TEACHERS’ THINKING ABOUT CHILDREN’S COGNITIVE IMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

University of Szeged, Faculty of Arts

MÁRIA HERCZ

TEACHERS’ THINKING ABOUT CHILDREN’S COGNITIVEIMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

PhD dissertation thesis

Graduate School of Educational Sciences Teaching and Learning Programme

Szeged, 2007

1

Introduction

The essence of teaching has not changed considerably, sincethe birth of the profession: the cooperation of teacher andchildren, with the aim of making children competent in life.The factual aims, the ideal ways to reach them and theexpectations of teachers’ and children’s role change fromtime-to-time, consequently with the change of the world. Inthe last few decades special responsibility fell on schools,if they wanted to meet the requirements as time went by. “Inmodern societies, knowledge determines the developmentalopportunities of the individual, as well as the pace ofsocietal-economical progress.” (Csapó, 2007, p.11.).

“One of the most important issues of Europe’spedagogical research is the method of transformation ofschool education, and the specification of teachers’ newroles (OECD, 1998). Nevertheless, the attitude of renewal canonly be embedded to the practical teaching very slowly. Themain concept of schools’ elemental and methodologicalreconstruction is the modification of teacher’s thinking andpragmatic work.” (Hercz, 2002, p.251.)

According to the international technical literature, itis unambiguous that within the research of teachers, theresearch of the thinking of teachers can be separated. It isknown, that it is their thinking, their knowledge and theiropinions that form their everyday practical activities(Falus, 2001a), as well as it is known that researchersconsider a decisive portion of a multi-dimensional system,rather than a mechanical correspondence when they starttheir work. Throughout the years, several concepts emergedabout the relationship between opinions and activity, in theprevious decade researchers pointed out an interferencebetween them (Huberman, 1993; Richardson, 1996).

The long-term aim of this research is to help trainingsand extension trainings – within our range of possibilities– with the empirically revealed correspondences. Our work isconcerned with the research of educational sciences, moreprecisely, with research on teachers and on their thinking.It is a fairly new field in Hungary, only a few researchers’attention was raised by it. Precisely examining thetechnical literature, comparative studies concerningpersonality, values or opinions of teachers working invarious types of institutes and departments are very rare

2

with the exception of some major researches (Falus és mtsai,1989, Golnhofer és Nahalka, 2001; Szabó, 1998). Research, thatwould include kindergarten teachers - according to theaspect mentioned - to all teachers, their personality andthinking being compared to other teachers’, has not beenconducted in the last two decades, even though in order tobe able to build up an educational process, the leader ofall phases should be seen, in the shape of the educator.

The aim of our research is to get acquainted with thethinking of teachers, more precisely with the implicittheories, opinions and preconceptions concerning children’scognitive development, as well as to expand on thecharacteristic thinking of various teacher groups, and tocompare the thinking of educators working in different typesof institutions.

Theoretical sources, interpretation frames ofdiscussion

Research on educators as known today was born in thebeginning of the XX. century, and accomplished itself in the1950s, therefore the more significant researches had beganonly a little more than fifty years ago. Briefly it can bedefined as: “The branch of pedagogical research, whichexamines the peculiarities of the educator profession, theliving and working conditions of teachers, as well as theiractivities and trainings. One course of the research oneducators tends to expand the specialties of the teacherprofession, namely, the kind of special knowledge orproficiency represented by teachers.” (Kotschy, 1997, p.168.)

The concept of thinking of teachers often soundsstrange to Hungarian educators. Its concept can be found inthe language of science, but not in the ordinary pedagogy.The Pedagogic Lexicon defines it as the following: “A partof specific content and strategies of general reflectiveprocesses, in connection with the appearing problems anddecisions in the activity of the educator.” (Szivák, 1997.p.161.).

According to Floden and Klinzig (1990) the proficiency ofteachers is to be revealed by the researches examining theirthinking. Therefore, the reflective models achieved canstand as the basis of teachers’ trainings. The monitoring of

3

teachers’ thinking can affect teachers’ trainings in threeaspects: it can serve as an elemental source, it can givemethodological help, giving insight to the processes ofteachers’ learning, and it can affect the educationalpolicy.

In the theoretical part of the discussion, theresearch of teachers’ thinking is introduced as a stream ofresearch on teachers. Having examined the national andinternational technical literature a dual problem occurred.Deposit copies of literature concerning the wider topic(research on teachers) of the dissertation were at disposal,fewer in the field of the research on thinking, and workthat dealt with the thinking in connection with children’scognitive development could hardly be found.

The following possible aspects emerged during theconstruction of the summary on the technical literatures:(1) research paradigms, (2) inter-disciplinal nature, (3)vertical – horizontal dimension, (4) geographical – culturaldimension. Instead of trying to completely introduce thetendencies and processes, they are only illustrated, whilethe conceptual basis of the dissertation is introduced indetail. Results, theories and concepts which affected theresearch are of high priority.

In the elaboration of the theoretical frames of thediscussion, cognitive pedagogy served as the source. Underthis expression, the specific scientific idea (Csapó, 1992)and in a wider sense the specialty of pedagogical questionof cognition is meant. The approach of our work was highlyinfluenced by István Nahalka’s constructive pedagogical studies(for example: 1997/b), studies published about the researchof teachers’ thinking and its methodological background bythe pedagogy research group of ELTE (Falus, 2001/b; Golnhoferand Nahalka, 2001), and out of foreign writers, Bruner’s book(2004).

