Doctor in Education (Ed.D.)

This is a qualitative study which explores teachers’ conceptions of meaningful social science (MSS) and their conceptions of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions (KSD) needed to teach MSS. Teacher standards in India, which are designed in generic, subject-free, and linear terms, form the backdrop of this study. The conceptual framework positions the teacher as a “silent witness” in policy discourse. However, teachers are “overlooked knowers”, who are anchored to subjects and have distinct perspectives of their work. This can significantly impact the effective implementation of educational reform.

This study reports the findings of 28 social science teachers from Bengaluru, India. Each of them participated in three semi-structured interviews. Written and graphical elicitation tasks, transcribed interview data, and curriculum documents on social science serve as primary and secondary data collection.

The findings are as follows: teachers’ conceptions of MSS reveal five orientations: Conservative, Normative, Pragmatic, Humanistic, and Transformative. Teachers’ conceptions of MSS subscribe to social education with a functional character. Orientations reflect teachers’ preferences through the selective (re) activation (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998) of their career trajectories, personal motivations, and the constraints and enabling aspects of their milieu. It displays qualities of reaction, response, and adaptation which are not premeditated or explicitly anticipated. Teachers’ subject conceptions uncover how cognitive conceptions blend with projections of embedded images of self, and the relationship between the two.

Teachers’ conceptions of knowledge are grouped into five main categories: (a) subject related facts and information (b) subject content knowledge (c) subjective knowledge (d) knowledge of learners and (e) knowledge for teaching. Conceptions of skills comprise (a) instructional didactic, (b) instructional experiential, and (c) instructional inquiry skills. Conceptions of dispositions are classified as: (a) intellectual dispositions (b) social and emotional dispositions and (c) personal values. Conceptions of KSD are arrayed into four “Constellations of Practice”: Protean, Formalistic, Design, and Personalistic. Teachers’ conceptions of KSD are multivalent and not static, and are assigned asymmetrical priorities. In doing so, they rely more on personal interpretations and practical experiences, and less on curricular expectations.

The findings are discussed in the context of teacher standards. Firstly, a cautionary note is issued for generic standards as it further threatens a marginalised subject like social science, by rendering invisible the rich expressions of subject conceptions, which showcase teachers’ embedded images of self. Secondly, constellations of practice indicate decentred and diffused ways to examine teacher practice, in contrast to universally-worded standards. Finally, while standards tend to be linear and static, teachers’ subject conceptions, and their conceptions of KSD to teach their subjects help us understand how they sieve subject matter, which substantiates their professional and personal identities. The conceptual framework is revisited by demonstrating that standards are a project of re-socialization where teachers are asked to adopt new KSD as part of their assigned professional identity. This urges us to interrogate the internal world of teachers and place them at the centre of the teaching learning process. It underscores the need for policymakers to engage with teachers in constructive ways to understand their lived experiences.

Emergent curriculum can be misconstrued as a liberal approach where children are given absolute agency and control over the curriculum. To the contrary, emergent curriculum planning and teachers’ contributions are just as important in this co-constructivist model of teaching and learning. Unfortunately, the struggle of reconciling the child-centered philosophy with adult agendas presents an oxymoron at the heart of this complex approach: planning for unpredictability. The review of existing literature rendered a framework of six possible entry points, or starting points, for emergent curriculum planning. Teachers’ concerns, decision-making, and priorities pertaining to these initial choices are of importance as they define the direction the curriculum can take. Understanding teachers’ priorities and concerns when choosing entry points for emergent curriculum planning will aid teachers, curriculum specialists and educational leaders in their efforts to understand the degree of authenticity in their program’s delivery of the emergent approach, as well as the impact of teachers’ priorities and concerns on the emergent curriculum planning. To explore the nature of teachers’ decisions behind emergent curriculum planning, the aims of this research were to (a) synthesize a comprehensive framework of entry points to emergent curriculum planning; (b) uncover and explore teachers’ priorities when choosing entry points for emergent curriculum planning; and (c) uncover and explore teachers’ concerns when choosing entry points for emergent curriculum planning.

