. Because we put revision for exams first...”
“I don’t understand why fill in the blanks format is used in exams.”
Both statements referred to the assessment of compartmentalized facts instead of integrated learning or application of learning.
j) Availability of “elective” subjects/courses and freedom of choice
Students mentioned the importance of an all-encompassing curriculum with a lot of choices so that students could really “explore subjects of interest.”
Those related to Institutional support and climate
k) Grant and loan and students working part-time
Students claimed that insufficient financial support for students was one of the major reasons that students had to work part-time to support themselves. Time became a scarce resource and difficult priorities had to be made between work and study.
l) Dormitory
There was split opinions towards the functions and desirability of “hall life” and its effect on learning. Some said that it was essential since students could save a lot of traveling time and had more time to actively participate in university life and built a sense of belonging. Others said that “hall life” had nothing to do with learning and it might hinder study with too much hall activities.
Some regarded hall life as “a miniature of society” with a lot of opportunities to learn, but another described it as “a place for entertainment”.
m) Facilities of department/school
Computer lab and library were mentioned. Both were considered to be essential to students’ learning.
n) Sense of belonging to department/school
Some respondents raised this issue and urged departments to take the initiative in contacting students to foster a sense of belonging, which was considered to be conducive to learning. It was suggested that the involvement of students in department/school administration was crucial. Students should be encouraged to speak up and criticize their departments/schools so that they could improve.
Others attributed this lack of sense of belonging to “autistic or aloof students who never participated in activities other than classes”; “bookworm students” who buried themselves in heaps of books; and “instrumental students” who calculated on immediate and tangible benefits from campus activities.
A respondent pointed out a mismatch of expectations between University and students. The former aspired to be a top-class research university at world standard whereas the latter wanted to receive contextualized training that helped them to get a good job.
It was felt that both faculty and students had to team up to build the sense of belonging and that it would take years to actualize.
o) Family support
Here is the most impressive uttering about support from family:
“I feel that learning is like walking on a long, long road. You need to go through the starting point and end point. When you just begin, you are given initiation and ignition. You follow the guidelines. When you are at the crossroads and don't know where to go, teachers can give you directions and tell you where to go. But you have a choice to determine whether to follow the directions and whether to go further. And your family and peers walk along with you to your endpoint. Perhaps, after three-year undergraduate study is an end point. You are not alone. Your family is with you. They certainly will not tell you. They will stand by you. But whether they understand your situation is another matter. They seem studying too. And your friends are also like
this. They will not help you in technical things like your teachers. I mean
psychologically and spiritually. Actually, study is quite tough. Peers can help you relieve stress. On the other hand, they can give you ignition.”
An interesting observation from a focus group respondent:
“ I think that it (learning) depends on age. In lower forms, teachers are an important element to learning. For example, you may study better if teachers praise your performance--students may spend more effort on it. But I think teaches’ influence may diminish when we get older. On the contrary, I think...family members or friends, their support is very crucial.”
p) Impact of local university system
Some students highlighted the pressure to complete a four-year program in three years’ time, with rush in teaching and exhaustive catching-up on students’ side. The cramming of teaching and learning had invalidated the goal of having a general and all-round education for students.
A holistic study of all responses from the respondents to the question showed that they were discussing effective learning in its proper context and have identified most major factors affecting their learning. (Source: a presentation on some findings of the Evaluation on Student Experience Project by David Kember and his team in 1998.) The focus group respondents spent considerable time talking about peer learning and stressed students’ roles in learning and creating a sense of belonging within department/school. They highlighted the importance of effective communication among instructors, department and students but did not see instructors playing a solely detrimental role in effective learning as compared to many other factors that were beyond their control, like the institutional policies and support and the overall educational system in Hong Kong.