Dimensions of research and assumptions

Our aim throughout the research was to reveal teachers’thinking about children’s cognitive development andimprovement, interpreted in the system of cognitivepedagogy. The assumptions were set to include topics that

4

could serve as the cognitive pedagogic background to therecognition of children’s image, topics such as teachers’thinking about knowledge, about the change of knowledge andthe conditions of it, and the individual differences ofknowledge. The empirical research embraces two main questions:- How do teachers think about children’s cognitiveimprovement and development? What opinions andpreconceptions do they have?- Do the images of children and teachers show suchcharacteristic features, which enable us to differentiatebetween various teacher groups?Assumptions of the research:

1. Teachers’ thinking about children’s cognitive improvement anddevelopment show group specific features, properlydifferentiated from each other, their child imagediffers focusing on cognitive improvement.

2. The theoretical basis of teachers’ thinking about children’sdevelopment is slightly eclectic; the various theoriescharacterize it jointly. The judgment of thesignificance of influencing factors of children’scognitive development is realistic. In their childimage the interpretation of individual differences iswide ranged, but in the various phases of education theconsideration of cognitive features is dominant.

3. Teachers’ thinking about children’s cognitive improvement ischaracterized by the belief in the possibility ofimproving. Cognitive improvement does not play animportant role in their aims.

4. Thinking about the practical side of the cognitive improvement ofteaching, teachers’ assessments reflect rather theexternal expectations, while the pragmatic realizationof their thoughts (opinions, principles) reflects theirthinking.

5. The professional self-image and specialist-image of theeducator, as the leader of children’s development, shows typicalfeatures of the different groups. The professional selfimage is more dependent on the school’s internal thanthe society’s external evaluation. In the process oftheir professional socialization, the organized effectsare not considerable.

6. In their pedagogical knowledge, the learnt features formeda unified system, but the views concerning the various

5

elements of knowledge differ according to the variousgroups of teachers. The usage of the terminology ofcognitive development causes problems for a segment ofteachers. All those activities that connect teacherswith the study of education affect their professionalerudition.

Methods and tools of research

An empirical study was made, with the help of an inductiveand relation-revealing strategy. Data was collected byindividual questionnaires, and processed with SPSS program.

The first data collection of our six year old study wasmade in the academic year of 2000/2001, while the second inthe 2006/2007. A total of 1504 people’s responses wereevaluated. In the first phase, 666 teacher of Fejer Countyanswered, while in the second, 838 from 80 settlements (2.5%of all settlements) of the 19 counties of the country.

In the first phase, 5 groups of educators wereexamined: kindergarten teachers, primary school masters andteachers and teachers working in vocational secondaryschools and grammar schools. In the second phase, onlyteachers working in schools were examined, to enable us tomore precisely concentrate on the main aim of the research,to the thinking about children’s development and teaching,and to compare these to the activities practiced.

Results of the empirical study

The aim of the research was to get acquainted with teachers’thinking on one special field of teaching: teachers’thinking was studied about children’s cognitive improvementand development. The images of children, and professionalself-images of teachers in connection with our study weremeant to be portrayed. Their views, preconceptions andopinions about themselves, children and teaching wererevealed, but keeping children’s cognitive improvement tothe fore. Some features of their professional socialization

6

were pointed out, to answer the question, to what extent isteachers’ personality affected by organized forces.Concerning the importance of their practice, the mostimportant was to point out the connection between theirpedagogical knowledge and their thinking about children’sdevelopment.

Our aim was to differentiate the thinking of the abovementioned five teacher groups. Wanted to find out whethertheir child- and teacher-images show any characteristicdifferences that could be traced back to the differentteacher groups.

The results of our empirical study were introduced inthree chapters:In the 3rd chapter the main features of teachers’ child-images were systematized in connection with children’scognitive development. Teachers’ thinking about the factorsconstituting to children’s cognitive development wasexamined, and according to their opinions, we tried to takeconsequences concerning the main features of their thinkingabout children’s cognitive development. Later, theirpreconceptions concerning children’s individual differenceswere studied, which helped us to create assumptionsconcerning the appearance of individual differences ofstudents in teachers’ thinking.

In the following part, educators’ preconceptionsconcerning their students were studied in the face of thetwo extremes of children’s mental capabilities, namelythrough the meaning of smart and stupid students. Finally,the concept of students’ successfulness was examined, andthe reasons teachers believed to affect the success orfailure of their students.

In the 4th chapter teachers’ thinking about children’scognitive improvement was looked at. The role of cognitiveimprovement was determined in the aims of teachers andinstitutions, and the relationship between them wasexamined. Later, teachers’ thinking about the change inchildren’s knowledge was shown. The question of children’scapability of improvement was shown with all those variablestaken into account that relate to the topic. We found outthe connection between the knowledge of cognitiveimprovement’s modern ideas and the importance and usage ofthem in practice.