Q methodology was primarily chosen due to its demand for individual teacher participants to systematically rank the perceived likelihood of various entry points in the process of constructing a curriculum, specifically within the context of an emergent approach. This ranking process was facilitated through a forced distribution matrix, thereby promoting a structured examination of the participants' beliefs, values, and present circumstances with regard to curriculum development.

The subsequent application of statistical factor analysis resulted in the identification of three distinct clusters, or shared viewpoints on the emergent curriculum planning priorities: Child-Teacher Dichotomy, Process-Demands Moderation, and Policy Imposed Pedagogy. Subsequently, the data obtained from post-sort interviews played a crucial role in providing valuable insights that contributed to a comprehensive description and explanation of the decisions and priorities inherent to each identified cluster.

This mixed methods study sought to understand how different parenting styles affect the levels of well-being and resilience of children who were taking the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) and how parental involvements enhanced the children’s ability to take the PSLE. Results from the online survey of a sample of 74 mother-child dyads suggested that the authoritative parenting style was the most prominent parenting style. Children whose mothers had the authoritative parenting style displayed the highest mean well-being score of 4.20 (SD = 0.59) and had a significant and positive correlation of well-being with authoritative parenting scores (r = 0.41**, p < 0.01), while children whose mothers had authoritarian parenting style reported a mean well-being score of 3.73 (SD = 0.59) and exhibited a significant and negative correlation of well-being with parenting style (r = -0.25*, p < 0.05). Permissive parenting was significantly and negatively correlated with well-being of the children (M=3.71, SD=0.65; r = -0.32**, p < 0.01). Interestingly, permissive parenting was found to be significantly correlated with resilience of the children. Resilience was also found to partially mediate the impact of permissive parenting, but it did not significantly mediate authoritative, authoritarian, or helicopter parenting styles.

To delve further into mothers’ involvement during their children’s PSLE years, interviews with ten mother-child dyads were conducted. Findings revealed that mothers were involved in both academic and non-academic activities of their children, with themes such as stresses felt by both mother and child, the provision of tuition for the children and the children’s gratitude for their mothers’ involvement. Mothers started their intervention with the children at an early age by enrolling them in extra classes as well as private pre-schools. Children had timetables and schedules set out for them to ensure they stayed on track with their educational journey. Despite having to adhere to rules and timetables set by their mothers, children indicated that they appreciated their mothers’ enhanced involvement especially during the PSLE year.

Many universities that offer writing courses on how to write business proposals often fall short in adequately preparing students for real-world applications (Bhatia & Bremner, 2012). This deficiency primarily arises from an overreliance on textbooks as the main instructional materials in the curriculum (Lawrence et al., 2019). These textbooks typically lack a practical connection to the complexities involved in crafting a business proposal. They overlook critical aspects of the process, such as the need for in-depth research, the development of critical thinking skills, and the ability to collaborate effectively in writing these proposals. The aim of this dissertation is to examine ways in which the students can be better supported when writing a business proposal. It seeks to address the following research questions:

1) How do novice writers write a business proposal?

a) What do business proposal task prompts require of novice writers?

b) What are novice writers’ understanding of these requirements?

c) How do novice writers approach the writing of business proposals?

2) How do professionals write a business proposal?

a) What do requests for proposals (RFP) require of professionals?

b) What are professionals’ understanding of these requirements?

c) How do professionals approach the writing of business proposals?

3) How are the approaches in 1) and 2) similar or different?

4) How can universities support the development of writing business proposal skills that will prepare students for the working world?

This study used a narrative inquiry methodology. Participants shared their lived experiences through stories (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The roles were switched as the researcher retold the stories by interpreting the events, problems, setting, characters, and solutions to form a coherent structure. The researcher then checked the authenticity of the stories with the participants who now become the listener. The narratives were further analysed to produce restories.