Discussion and questions for thought
1. About half of the respondents mentioned that they wanted to acquire knowledge from their studies. Another half saw university education as a means toward their future career, study and social participation. There was insufficient evidence to say that all those who saw learning as an end were studying for the sake of learning. Some could be and others simply forgot to share how and where their acquired knowledge and skills could be applied. A simple count of responses showed there were only a few students (11% of the respondent population) who were instrumental in their studies, hoping for more money in their job, getting exemptions from public examinations and so on. Few mentioned using their acquired knowledge and skills to serve society. Does this reflect the prevailing value of Hong Kong youth—self- and family-oriented (they are not individualistic as far as education is concerned) but with little social
commitment as a citizen?
2. On the issue of what knowledge and skills were to be learnt, professional knowledge related to a discipline was the most frequently mentioned. But there was also a substantial number of respondents who said they aimed to develop their generic skills such as problem solving, analytical skills, logical thinking, time management, and so on. This demand could not be ignored. There seemed to be a strong cry for better integration of the development of both types of knowledge and skills in university education. While many teachers claimed that this was exactly what they were trying to do, how valid was their claim and how successful was their claim?
3. Data also showed a predominant career-orientation among students in their university education. This could be regarded as a characteristic of Hong Kong students who saw university education as vocational preparation. As Kember and Lau (1997) mentioned, this orientation did not induce a surface learning approach. It was simply a strong motivator to learn.
4. About effective teaching. Students did not simply see types of effective teaching or factors affecting effective teaching. Their conceptions about effective teaching were far more complicated. Their depiction of effective teachers possessing different levels of
competencies challenges the earlier research result that “different types of teachers can be equally effective”. The latter can be amended to “different types of teachers can be equally effective at different times and contexts” and “a highly competent teacher possesses a repertoire of skills which can help students to understand, apply and construct their knowledge.”
5. Students’ views on effective teaching implied the complication of knowledge, skills needed for an effective teacher and their expectations of teachers.
6. While more students emphasized the ‘task’ function of a teacher, the students’ concern about the ‘people’ functions of a teacher should not be overlooked (ratio at 5:4 of the population). Many said that they needed care and concern from their teachers. The desired care and concern referred to took many forms, such as being available for consultation, being helpful with problems, setting high expectations/standards towards students and being strict and demanding. The last point seemed to be an actualization of the old Chinese cliché: “Only strict and demanding masters can produce brilliant students.” Students seemed to believe this. (For a more detailed explanation of this student-teacher relationship, please refer to “Chinese conceptions of ‘effective teaching’ in Hong Kong: towards a culturally sensitive evaluation of teaching.” by Pratt, Kelly and Wong, 1999.)
Another interesting observation. Many university teachers emphasized the value of knowledge construction in their teaching but only a small percentage (a simple count of 10% of the group who saw their university education as a means to a second level goal) would acknowledge this single type as an effective type of teacher. What is missing here? The difference between espoused theory vs. the teachers’ actual daily practice? (Singer, 1996) Or that local students were unfamiliar with the constructive approach to learning? Or both?
7. What are the major things that help students learn?
a) One third said “their teachers” and their teachers alone. It seemed that the students had little control over the teaching-learning process. This perceived power distance between teacher and student could be an issue, most probably a
barrier, in helping students to construct their own knowledge base. (Power in the sense of positional, expertise and reference power)
b) 15% of the group said that students themselves, their interest in the subject (a motivator), their participation and effort in the learning process (an expected role) were detrimental to their learning. There was no further information in this study to show which of the two aforementioned was a stronger drive to learn or both had to be stressed during the learning process. While the West emphasizes motivators in learning, the East advocates the proper fulfillment of expected roles. Another quarter of the group hold an interactive view of teaching and learning.
c) Other identified factors affecting learning included subject nature, learning climate, workload, textbooks and reference works (subject-related matters), language, and support from institution, family and peers. All seemed to have some bearing on students’ learning and their impact should be further explored. (The Student Experience Project led by David Kember is working on this issue.) d) In brief, students perceived their teachers’ competences, students’ effort and
communication between teacher and student as the three most important factors affecting their learning. This result comes as no surprise to all experienced teachers. However, it has to be noted that of these three factors, teachers’ competence was accorded much more weight than the other two. In other words, local tertiary students have still to learn how to become more self-directed in their learning and shorten the perceived distance between themselves and the teacher. Some students obviously felt this need and so stressed the importance of teacher–student communication in helping to shorten the power distance and to facilitate the provision of guidance and support to students in the development process towards being more self-directed.
8. It would be a reasonable guess that students from different disciplines would have a slightly different emphasis on what helps them learn. The data from this study did not yield further analysis of the possible relationships in this issue. This would be another interesting research topic.
Concluding remarks
As Pratt pointed out, conceptions of teaching are mirrors of the cultural, historical, and social structures within which they are enacted. The simple act of requesting notes from a lecturer could be interpreted both as ‘laziness’ on the part of students who failed to take notes in class and as a manifestation of a genuine need towards “authorized knowledge” from the
expert/master teacher in its most likely testable form, a culturally inbred behavior.
This report does not attempt to explain the students’ behavior but tries to put forward a real-life picture of students’ views towards effective teaching to stimulate further discussion.
References
Arseneau, R. and Rodenburg, D., A developmental perspective on teaching, in D. D. Pratt and Associates, Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult and Higher Education, Krieger Publishing, pp. 105-150, 1998.
Au, Chung-park, A study of Teacher Role Expectations as perceived by Students and Teachers in Hong Kong, CUHK Education Journal, Vol. 17 No.2, pp. 154-161, 1989. Cheung, K. and Lew, W. J. F., The Criteria of Teacher Competence as perceived by Students, Student-teachers and Serving Teachers in Hong Kong, CUHK Education Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 47-64, 1981.
Clarke, J. A., Tertiary Students’ Perceptions of their Learning Environments: a New Procedure and Some Outcomes, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 1-12, 1995.
Fung, Y. Y. H., Ho, A. S. P. and Kwan K.P., Educational Goal Orientations of First-year Polytechnic Students, HKPETU, 1993.
Havita, N., Towards a Conceptual Framework of Dimensions of Effective Instruction: The Role of high-, Intermediate-, and Low-Inference Teaching Behaviour, Instructional
Development and Faculty Evaluation Vol. 19 # 1, Spring 1999 (on-line version at www.uis/edu/~ctl/sigfed.html)
Kember, D., 'A Reconceptualisation of the Research into University Academics’ Conceptions of Teaching, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 255-275, 1997. Menges, R.J. and Rando, W. C., What are your assumptions? Improving instruction by examining theories, College Teaching, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 54-60, 1989.
Paine, L.W., The Teacher as Virtuoso: A Chinese Model for Teaching, Columbia University’s Teachers College Record Vol. 92, No. 1, pp. 49-81, 1990.
Pratt, D. D., Kelly, M. and Wong, W. S. S., Chinese Conceptions of ‘Effective Teaching’ in Hong Kong: Towards a Culturally Sensitive Evaluation of Teaching, International Journal of Lifelong Education, vol. 18(4), pp. 241-258, 1999. Pratt. D. D. and Associates, Five Perspectives on Teaching in Adult & Higher Education, Krieger Publishing, 1998.
Rossum, E.J.V, Deijkers, R. and Hamer, R., Students’ Learning Conceptions and their Interpretation of Significant Educational Concepts, Higher Education 14, pp. 617-641, 1985.
Singer, E. R., Espoused Teaching Paradigms of College Faculty, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 659-679, 1996.
Watkins, D. A. and Biggs, J. B. (eds.), The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological, and Contextual Influences, Hong Kong Comparative Education Research Centre: University of Hong Kong, 1997.
Teaching-Learning Tips is a CELT publication which aims to convey contextualized and practical ideas for discussion and sharing among instructors and teaching assistants for their teaching enhancement. It will be published four times annually. Contribution of ideas and suggestions of topics are heartily welcome. Please contact Winnie Jenkins, editor at ext. 6809 or email "ctwinnie".