7

In the 5th chapter we consider educators as the leaders ofchildren’s cognitive improvement. Those elements were drawnout of the research, which helped to illustrate both theprofessional self-image and specialist-image of thoseteachers who encourage the growth of children. Thedifferentiation of the later two notions was necessary, toseparate the personal and professional content properly.Some features of professional socialization, teachers’knowledge and erudition were studied. Finally, one aspect ofteachers’ self-image was introduced and its relationship totheir child-image.

The results, relations and ideas of teachers’ child- andteacher-images (both self- and specialist-image) will besystematized according to the two main themes of ourassumptions.

Differences between the thinking of various teacher groups

Thinking about children’s cognitive improvement and development,significant differences appeared between the various teachergroups (the only exception was concerning the judgment ofcognitive improvement’s system of aims).

In sum, we could notice primary school masters’outstanding professionalism, the belief in children’simprovement and the practical application of methodologicalculture, the characteristic attitude of grammar schoolteachers determined by traditional elements as well as bymodern pedagogical features. Unique features determine theteachers of vocational trainings (mainly appearing in thefirst phase of the research), however teachers of 5-8. gradeseem to have the least group concerned characteristics. The first phase of the research proved the assumptiondealing with the differences of teachers’ thinking, butserved with new and surprising results as well. On one hand,the thinking of the two extremes of the educational systemdetermined by the public thinking (primary school mastersand grammar school teachers) many times stood near to eachother, while on the other hand the supposedly similarlythinking kindergarten teachers’ and primary school masters’thinking many times differed significantly. The differencebetween teachers’ thinking was mainly significant betweenthe different groups of teachers (and institutions), theirthinking about children’s capability of improvement and

8

cognitive development did not depend on their duty,qualification, number of years spent in the profession or ontheir participation in extension trainings.

The results of the second phase also clearly support thepresence of a group-based typical thinking. On most examinedfields, a significant difference can be found, which will bedetailed in the next paragraph. In this phase, often thedifferent thinking of males and females was present beyondthe difference in educators’ groups, and many times thedifference in thinking appeared concerning beginner andexpert teachers as well.

According to the research, the child-image of teachers istypical according to the group they belong to, neverthelessthe groups cannot always be described precisely only throughthe results. Out of all groups, mostly the primary schoolmasters’ thinking seemed to lie on unified pedagogical baseswith a lot of optimism. Their thinking differed many timesfrom other groups’, for example they thought of pedagogicalknowledge as the most important feature of a teacher, theyassigned high importance to the personal effect of theteacher (in planning, confirming and asking), and they alsothought of the coherence of the teacher’s verbal and non-verbal effect and the permanent preparation to classes veryimportant. They were the most optimistic concerning thepossibility of children’s improvement.

The different thinking of the primary school mastersappeared in the second phase of the research as well, butnot as sharply as in the first one. The difference was clearin questions concerning the belief in children’simprovement, the professional knowledge or the usage ofmodern methods: primary school masters’ thinking was themostly child- and improvement-oriented.

The thinking of teachers of 5th-8th grade many times wasvery similar to the thinking of teachers teaching invocational grammar schools, but in the questions studied,often different replies arrived, therefore we can concludethat this group’s thinking can be the least unified. Aninteresting experience here is that their thinkingsignificantly differed from even those teachers’ that workedin the same institute, under the same pedagogical aims andconcepts. Their thinking about children’s successfulnessstood as an exception.

9

The difference between teachers’ thinking within onetype of institution was often greater than it was betweenteachers of different institutions. Sometimes kindergartenteachers’ and grammar school teachers’ or vocational grammarschool teachers’ opinion was the same, other times theprimary school teachers and workers of vocational trainingagreed.

Teachers’ thinking about the development of children

According to the results deducted from the study of thinking ofchildren’s development, we can verify that excluding one sub-point, our assumptions were correct. The theoretical basis ofteachers’ thinking was affected by various concepts at allcases, within the groups’ system of opinions we found bothinternal and external differences.The extreme differences in individuals’ thinking appearedwithin groups as well. The tendencies seemed to be identicalin both phases of the research.

Opinions were divided concerning the effects ofinheritance and surrounding atmosphere to development. Insum, the importance of the surroundings’ developing effectwas stressed, but the difference between the teachers'groups appeared again. Mostly primary school mastersrejected the role of inheritance, while grammar schoolteachers accepted it. It is interesting to note, that theratio of those believing in the decisive role of inheritancewas equal (app. 20%) in both groups. Significant differenceswere found in the different types of institutions, primaryschool masters and teachers working in vocational trainingswere more concerned with the developing effect of thesurrounding atmosphere.

The question whether children’s development iscontinuous or discontinuous, resulted in contradiction. Whenevaluating the opinions, instead of considering the deepermeanings, probably only the conspicuous meanings were takeninto account.

In the judgment of children’s development, the cause ofdiscrepancy in the thinking about improvement andreceptiveness, was the more traditional thinking of grammarschool teachers, while, on the contrary they placed the mostimportance on diligence and effort.

10

Concerning selection, contradiction was experiencedagain; two views of the same content but composeddifferently were evaluated significantly different.

In sum, educators hope for the improvability ofchildren, but the ratios are thought-provoking: one third ofthe sample studied shows optimistic attitude, but accordingto some certain opinions of 15-25% of respondents, it isprobable that they do not believe in children’simprovability.

Factors contributing to cognitive development were thought to berealistic, but that was a mistake. On the top of thehierarchy of factors in teachers’ thinking, stood their owninfluence, the scientific experiences were not taken intoconsideration for none of the respondents. In the judgmentof factors influencing children’s cognitive development,significant differences appeared in the different groups ofeducators.

Having examined the individual differences of children, we obtained awide range of results. The system of teachers’ thinkingbecame easy to understand from the general model obtained:the characteristics of children were divided according topersonality dimensions and the contribution in the learning-teaching process. From the results we can conclude that theinfluence of personality dimensions decrease in teaching aschildren’s age progress, while the influence of thecharacteristics of the learning-teaching process increases.In the later, teachers of all three types of institutionsmostly consider cognitive features, after them come theaffective features in kindergartens, and the social ones inschools.

The patterns made of the differences of students’characteristics followed similar schemes in the two phasesof the research, the most important element was theactivity, interest and motivation of children, then followedthe intelligence, attention and quick and logicalunderstanding. We can conclude the dominancy of cognitiveelements in this case as well, but differently depending onthe group of teachers. Primary school educators considercognitive features important within children’s personalitydimensions, while grammar school teachers consider thefeatures of learning process more important. In grammarschools the affective atmosphere, in vocational trainings

11

the social atmosphere is significant (in the second phase ofthe research).

The results derived from the association of the twoextremes of mental abilities, the concepts of ’smart’ and ’stupid’also showed significant differences between the teachergroups. The obtained ratios are also interesting, butfurthermore, the preconception in the background can alwaysbe traced back: primary school masters consider generalknowledge important, while other primary school teachersjust as teachers of vocational grammar schools believe inthe importance of previously acquired knowledge. Anothertypicality is that talented students of grammar schools aresupposedly in possession of inherited knowledge, whilestudents in vocational trainings are talented if theypossess acquired knowledge.

During the evaluation of children’s successfulness, thecharacteristics of the different teacher groups can clearlybe isolated from each other.

Teachers’ thinking about children’s improvement

Capability of improvement, change in knowledge

As a basis of the research, it was stated that teachersbelieve in the possibility of children’s improvement. Thisquestion was examined from several views in both phases ofthe research. On the whole, we can declare that ourassumption seemed to be correct in the second phase, whenthe question was examined more thoroughly, from variousaspects.

The belief in children’s capability of improvement was low in thefirst phase of the research, while the ratio of those, notbelieving in the possibility was very high. The differencein teacher groups appeared both in the belief of thecapability of improvement and in the acceptance of modernviews; primary school educators seemed to be more positive,while kindergarten teachers and grammar school teachers hadrather negative opinions. Latter groups had a moretraditional thinking, which caused the rejection of newerviews and methods.

In the second phase of the research, educators’ beliefin children’s capability of improvement – based on somewhatdifferent views – showed a significantly higher value (an

12

average of two integers rise on a five-scale range), but asimilar tendency appeared amongst the educator groups: asignificant difference between the more optimistic attitudeon the primary school educators’ side, while a more negativeopinion amongst grammar school teachers.

Amongst features that have an effect on the belief inthe capability of improvement, 68% in the first, and 50% inthe second phase could be identified. In the first phase, aconnection between teachers’ professional self-image andtheir scientific-image was found, while in the second phase,a relationship between teachers’ child-image and theopinions that form this image was revealed.

Teachers agreed in the matter of optimal time of improvement.They uniformly stated that children can mostly be improvedin their kindergarten and primary school ages. The ratio ofthose rejecting the capability of improvement in grammarschool years is approximately 10-15%, varying according tothe groups of educators.

According to the technical literature we can assume thatcognitive improvement does not play an important role inteachers’ aims. Our statement was proved: it did not appearin leading positions of schools’ evaluation forms. Theindividual values of educating always seemed to be moreimportant than the values of the school as a whole, and thelow order of rank of the improvement of mental abilities wascommon for all groups of teachers. Nevertheless, concerningsome aims, differences appeared. The fact that teachersconsider aims less important might cause difficulties in thepractical work of institutions.

The deliberateness of the thinking about the aims ofcognitive improvement was of high priority. Out of the aimsdirectly in connection with cognitive development(improvement of mother tongue, mental, study and individualskills), teachers agreed in the evaluation of mentalabilities, but the other three aims were judged differently.Educators of primary schools thought of the improvement ofmother tongue and study skills important, while theeducators of young children (up to the age of 11) gave ahigh importance to the improvement of individual skills.

Concerning the change in children’s knowledge, the opinionssignificantly diverged according to the traditional – moderndimension. The degree of acceptance highly depended onwhether a known, a habitual or a new element was evaluated.

13

It seems that kindergarten teachers have the mosttraditional way of thinking concerning these views, asopposed to the primary school masters, who seem to be themost modern ones – even though educators of grammar schoolswere expected to be in this position. Concerning thecontextual elements, both individual and group-basedcharacteristics appeared, only the positive judgment of theimportance of affective factors was unified.Having examined the practical side of cognitive improvement(which will be shown from another point of view in the nextparagraph), we arrived to the analysis of traditional versusmodern thinking. Having examined the practice of cognitive improvement (whatwill be looked at from a different point of view in the nextparagraph) we arrived to the analysis of traditional versusmodern nature of thinking. The cluster diagram – made uponthe opinions concerning the activities prior to, and duringclasses - examining the connections of teachers’ thinking,separates mainly the principles of improvement andactivities, then on both branches, the traditional andmodern elements. On theoretical level, many teachers thinkthey apply modern principles, while in their activities,mostly traditional principles are present. However, therelations between frequencies and contents containcontradictions: the ratio of those declaring to applycognitive pedagogic principles is much higher, than of thosewho do carry out such type of preparing activity.

The technique of improvement

In the first phase of the research, certain elements ofteachers’ thinking showed contradiction and lacked content.For example, the previously declared individual ability toimprovement conflicted with the importance of the knowledgeof children’s preliminary knowledge. Can abilities ofchildren be improved if their preliminary knowledge andeducating atmosphere is not known? Naturally, they can,probably because the pedagogical patterns and experiences(Csapó, 1992, Falus, 2001a) help, but in order to increaseeffectiveness, children should be known „scientifically”.(Quotation marks are necessary, in the lack of a moresuitable term.). Not the original meaning of scientificquality is meant under this term, rather a more commonscientific characteristic, in which the simplified

14

scientific results are transported to practice, to create amore conscious, planned and professionally groundedimprovement of children.

Out of all views in connection with the improvement ofcognitive abilities, the view stating the importance ofmaking children to act needs to be highlighted. Kindergartenteachers thought it important, but as the ages of childrenprogressed, the number of educators on the same opinion askindergarten teachers decreased. Due to the increasedmaterial in 1-4. grade, making children act by themselves isonly frequent in the first grade teachers’ thinking. Ourexperience from school visits and conversations at extensiontrainings is that a very short time is spent for suchactivities even at this age, as the aim of teachers is toget children acquired with as much knowledge as possible, asquick as possible, for various reasons.

In the second phase of the research, teachers’techniques of cognitive improvement were studied, with thehelp of preparations to teaching and the principles andmethods used during teaching. The results proved thevalidity of our assumptions; a significant difference wasshown between the importance of principles and methods, andtheir practical implementation. The averages of values werenotably higher in the theoretical agreement as they were inthe case of practical implementation.

Examining more deeply the relation between improvingactivities and methods and the personality of the teacher,which could be seen according to their thinking aboutpedagogical knowledge, four – affective – elements of thisconnection were related to the frequency of the cognitivepedagogic principles: openness, flexibility, determination,considering improving work important, and a cognitiveelement, the knowledge of how to improve various things.

Focusing to the technique of improvement, several relationsshould be highlighted. Though the traditional-moderndimension the results turn out to be somewhatcontradictional: contrast lied between primary and grammarschool teachers, concerning traditional and basic principles(primary school teachers more often carried out such anactivity), modern, cognitive pedagogic preparing activitywas also done more frequently amongst primary schoolteachers. The significant difference in the thinking ofvarious teacher groups showed the diversity of primary

15

school masters’ thinking and methods of teaching. Three-quarters of the differences between groups deviated in apositive way. Most of the time, cognitive pedagogicalmethods were applied by primary school masters.

The teacher, as the leader of children’s improvement

Professional self-image and specialist-image

The differences of educator groups appeared lesssignificantly in their professional self-images, but quiteremarkably in their specialist-images. Furthermore, thedifference between educators was best seen concerning themission of educators and the knowledge of their roles.

Their belief and opinion about children’s improvementwas diverse according to their own influences. The classicaland ideal image of teaching could only be realized in theprimary school masters’ thinking. They truly believe thatprofessional consciousness, planning and high professionalknowledge highly determine their students’ cognitiveimprovement.

The most optimistic child-image was of kindergartenteachers. They hoped most in the capability of improvementof children, and blamed no external cause for the possiblefailures. Values, which are needed at all stages ofeducation for a harmonic improvement of children, are ofhigh importance in their teaching.

The other end was represented by the teachers ofvocational trainings. In their thinking neither did thechild-orientation nor the belief in their role dominated,they were thinking as specialists, who work according totheir best knowledge in their profession. They generallyassigned the failures of their students to external factors,and did not consider teachers’ knowledge of high importancein children’s cognitive improvement.

The different specialist-images of the various teachergroups appeared during the research of professionalsocialization as well. Their opinions about the sources oftechnical knowledge differ from many points of views. As anexemplar, all groups chose a teacher working in the samegroup as they do.

As a result of the research, we can state that the thinking ofdifferent groups of teachers significantly differ both in

16

their professional self-image and specialist-image, andtheir child-image. Their views of their profession showcharacteristic features not only depending on the group theybelong to, but on the length of time spent in their career,and on the type of settlement they live in.

As a highlighted element of teachers’ professional self-image, their satisfaction was examined on various fields.They are not satisfied with their societal and financialappreciation, and only moderately satisfied with theirachievement in their professional ambition and pedagogicalaims. Having examined the constituents of their professionalself-image and image of prestige, it is clear that they arein interaction with each other: although the judgment oftheir societal prestige and financial situation is verynegative, the realization of their professional aims andambitions resulted in a overall better valuation, than whatcould have been expected from the average of the elements.Therefore, the influence of features within the institution(relationships, atmosphere, etc.) is more important than theexternal judgment.When examining the professional socialization, teachers’thinking of its sources was explored, and then the evolutionof their teacher- and child-image was studied. Havingvaluated the sources of professional socialization, specialattention should be given to the result that states thatone-quarter of the respondents think of pedagogicalknowledge as a natural endowment. Especially primary schoolmasters and grammar school teachers think this way; everythird respondent of their groups. Therefore, the ratio ofthose rejecting the possibility of learning the professionis very high. Probably they join organized courses andvocational trainings with a rejection in their minds towardsthe possible effects of them. 16% of respondents thought ofhigher education as a source of their knowledge (84%partially), on a 5-scale range the obtained average was 3.3,while the extension trainings got 2.4.

The established professional self-image and thinking ishardly influenced by the organized socializational source,as extension training. The more than five hundredrespondents valued the efficiency and successfulness ofthese quite negatively. They hardly influenced thedeliberate and planned work, or the formation of opinions:

17

their views concerning child-image, themselves and theirpedagogical role hardly changed.

The results of the spontaneous effects of professionalsocialization can be important, should not be left out inthe formation of our opinion about teachers’ thinking. Theexistence of an own child, him or her going to kindergartenor school, changes the thinking of teachers. 30% of therespondents’ child-image was modified when their own childwent to kindergarten, and 40%, when their children went toschool. Generally, entering kindergarten had a weakereffect, but teachers’ expectations, teaching methods andprofessional interest altered more at this stage. The imageabout children’s thinking and teachers’ scales of valueschanged similarly at both stages. One-third of the samplehad their teacher- and child-image and their relationshiptowards children transformed when their child enteredschool.

Teachers’ self- and child-image was connected throughthe evaluation of their satisfaction. We learnt that theevaluation of the realization of professional ambitions andpedagogical aims are in a tight connection, and are in asignificant mutual effect with the judgment of students’successfulness. The prestige-image does influence teachers’child-image to a certain extent: their influence was seenboth in the cases of believing in students’ capability ofimprovement, and in the satisfaction with them. Aninteresting relation is that a big portion of teachers isnot satisfied with their students’ results, they considerthemselves as the most influencing factors of children’sdevelopment, but they blame ’external’ factors for failures.

Pedagogical knowledge, technical language

Elements of pedagogical knowledge appeared as an easilyunderstandable structure in teachers’ thinking. Themechanical model built into the cluster diagram proves thesystematic nature, where the theoretical and technicalelements of knowledge are separated severally. The obtainedfour layers of knowledge: (1) methodological knowledge, (2)professional erudition, (3) general conditions of teaching,(4) the first two of the actual conditions of teachingconsider the theoretical elements of knowledge, while thesecond two the technical ones. Within the layers thetheoretical and technical elements are separated again. When

18

judging the importance of the fields consecutively thetheoretical aspects were preferred over the technical ones.This result contradicts the results obtained from otherpoints of the research, which could have two explanations.This case the situation stated in the 4th assumption ispresent, teachers responded according to the supposedexpectations, but they might seriously think of theoreticalknowledge as the more important one.

Opinions of teacher groups significantly differedconcerning the judgment of knowledge, and the importance ofsome fields. In the first phase of the research, primaryschool masters gave the highest value to the importance ofall fields of knowledge, and the role of professionalerudition (was equally high with the kindergarten teachers).When examining the importance of knowledge, a reversetendency in decrease was seen as compared to the increase inchildren’s age and the latent prestige of teacher groups.The thinking of primary school masters significantlydiffered from the thinking of grammar school teachers,furthermore, from all groups concerning the importance ofprofessional erudition.

In the second phase of the research the high averagevalue of primary school masters remained (except of theevaluation of the importance of professional erudition, asall groups valued it high), but it only differed from theother groups in the knowledge of general conditions ofteaching, in one case their thinking only differed fromteachers of 5-8. grade, and in only two cases from grammarschool teachers’. When evaluating the various elements, thetypically negative opinion of grammar school teachers couldbe differentiated. As it was mentioned before, in thisphase, we approached to the pedagogical competence. Havinginterpreted the elements according to József Nagy’spersonality-model (1996), teachers valued the elements ofcognitive, personal and special competence of the greatestinfluencing ones.

A significant difference could be seen in the betweenteacher groups in the judgment of the importance of variousfields of competency: primary school masters valuedcognitive competency the highest out of all teachers, whilegrammar school teachers valued personal- and specialcompetency less important as others.

19

Therefore, the question of pedagogical knowledge is thefield, where the topicalities of the system of teachers’ training can befound. It is probable, that the results occurred to theinfluence of higher education, since the younger the child ateacher has to teach, the more pedagogical and psychologicalfoundation is needed and the higher the importance ofinstitutional activities. In some types of trainings,teacher aspirants can learn the techniques of theprofession, scale of values, attitude and all the classicalknowledge of the profession. The basis of our conclusions is the results derived from thefirst phase of the research concerning the valuation offeatures of child-image and pedagogical knowledge, where thethinking of kindergarten teachers and primary school mastersis unique, with optimistic and positive features.Consequently, a similar tendency was seen in the secondphase of the research, since the more optimistic thinking ofprimary school masters can be separated many times.

Another result to consider is that 8% of teachers’professional exemplars come from higher education, 6% frompost gradual courses, therefore even if not significantly,but higher education does have an example setting influence.

Professional erudition, more precisely the technicalliterature and the usage of technical terminology is an important elementof teachers’ knowledge. Our assumption stating that thiscauses several problems for teachers proved to be correct.In the two phases of the research, various basic terms ofcognitive improvement are defined together with teachers. Inthe first phase, the terms of knowledge and ability arestudied, while in the second, learning and competency. Thepreliminary knowledge appeared in both phases; therefore theresults of the opinions chosen were studied. In the secondphase, the content of thinking and knowledge was derivedthrough a problem-solving activity. We threw light upon thedeficiencies of contents and contradictions in the usage ofterminologies that characterize teachers. In detail, thedifferences in concepts and interpretations between teachergroups, show general tendencies, such as a more punctualknowledge of technical language of grammar school teachersand primary school masters.

Despite our assumptions, no influence on professionalerudition could be seen of those organizational forms, whichconnected teachers with the representatives of the science

20

of education. No connection was seen between theparticipation in professional innovation and professionalknowledge. Even though, every fourth teacher participated insome kind of innovation, only every third respondent wasfamiliar with researchers, and only 10% of these meet therequirements. The question may rise: do the scientificresults reach practicing teachers; do they read those booksand studies that intend to address them (as well)?

When introducing the characteristics of the sample,skills were highlighted, in order to be able to consider:well- qualified teachers formed the sample, who tend toimprove their technical knowledge, but at various stages ofthe research surprising uncertainties and mistakes showed intheir knowledge of professional terminology and basicterminology of cognitive improvement. It is thought-provoking that professionally well-educated practicingteachers have problems with the understanding of basicterminology.

Possible ways of utilizing the results

In our discussion we examined teachers’ thinking aboutchildren’s cognitive improvement and development. Due to thecomplexity of the examined topic and to the limitedpossibilities of the study, the results obtained can onlycover a portion of the field examined. Nevertheless, theobtained results show such ways and tendencies that couldserve as a starting point of the renewal of teachers’education, extension trainings and further researches. It is inevitable that thinking of various teacher groupsdiffer characteristically from each other. Mostly all pointsof research showed significant difference in thinking. Themain features of child- and teacher-images could be seen,and so did the fields that would require further researches.

The research should be continued in order to explorewhether teachers are aware of the characteristics ofchildren’s thinking and their processes of development, andwith the effects of their work on children. The explorationof the causes of results would be interesting, and thefurther identification of characteristics of the variousteacher groups, which could be utilized in their trainings.

Some sub-results show the necessity of exact and quickproblem solving. It is obvious, that a portion of teachers

21

do not believe in the possibility of improvement ofchildren, which will restrain their technical work.Therefore, it is necessary to consider the transformation oftheir thinking, as an important task of trainings. A significant problem - mostly of grammar school teachers –is the improvement of children. Although they highlighttheir own role in children’s improvement, in their thinkingand opinions many times we came against contradictions.Grammar school teachers think of children’s learningabilities as an important factor of children’ssuccessfulness, but in their system of aims it is not shown,probably because they are not prepared for theirimprovement. The methodology of the improvement of abilitiesor the teaching of learning is a defectiveness in teachers’trainings.

Our research also revealed that the one of the mostimportant factors of the transformation of public education,the thinking of teachers cannot be changed with the currentsystem of extension trainings. Nowadays, the transformationof teacher training is in the centre of attention, but theunsuccessfulness if the system of extension trainings is notrevealed. The real influence is hardly measurable, since itmostly appears in everyday teaching of teachers’ activities.During the organization of extension trainings, teachers’thinking and opinions should be taken into consideration, inorder to create such types of trainings that relate to themain characteristics of the teacher groups.

Relying on the measurement tools of this research, weplan to conduct such a questionnaire that can be used toreveal opinions of students entering their pedagogic studiesor trainings. Questionnaires alone do not provide enoughinformation about individuals; therefore other complementarymethods will be required in the practice. Our opinion based on the results obtained is in harmony withopinions of researchers of out time, namely that the aims oftrainings should be determined more precisely, theirefficiency should be increased and measured, since „even inpublic education and teacher training, the new pedagogicaland methodological culture based on the perception oflearning can only succeed, if the teachers in activity andthe educators in teacher trainings possess a decentknowledge in this field.” (Golnhofer, 2003. p.106.). Withoutthe transformation of teachers’ opinions and preconceptions,

22

the functioning of a new school insisted by the OECD (1998)is hardly imaginable.

23

References

Bruner, J. (2004): Az oktatás kultúrája. Gondolat Kiadó,Budapest

Csapó Benő (1992): Kognitív pedagógia. Közoktatási Kutatások.Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Csapó Benő (2007): A tanári tudás szerepe az oktatásirendszer fejlesztésében. In: Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 3-4. 11-24.

Falus Iván (2001a): Pedagógus mesterség – pedagógiai tudás.In: Iskolakultúra. XI. 2. sz. 21-28.

Falus Iván (2001b): A gyakorlat pedagógiája. In: GolnhoferErzsébet és Nahalka István (szerk.): A pedagógusokpedagógiája. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.

Falus Iván, Golnhofer Erzsébet, Kotschy Beáta, M. NádasiMária és Szokolszky Ágnes (1989): A pedagógia és apedagógusok. Egy empirikus vizsgálat eredményei. Akadémiai Kiadó,Budapest

Floden, R. E. és Klinzig, H. G. (1990): What Can a Research onTeacher Thinking Contribute to Teacher Preparation? : A second opinion.American Educational Research Association, Washington.

Golnhofer Erzsébet és Nahalka István (2001, szerk.): A pedagógusok pedagógiája. Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.

Golnhofer Erzsébet (2003): Törekvés a tanárképzés megújítására. In: Pedagógusképzés 1. 1–2. sz. 106.

Hercz Mária (2002): A szakképzésben dolgozó tanárokgondolkodása tanítványaik kognitív fejlődéséről.Társadalom és Gazdaság, 24. 2. 251-269. Akadémiai Kiadó,Budapest.

Huberman, M. (1993): Changing Minds: The Dissemination of Research and its Effects on Practice and Theory. In: Day, C., Calderhead, J. and Denicolo, P. (1993, szerk.):Research on Teacher Thinking: Understanding Professional Development. The Falmer Press, London. 34-52.

Kotschy Beáta (1997): Pedagógiai készségek. In: BáthoryZoltán és Falus Iván (főszerk.): Pedagógiai Lexikon. KerabanKiadó, Budapest. III. 146.

Nahalka István (1997b): Konstruktív pedagógia - egy újparadigma a láthatáron. In: Iskolakultúra, 2. 21–33.; 3.22–40.; 4. 21–31.

Nagy József (2000): XXI. század és nevelés. Osiris Kiadó, Budapest.

24

OECD (sz. n., 1998): Education at a Glance. (Teachers forTomorrow's School). Education Policy Analyses. OECD,Paris.

Richardson, W. (1996): The Role of Attitude and Beliefs inLearning to Teach. In: Sikula, J. (szerk.): Handbook ofResearch on Teaching Education. Second edition. MacMillan, NewYork. 102-119. Richardson, W. (1997, szerk.): ConstructivistTeacher Education. Falmer Press, London.

Szivák Judit (1997): Pedagógus gondolkodása. In: BáthoryZoltán és Falus Iván (főszerk.): Pedagógiai Lexikon. KerabanKiadó, Budapest. III. 161.

25

Publications

Hercz Mária (2007): Teachers’ Concepts of Experts andChildren. (Reflections on examining interpretations ofcognitive development). Paper. EARLI, 12th BiennialConference, August 28th –September 1st 2007, Budapest.(Elfogadott előadásterv)

Hercz Mária (2006): Európaiság az oktatásban tanár- ésdiákszemmel (tematikus előadás). VI. Országos NeveléstudományiKonferencia, Budapest, 2006. Tanul a társadalom. Program. Tartalmiösszefoglalók, MTA Pedagógiai Bizottság. 231.

Hercz Mária (2006): A hagyományos tanártól az e-tutorig,avagy: hogyan alakítható át a pedagógusok gondolkodása.In: MultiMédia az oktatásban 1995-2006. v 12.0. Pannon Egyetem, Veszprém.

Hercz Mária (2005): Pedagógusok szakember- és gyermekképe(gondolatok a kognitív fejlődésről vallott nézetekmegismerése közben). In: Magyar Pedagógia, 103. 2. 153-184.

Hercz Mária (2005): Pedagógus-gondolkodás: fogalomzavar ésnézetkülönbségek a pedagógiai tudás mélyén (tematikuselőadás). V. Országos Neveléstudományi Konferencia. Program.Tartalmi összefoglalók, MTA Pedagógiai Bizottság. 134

Hercz Mária (2004): Teachers’ Thinking about their Successand Efficiency. In: microCAD 2004 International ScientificConference 18-19 March 2004 Section P: Humanities, Miskolci EgyetemInnovációs és Technológiai Transzfer Centruma, Miskolc.51-57.

Hercz Mária (2004): Siker és kudarc – a szakképzésbendolgozó tanárok képe önmagukról és tanítványaikról. In:A Dunaújvárosi Főiskola Közleményei XXV. Dunaújvárosi FőiskolaKiadó Hivatala, Dunaújváros, 2004. 113-122.

Hercz Mária (2003): Research on Teacher Thinking: TheChildren’s Environment as a System that Affects TheirCognitive Development. In: IVth International Conference of PHDStudents. Humanities. 11-17 August, 2003. University ofMiskolc, Hungary. 323-328.

Hercz Mária (2002): A szakképzésben dolgozó tanárokgondolkodása tanítványaik kognitív fejlődéséről.Társadalom és Gazdaság, 24. 2. 251-269. Akadémiai Kiadó,Budapest.

26

Hercz Mária (2002): A pedagógusok gondolkodása a gyermekekkognitív fejlődéséről. In: Szakképzés-Pedagógiai Ph.D program VII.Hallgatói Konferencia, BMGE, Budapest. 10-12.

Hercz Mária (2001): A pedagógusok gondolkodása a gyermekekkognitív fejlődéséről (tematikus előadás). I. OrszágosNeveléstudományi Konferencia. Az értelem kiművelése. Program. Tartalmiösszefoglalók. MTA Pedagógiai Bizottság. Budapest, 2001.159.

27