Advertisement

Teacher as Expert: Using Teacher Knowledge to Engage Students

  • Adrian LaceyEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

In Australia, as well as other regions of the world, educational research has highlighted the importance, and challenge, of engaging students in discipline areas such as religious education (RE) (de Souza, 1999; White, 2004), literacy and mathematics.

References

  1. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/.
  2. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  3. Basit, T. N. (2010). Conducting research in educational contexts. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  4. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Bowen, G. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137–152.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107085301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowers, B. (1988). Grounded theory. In B. Starter (Ed.), Paths to knowledge: Innovative research methods for nursing (pp. 33–59). New York: National League of Nursing.Google Scholar
  7. Buchanan, M. T. (2003). Survey of current writing on trends in religious education. Journal of Religious Education, 51(4), 22–30.Google Scholar
  8. Buchanan, M. T. (2005). Pedagogical drift: The evolution of new approaches and paradigms in religious education. Religious Education, 100(1), 20–37.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080590904662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buchanan, M. T. (2009). Religious education in Australian Catholic schools: Past and present. Religious Education Journal of Australia, 25(2), 30–37.Google Scholar
  10. Buchanan, M. T. (2012). What has faith got to do with classroom religious education? Journal of Religious Education, 60(1), 23–30.Google Scholar
  11. Buchanan, M. T. (2015). Leadership sustainability: Supporting religious education leaders in the school context. In M. T. Buchanan & A.-M. Gellel (Eds.), Global perspectives on Catholic religious education in schools (pp. 91–102). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buchanan, M. T., & Hyde, B. (2006). The role of the religion teacher: Ecclesial and pedagogical perceptions. Journal of Christian Education, 49(2), 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Catholic Education Office. (2006). Student survey—Education in faith/learning and teaching religious education. Melbourne: Catholic Education Office. Retrieved from www.ceomelb.catholic.edu.au.
  14. Catholic Education Office. (2008). Coming to know, worship and love. A religious education framework for Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Melbourne. Melbourne: James Goold House.Google Scholar
  15. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1990). The religious dimension of education in a Catholic school. Homebush: St Paul Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Congregation for the Clergy. (1997). General directory for catechesis. Strathfield, NSW: St Paul Publications.Google Scholar
  17. Culican, S. J., Emmitt, M., & Oakley, C. (2001). Literacy and learning in the middle years. Major report on the middle years literacy research project. Burwood: Deakin University, Faculty of Education Consultancy and Development Unit.Google Scholar
  18. de Souza, M. (1999). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of year 12 religious education programs in Catholic schools in Victoria: Implications for curriculum (Doctoral dissertation). Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.acu.edu.au.
  19. de Souza, M. (2005). A discussion of some Australian research studies that have influenced the practice of religious education in Catholic schools in the past few decades. Journal of Religious Education, 53(2), 60–69.Google Scholar
  20. Durka, G. (2004). Through the looking glass: Reflections on a gift to religious educators. Religious Education, 99(4), 422–426.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080490513081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edwards-Groves, C. J., & Hoare, R. L. (2012). ‘Talking to learn’: Focussing teacher education on dialogue as a core practice for teaching and learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(8), 82–100.  https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n8.8.
  22. Engebretson, K., Fleming, J., & Rymarz, R. (2002). Thriving as an RE teacher. NSW: Social Science Press.Google Scholar
  23. Faircloth, B. S. (2009). Making the most of adolescence: Harnessing the search for identity to understand classroom belonging. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24(3), 321–348.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558409334248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ferguson, S. (2012a). Like a bridge: Scaffolding as a means of assisting low-attaining students in mathematics during cognitively challenging tasks (Doctoral dissertation). Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.acu.edu.au.
  25. Ferguson, S. (2012b). The impact of two teacher’s use of specific scaffolding practices on low-attaining upper primary students. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 191–198). Fremantle: MERGA. Retrieved from http://www.merga.net.au/publications/conf_display.php.
  26. Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.  https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300–329.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gambrell, L. B. (2011). Seven rules of engagement: What’s most important to know about motivation to read. Reading Teacher, 65(3), 172–178.  https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.01024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grossman, P., Stodolsky, S., & Knapp, M. (2004). Making subject matter part of the equation: The intersection of policy and content. Retrieved from http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/SubjectMatter-GSK-12–2004.pdf.