Five undergraduates and five business professionals participated in the study which took place in a business management university in Singapore. They provided artefacts such as business proposal assignments, and reflective journals and participated in interviews to share their experiences. The main findings show that students struggled as they had little access to their clients’ problems. They did not have business proposals for reference because these are confidential documents. Students could not discuss their ideas with their classmates because of plagiarism issues. Therefore, they could not participate in a community of writers to develop their writing skills. In contrast, the five business professionals spent time understanding their clients' issues. They conducted research to propose solutions and write collaboratively with their team. Their approach reflects the sociocultural theory of writing where writing is deeply influenced by the social and cultural contexts.

The results of the study led to two sets of recommendations: internal and external. Internal recommendations involve getting instructors to update their knowledge of business proposal writing. Teaching and learning practices should be developed to help students collaborate more with their peers. External recommendations include working with clients on semi-confidential projects and increasing client participation to develop the students’ business proposal writing skills.

Teachers are envisioned to integrate Information and Communication Technology (ICT) as a lever in creating learning environments that promote and improve students’ 21st Century Competencies (21CC) (Roussinos & Jimoyiannis, 2019; MOE, 2023a). Seow et al. (2020) caution that technology itself will not transform teaching and learning. Rather, what is more pertinent is how teachers integrate their ICT knowledge through their techno-pedagogical practices. The literature suggests that concerns remain regarding teachers’ use of ICT for teaching and learning in classrooms (Chai et al., 2013; Koh, 2019; Niederhauser et al., 2018; Schmid et al., 2021; Staus et al., 2014).

The Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework was conceived to elucidate the complex knowledge required by teachers to effectively integrate ICT into lessons (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). To understand the level of teachers’ TPACK, studies often rely on self-reported quantitative data through surveys to report their ICT knowledge or TPACK development (Choy & Ng, 2015; Koh et al., 2013; Tou et al., 2020). Relying solely on self-reporting data might be insufficient, as it may not capture the entire picture or nuance. Teachers’ perceptions or self-reported TPACK might not align with their actual practice. The lack of evidence based on examining teachers’ TPACK ICT integration practices and a high reliance on self-reporting for TPACK development assessment are deemed notable deficiencies in TPACK research (Koehler et al., 2012; Niess, 2005; Staus et al., 2014).

The purpose of this study is to investigate teachers’ TPACK and understand how teachers integrate technology into their practice by examining their lesson design and enactment. This will also allow for the examination of how the TPACK of teachers aligns or misaligns with their ICT integration practices. The study uses the TPACK theory as a framework and analytical lens. TPACK Design Scaffolds (DS) have been suggested to support teachers’ TPACK development (Koh, 2019). Hence, this study engaged a group of three teachers in an eight-session professional development (PD) program to observe and examine their ICT integration practice through a TPACK DS PD approach.

Four research questions were explored, with empirical evidence collected from three teachers in the TPACK DS PD study. Research Question 1 explored the teachers' TPACK levels and found that teachers generally perceived their TPACK favourably. Research Question 2 examined how teachers integrate ICT, as demonstrated in their lesson design. The findings indicate that although the teachers used a variety of ICT tools, their demonstrated TPACK in lesson design was generally lower than their self-reported TPACK levels. Research Question 3 explored how teachers integrate ICT, as demonstrated in their lesson enactments. Finally, Research Question 4 investigated the alignment between teachers' self-reported TPACK and their demonstrated TPACK in lesson design and enactment. The results of the study suggest a discernible discrepancy between the teachers' perceived TPACK and their ICT lesson design and enactment. This inconsistency infers the necessity for enhanced support structures and PD opportunities, such as the TPACK DS PD, to facilitate a more seamless incorporation of ICT into their pedagogical repertoire. Thereby, fostering a more congruent alignment between their TPACK and actual practice.