  30. Hatch, A. J. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  31. Helme, S., & Clarke, D. (2001). Identifying cognitive engagement in the mathematics classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 13(2), 133–153.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03217103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jurik, V., Groschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2014). Predicting students’ cognitive learning activity and intrinsic learning motivation: How powerful are teacher statements, student profiles, and gender? Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 132–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.01.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2006). Research for educators. South Melbourne, Victoria: Thomson, Social Science Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kiemer, K., Groschner, A., Pehmer, A., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lacey, A. (2011). From catechisms to texts: Engaging students in religious education in Australian Catholic primary schools. Religious Education Journal of Australia, 27(1), 16–22.Google Scholar
  36. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Morgan, M., Gibbs, S., Maxwell, K., & Britten, N. (2002). Hearing children’s voices: Methodological issues in conducting focus groups with children aged 7-11 years. Qualitative Research (2), 5–20.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794102002001636.
  38. National Catholic Education Commission. (2008). Religious education in dialogue: Curriculum around Australia. Australia: National Catholic Education Commission.Google Scholar
  39. O’Donnell, A., Dobozy, E., Bartlett, B., Nagel, M., Spooner-Lane, R., Youssef-Shalala, A., … Smith, J. (2016). Educational psychology (Second Australian edition). Milton, Queensland: Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. O’Neill, S., Geoghegan, D., & Petersen, S. (2013). Raising the pedagogical bar: Teachers’ co-construction of explicit teaching. Improving Schools, 16(2), 148–158.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480213493709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Punch, K. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Rossiter, G. (1981). Stifling union or creative divorce. Retrieved from http://rel-ed.acu.edu.au/ren2/gr19.doc.
  43. Rossiter, G. (1999). Historical perspective on the development of Catholic religious education in Australia: Some implications for the future. Journal of Religious Education, 47(1), 5–18.Google Scholar
  44. Russell, V., Ainley, M., & Frydenberg, E. (2005). Schooling issues digest: Student motivation and engagement. Retrieved from http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/profiles/schooling_issues_digest_motivation_engagement.htm.
  45. Rymarz, R. M. (2007). Who is this person Grace? A reflection on content knowledge in religious education. Religious Education, 102(1), 62–74.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00344080601117697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education. (1965). Declaration on Christian education. In Church documents on Catholic education. Strathfield, NSW: St Paul’s Publications.Google Scholar
  47. Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education. (1982). Lay Catholics in schools: Witnesses to faith. In Church documents on Catholic education. Strathfield, NSW: St Paul’s Publications.Google Scholar
  48. Sadker, D., Zittleman, K. R., & Sadker, M. (2011). Questioning skills. In J. M. Cooper (Gen. Ed.), Classroom teaching skills (pp. 119–167). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  49. Scott, K. (2015). Problem or paradox: Teaching the Catholic religion in Catholic schools. In M. T. Buchanan & A.-M. Gellel (Eds.), Global perspectives on Catholic religious education in schools (pp. 47–60). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shostak, R. (2011). Involving students in learning. In J. M. Cooper (Gen. Ed.), Classroom teaching skills (pp. 82–106). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  51. Siemon, D., Virgona, J., & Corneille, K. (2001). The middle years numeracy research project: 5-9. Bundoora: RMIT University.Google Scholar
  52. Smart, J. B., & Marshall, J. C. (2013). Interactions between classroom discourse, teacher questioning, and student cognitive engagement in middle school science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 249–267.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9297-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stodolsky, S. (1988). The subject matters: Classroom activity in math and social studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  54. Turner, J. C., & Paris, S. G. (1995). How literacy tasks influence students’ motivation for literacy. The Reading Teacher, 48, 662–673. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/jour-nal/10.1002/%28ISSN%291936-2714.
  55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  56. Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2008). The teachers’ role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516–551.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. White, D. (2004). Pedagogy—The missing link in religious education: Implications of brain-based learning theory for the development of a pedagogical framework for religious education (Doctoral dissertation). Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.acu.edu.au.
  58. Wilson, N. S., & Smetana, L. (2011). Questioning as thinking: A metacognitive framework to improve comprehension of expository text. Literacy, 45(2), 84–90.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-4369.2011.00584.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang, J., & Dougherty Stahl, K. A. (2012). Collaborative reasoning: Language-rich discussions for English learners. The Reading Teacher, 65(4), 257–260.  https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.01040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Catholic Education MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations