Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
A gap analysis of the community school: an evaluation of the implementation of self-directed learning
(USC Thesis Other)
A gap analysis of the community school: an evaluation of the implementation of self-directed learning
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
A Gap Analysis of The Community School:
An Evaluation of the Implementation of Self-Directed Learning
by
Karen Elizabeth Song
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2020
Copyright 2020 Karen Elizabeth Song
ii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this dissertation to my husband, Suk Won Song, who has carried me on this
educational journey across the United States, Cambodia, and New Zealand, taking care of our
four children, and feeding us all so well over the last two and a half years. I can’t count the
number of weekends that I have had papers due and he gathered up the kids and headed out to
the beach or on a hike without me. I am looking forward to joining my family on those outings
and learning how to cook again!
I also dedicate this dissertation to each of our four kids, Morgan, Eli, Jonah, and Hannah
who have watched me write a lot of papers over the last five years of back-to-back graduate
programs. I am looking forward to spending quality time with each of them and celebrating the
end of my formal studies. Here’s to years of learning together on the West Coast of New
Zealand!
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation committee Dr. Emmy Min, Dr. Corinne Hyde, and
Dr. Don Murphy, for your guidance and support, and Dr. Canny for all of the feedback on
multiple drafts of this dissertation. I would not have accomplished this doctorate without having
each of you holding me accountable while understanding how crazy life can get outside of
school. I am grateful for all that I have learned at USC Rossier School of Education, from
valuing creative and innovative approaches over a path that may seem easier, being a reflective
educator, and a mindful leader. I know that I will miss having classes every week with
innovative thinkers from all over the world. Thank you all for an amazing experience and “Fight
on!”
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables viii
List of Figures ix
Abstract x
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Introduction to the Problem of Practice 1
Organizational Context and Mission 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem 3
Current Performance Status 5
Organizational Performance Goal 6
Description of Stakeholder Groups 6
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal 6
Purpose of the Project and Questions 7
Methodological Framework 8
Definitions 9
Organization of the Project 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 12
Review of the Literature 12
Learning to Learn 12
Historical Perspective: Work Readiness versus Learning to Learn 13
Self-Directed Learning 14
Models of Professional Development 16
Teachers as Learning Facilitators 17
Personal/Collaborative Models of Professional Development 19
Case Studies: Self-Directed Learning in the Classroom 20
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences 23
Knowledge Influences 24
Increasing an Understanding of Self-Directed Learning 25
Scaffolding Self-Directed Learning into New Zealand
Curriculum 26
Metacognitive Reflective Practice 27
Motivation Influences 29
Self-Efficacy Theory as Related to Teacher’s Motivation to
Facilitate SDL 31
Expectancy Value Theory as Related to Teacher’s
Motivation to Facilitate SDL 32
Organizational Influences 34
v
Cultural models 35
Need for a Culture of Accountability Across
Organizational Levels 35
Need for a Culture of Systematic Communication and
Collaboration 37
Cultural settings 38
Need for Consistent Performance Goals and Feedback
for Teachers 39
Interactive Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’
Knowledge and Motivation and the Organizational Context 40
Conclusion 43
Chapter Three: Methodology 45
Participating Stakeholders 45
Data Collection and Instrumentation 46
Survey Instrument 48
Survey Procedures 49
Survey Sampling Criterion and Rationale 49
Criterion 1 49
Survey Sampling Strategy and Rationale 50
Interview Instrument 50
Interview Protocol 51
Interview Procedures 51
Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale 52
Criterion 1 53
Criterion 2 53
Criterion 3 53
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale 53
Credibility and Trustworthiness 53
Validity and Reliability 54
Ethics 55
Limitations and Delimitations 58
Conclusion 58
Chapter Four: Findings 60
Purpose of the Project 60
Research Questions 60
Participant Stakeholders 61
Definition of Validation 62
Results and Findings 62
Research Question 1: To what extent is TCS meeting its goal of
100% of teachers implementing self-directed learning skills into
their classrooms across New Zealand by 2020? 65
Research Question 2: What are the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences related to TCS achieving its
organizational goal? 67
vi
Knowledge Results 67
Knowledge Findings 70
Knowledge Theme 1. Teacher’s declarative understanding
of SDL is necessary for it to be facilitated and embedded
in their practice 70
Knowledge Theme 2. Teachers at all levels need to
understand how to embed SDL into their teaching 71
Knowledge Theme 3. To improve one’s facilitation of
SDL, teachers should regularly practice metacognitive
reflection 73
Motivation Results 74
Motivation Findings 78
Motivation Theme 1. Teachers need to believe they can
integrate SDL into TCS’s learning to learn framework
at the primary and secondary levels, both face-to-face,
and over Zoom 79
Motivation Theme 2. Both primary and secondary teachers
need to believe that shifting from a subject matter expert
to a facilitator of self-directed learning is beneficial to
students as life-long learners 80
Organizational Results 82
Organizational Findings 85
Organization Theme 1. The organization needs a culture
of accountability at all levels, including the support of
teacher accountability 86
Organization Theme 2. The organization needs a culture
of collaboration between leadership and teachers through
increased systematic communication and collaboration 88
Organization Theme 3. The organization’s leadership
needs to provide teachers with consistent performance
goals and feedback 90
Synthesis 92
Chapter Five: Recommendations 95
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 95
Knowledge Recommendations 95
Introduction 95
Teachers need knowledge of the concepts behind
self-directed learning 97
Teachers need metacognitive reflection on their
facilitation of self-directed learning 98
Motivation Recommendations 99
Introduction 99
Self-efficacy Influence Written as Solution Statement 101
Increase the Self-Efficacy of Teachers 101
Value Influence Written as Solution Statement 101
vii
Teachers Value Being a Facilitator of SDL 101
Organizational Recommendations 103
Introduction 103
Cultural Models 104
Building a Culture of Accountability Across all Levels
of the Organization 104
Cultural Settings 105
Provide Teachers with Consistent Performance Goals
and Feedback 105
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 106
Implementation and Evaluation Plan 107
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations 109
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 109
Level 3: Behavior 110
Critical Behaviors 110
Required Drivers 111
Organizational Support 112
Level 2: Learning 112
Learning Goals 112
Program 113
Evaluation of the Components of Learning 114
Level 1: Reaction 116
Evaluation Tools 117
Immediately Following the Program Implementation 117
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation 117
Data Analysis and Reporting 119
Summary 121
Limitations and Delimitations 122
Future Research 123
Conclusion 124
References 126
Appendix A: Protocols 138
Survey Protocol Sample Questions 138
Interview Protocol 144
Appendix B: Implementation and Evaluation Plan 148
Sample of SDL Training Participant Survey – Immediately
After Training 148
Sample of SDL Training Participant Survey - Delayed Use
After Training 149
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Analysis 28
Table 2.2: Motivational Influences and Assessments for Analysis 33
Table 2.3: Organizational Influences and Assessments for Analysis 39
Table 4.1: Demographic Profiles Distribution 60
Table 4.2: Summary of Results of KMO Influences 63
Table 4.3: Knowledge Influences, Interview Results 66
Table 4.4: Motivation Influences, Interview Results 74
Table 4.5: Organizational Influences, Interview Results 81
Table 5.1: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 94
Table 5.2: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 99
Table 5.3: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 102
Table 5.4: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 108
Table 5.5: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 109
Table 5.6: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 110
Table 5.7: Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 113
Table 5.8: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 115
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework for TCS 42
Figure 5.1: The New World Kirkpatrick Model 106
Figure 5.2: Level 4 Training Report 117
Figure 5.3: Teachers Implementing SDL Strategies in the Classroom 118
Figure 5.4: Post Training Percentage of Level Criteria 119
Figure 5.5: Overall Level 1 Training Satisfaction and Perceived Relevance 120
x
ABSTRACT
Self-directed learning (SDL) is a process in which individuals can independently take the
initiative in diagnosing their learning process, including their needs, goals, and human and
material resources that are required for them to be successful learners over time. Students at The
Community School (TCS) are members of a closed church community who go directly from
high school to being employees at church-member businesses. This study examined teacher
facilitation of SDL in classrooms throughout TCS New Zealand to identify knowledge,
motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences that had either helped or hindered their
facilitation of increasing SDL skills in their students. This process was important for students at
TCS because SDL had been identified by business owners to be comprised of important
attributes that they seek in their employees. Without SDL skills, many individuals may struggle
to be life-long learners as they move from being students to being employees in the dynamic
environments of church-run businesses upon graduation. Using a mixed-methods research
design, 37 teachers were surveyed on the frequency of their SDL practice and KMO influences.
The survey was followed by 9 interviews so that a deeper understanding of the KMO influences
and their effect on teacher’s facilitation of SDL could be gained. The findings that were validated
revealed that teachers required training in procedural knowledge, support in building self-
efficacy, and clearer communication around performance goal setting and ongoing feedback
from leadership. Recommendations for closing gaps included training on SDL, the development
of a job aid that teachers could refer to after the training, and ongoing coaching designed around
the facilitation of SDL with a focus on goal-directed practice coupled with frequent feedback on
the progress of teacher learning and performance in the facilitation of SDL.
Keywords: Self-directed learning, learning to learn, professional development, job coaching
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to Problem of Practice
Self-directed learning (SDL), according to Knowles (1975), who is considered to have
developed the concept in the 1970s, is a process in which individuals can independently take the
initiative in diagnosing their learning process, including their needs, goals, and the human and
material resources that are required for them to be successful learners. Knowles (1973, 1978)
posited that as an individual matures, they have a need and a capacity to be self-directing, to
utilize one’s experience in learning, to identify one’s own readiness to learn, and to organize
their learning around life problems. In our knowledge-based society, life-long learning has
become increasingly more important and individuals who can be self-directed in their learning
can continue learning over time (Fabriz, Dignath-van Ewijk, Poarch, & Büttner, 2014, Council,
E. U., 2002.) The problem of practice that this research addresses is that if SDL skills in students
are not supported by teachers at The Community School (TCS), some individuals may struggle
to be life-long self-directed learners as they become employees in the dynamic work
environments of church-member run businesses upon graduating from TCS.
This research addresses the implementation of the stakeholder goal of 100% of teachers
facilitating self-directed learning across all campuses within TCS in New Zealand. While this
study was a process evaluation, it had implications on the learning outcomes of students as self-
directed learners, and their level of work readiness according to the expectations of area
employers. Students who attend TCS are members of a closed Christian community who begin
work in church member businesses upon graduation. The church has identified the attributes of
self-directed learning as those which are ideal for employees in their businesses and without
developing self-directed learning skills, students could find it challenging to immediately
2
participate as employees in the technologically advanced and multinational businesses in which
they are to be employed upon graduation. Most church businesses require employees to be able
to pick up new information quickly, work collaboratively, be responsible for problem-solving,
and for employees to have the ability to pace themselves through long-term projects. Because
TCS is run by the church, it is the responsibility of all teachers to meet the stakeholder goal
identified by the church, which can have direct implications for the future success of church
member businesses.
Organizational Context and Mission
TCS (pseudonym) currently has over 9,500 students in twenty-one countries on 130
campuses. In New Zealand, there are just under 20 campuses across North and South Islands,
150 teachers and staff, and 1,500 students who attend classes from grade three (age 7) to grade
thirteen (age 18). The school is run by a centralized educational trust located on the North Island
which is housed in a Christian church with a board of church members overseeing non-church
member educational specialists. Members of the church are a closed community, so all students
attending TCS are church members who go directly from high school to employment in member-
run businesses. A three-year strategic plan from 2018 – 2020 outlines reforms that are moving all
students to a model of self-directed learning.
According to the school’s promotional material, the organizational mission of TCS states
that teaching and learning programs developed by the school will: (a) be consistent with the
school’s relevant policies; (b) have content that is clearly linked to student’s needs and interest;
(c) employ a range of teaching strategies that are appropriate for the students; (d) incorporate
across-curriculum perspectives; (e) specify intended learning outcomes and detailed assessment
and evaluation procedures; and (f) pre-test – assess needs – teach to needs – assess and evaluate
3
accordingly. To support teachers’ ability to deliver the mission of the school, the national board
of trustees endeavors to (a) provide opportunities for teacher training and relevant feedback; (b)
update facilities, teaching aids, technology aids; (c) endeavor to ensure that an effective appraisal
system is supported; and (d) be receptive to teaching problems and concerns. Finally, TCS will
(a) provide the opportunity for open and continual communication and respond to general
concerns; (b) parents will be made to feel welcome to come and communicate; and the school
will (c) maintain equity in all curriculum areas as a part of working towards continual
improvement.
TCS in New Zealand maintains in promotional documents that teachers will enhance
children’s learning by (a) providing high-quality learning programs matched to the needs of
individual students and aimed at promoting their eventual full participation in society; (b)
establishing a supportive school community and to be responsive to its educational needs and
wishes; and (c) treating all children equally and providing them with skills, and the environment,
to work well with their peers and the wider community.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The construct of SDL is complex, and the literature is comprised of several studies which
define the attributes in slightly different ways including focuses on self-regulation, self-
determination, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and self-management (Agran, 1997; Bolhuis & Voeten,
2001; Darling-Hammond, et al., 2019; and Wehmeyer, Agran, & Hughes, 2000). Of these,
several studies concluded that in our knowledge-based society, life-long learning has become
increasingly more important and that individuals who can be self-directed in their learning can
continue learning over time (Fabriz, Dignath-van Ewijk, Poarch, & Büttner, 2014, Council, E.
U., 2002). There have also been several longitudinal studies (Carneiro, Crawford, & Goodman
4
2007; Cunha & Heckman 2008; and Heckman, Stixrud, & Urzua 2006) that link earnings and
specific achievement and behavioral skills, and for the church community, these are important.
An example of this was a study conducted by Heckman, Stixrud, and Urzua (2006) which
estimated a number of adjusted correlations between earnings and a scale combining adolescent
self-esteem and a sense of personal effectiveness. The study used the 1979 National Longitudinal
Survey of Youth which sampled 12,686 individuals born between 1957 and 1964 and the cohort
has been followed since. The data includes both cognitive and noncognitive data, with the
researchers finding that when examining the data on wages, schooling, employment, and
occupational choices, cognitive measures such as test scores were not the strongest predictor of
occupational success. It was found that noncognitive measures such as risk aversion, use of time,
and human capital productivity lead to higher wages. In the case of TCS, when self-directed
learning is facilitated, students can gain an increased sense of personal effectiveness as they
work, which can result in a stronger sense of self-efficacy as a learner. All teachers must
facilitate SDL in their classrooms because TCS is in the unique position of knowing the specific
skills needed to be work-ready for church member businesses and the educational community
can align the knowledge, skills, and attributes needed for students to be successful employees.
SDL is a behavioral practice used by students as they learn to develop their learning to be more
effective and efficient and SDL can be applied to any context as students continue to learn
throughout their lives. Helping all students to increase their ability to use SDL is important
because it potentially has future implications on their earnings and on the economic success of
the businesses that students will enter upon graduation from TCS.
5
Current Performance Status
According to TCS, SDL is reflected in a student’s ability to self-manage, self-modify,
and self-monitor as they engage in their learning process. This definition was created for TCS by
educational consultant, Dr. Selena Samuels, who was hired by the organization to develop their
pedagogical approach to the student learning process and is derived from the work of Knowles
(1975). Students who practice SDL are to be able to choose and implement the appropriate
strategies for success and then evaluate their learning outcomes. TCS has developed a conceptual
framework of the components of self-directed learning as defined in the ‘learning to learn’
process at TCS. It is comprised of The Assignment, which is the unit of work being explored.
Nested within The Assignment are The Study, which is student-led learning, and The Lesson,
which is teacher or group-led learning. To support SDL, teachers are responsible for facilitating
group discussions, workshops, direct instruction, analysis, assessments, or demonstrations.
Teachers are to set the success criteria, curriculum requirements, provide feedback on student
learning, and offer reflection on the learning process. Teachers are expected to collaborate, set
learning goals with aim and purpose identified, and provide student choice through open-ended
inquiry. Finally, resources are to be shared between teachers and students and shared across
campuses and schools. In terms of the full implementation of the conceptual framework, not all
aspects are currently being implemented across all campuses, but the vision has been clearly
stated by the national leadership team (both members and non-members of the church) of TCS to
all teachers and staff. The national leadership team supports teachers as they facilitate the
‘learning to learn’ journey, whereby students are equipped with the ability to think critically,
process information perceptually, analyze data accurately and evaluate situations intellectually so
that they fulfill their true potential.
6
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of the three-year strategic plan (2018 – 2020), 100% of all teachers will
implement Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for supporting self-directed learning at TCS. Dr.
Samuels is an education consultant who has established an online tutoring company in Australia
and whose teaching methodology is valued by the church leadership at TCS. The organizational
performance goal of implementing SDL was developed by the national leadership team (both
church members and non-church members) with the support of Dr. Samuels’ consultation as part
of their strategic plan process at the end of 2017. This research aims to measure how well SDL
has been implemented across all sites in New Zealand, allowing TCS to reflect on progress, and
to set new goals to fill identified gaps.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Four stakeholder groups are directly involved in the implementation of the strategic plan.
Board members are members of the church who allocate all finances for the resources necessary
to carry out the strategic plan. Educational experts at the national level are non-church members
who have devised the strategic plan and provide professional development to teachers and staff.
Teachers have been tasked with carrying out the implementation of self-directed learning in the
classroom. Finally, students are expected to master self-directed learning. TCS has specified the
global goal and the stakeholder goal for classroom-level implementation.
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal
The stakeholder group that this research will focus on will be teachers because they are
the ones who need to facilitate the process of all students becoming successful self-directed
learners (SDL) who can self-manage, self-monitor, and self-modify their learning. Teachers were
chosen as the stakeholder of focus because they are the bridge between leadership’s desire to
7
have all students develop the ability to become self-directed learners and students being able to
do these things well. The cycle for self-directed learning includes having students set realistic
goals for their learning, planning how they will use their time to effectively meet their goals,
carry out the learning, produce a product to demonstrate their understanding, and then reflect on
their learning process. Teachers are expected to frame their coursework in the ‘learning to learn’
framework of The Assignment, The Lesson, and The Study. They are to utilize the language of
learning, which includes metaphors for the learning process such as the mountain, the backpack,
the learning pit, and learning is differentiated through verbs found at the navigate-level, the
orientate-level, and the explore-level. Teachers facilitate learning using Zoom, Canvas, Office
365, and Edge.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which the organization is meeting
its global goal of having 100% of all teachers implementing Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for
supporting self-directed learning at TCS. The analysis will focus on knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences related to achieving the TCS’s goals. While a complete performance
evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder to be focused
on in this analysis is teachers.
The following questions will guide the research:
1. To what extent is TCS meeting its goal of 100% of teachers implementing self-directed
learning skills into their classrooms across New Zealand by 2020?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to TCS
achieving its organizational goal?
8
Methodological Framework
The world view that guided this research is one that is rooted in pragmatism, which is
defined by Creswell (2015) as a philosophy of research focused on the consequences of research,
the problem, and what works in real-world practice. This is because the purpose of this study is
to conduct a formative assessment of TCS in the form of an organizational gap analysis so that
barriers can be identified, and strategies developed to help TCS meet its stated goal. This
descriptive research sought to develop recommendations that were practical to implement and
reflected the values and pedagogical approaches of TCS. The study took place over three phases
which included (1) document review, (2) a survey administered to all 150 teachers, and (3)
interviews of twelve teachers.
Mixed-methods were used because it was reasonable that the research first identified
what was happening at the classroom-level as the organization worked to implement self-
directed learning skills across all campuses, followed by interviews to examine how gaps in
teacher’s knowledge, motivation, and the organization’s culture affects their implementation
process of SDL.
In addition to the survey and interviews, document review took place before the survey
and interviews as a thematic analysis of text. According to Trochim (2001), this process allows
the researcher to identify themes or major ideas in documents. At TCS, these included training
booklets, professional development PowerPoint slide decks, the school website, and any other
relevant documents that were used for training and supporting teachers to understand self-
directed learning. This explanatory sequential design and document review allowed for research-
based solutions to be recommended and evaluated comprehensively.
9
Definitions
To clearly understand the terminology that is used by TCS, definitions for terms that are
used throughout this study are as follows:
Explore: The language and procedures used at the highest level of learning. These include
applying newly discovered learning connections to wider contexts and new applications.
Students construct, reframe, hypothesize, justify, persuade, and design new ideas.
Language of Learning: Metaphors for the learning process. Students backpacks contain
the resources that they need to be successful learners, including people, resources, and skills that
they can rely on as they learn. The mountain is the learning journey and as students learn, they
need to pace themselves for the long journey. Because mountains are both up and down, at times
students will find themselves in a learning pit. When students find themselves in the pit of the
mountain, they need to look into their backpack for help from skills, people, or resources.
Navigate: The language and procedures used in the intermediate level of learning.
Students show understanding of complex learning relationships through analysis, comparison,
classification, distinguishing, and the identification of cause and effect.
Orientate: The language and procedures used at the most basic level of learning. Students
can make simple and obvious learning connections as they work towards understanding the
significance and relationships between those connections. Students define terms, list
components, identify parts, and outline steps at this stage.
Self-directed learning: The ability of students to be able to self-manage, self-monitor, and
self-modify as they learn. Self-directed learners are comfortable with independence, are
persistent, and view problems as challenges, not obstacles. They accept responsibility for their
learning, have a strong sense of curiosity, and organize their time well. They use goal-setting as
10
they complete their work and can pace themselves well when working on large projects. Self-
directed learners enjoy the process of learning.
The Assignment: The unit of inquiry being studied. It is often framed with a large and
open-ended question, under which several smaller questions can be explored. It is transparent,
defines what the teacher needs to cover and what students need to do to demonstrate
understanding. It requires student use of time-management skills and has deadlines and
checkpoints which are both formative and summative. It offers student choice, feedback from
teachers and peers, and reflection on the learning process.
The Lesson: Teacher-led inquiry that takes place during scheduled class periods. It
includes direct instruction, class discussions, workshops, analysis of the inquiry topic, student-
led presentations, and question and answer sessions. It included assessments that are both
formative and summative.
The Study: Student-directed learning which takes place outside of usual class times. It can
be used to research the unit of inquiry, to prepare for a lesson, or to receive 1:1 tutoring. The
Study can be done in small group collaboration, it can be in an adult workplace where work is
modeled or be when a student receives generalist or specialist support. It requires problem-
solving skills and self-management skills.
Organization of the Project
Five chapters were used to organize this study. The first chapter provides the reader with
key concepts regarding the organizational structure of TCS and the pedagogical approach of self-
directed learning. It covers the organization’s mission, goals, stakeholders, and key concepts of
the gap analysis that will be used to analyze the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to TCS achieving its organizational goal. It also covers the importance of
11
implementing self-directed learning across all campuses in New Zealand and the current status of
TCS’s progress in doing so. Chapter One also briefly outlines the methodological framework for
the study. Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature surrounding the scope of the
research and includes a historical perspective of the purpose of learning, self-directed learning,
teachers as learning facilitators, and effective methods of professional development. Chapter
Two then explains the study’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in detail and
provides the conceptual framework for the study. Chapter Three details the methodology used to
conduct the study and includes the sampling criteria, data collection and protocol, and how the
data will be analyzed. In Chapter Four, the data will be assessed and analyzed and in Chapter
Five, the results will be presented using the gap analysis framework. Also, in Chapter Five,
solutions to closing perceived gaps will be recommended for an implementation and evaluation
plan at TCS.
12
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Review of the Literature
This literature review examined the possible causes for the gaps in teacher
implementation of SDL in classrooms across all campuses at TCS in New Zealand. This chapter
first provides a review of SDL to outline TCS’s goal of teaching students to “learn to learn.”
Next, literature on knowledge-sharing communities was reviewed to frame the problem of
practice in terms of collaboration and social capital among teachers at TCS, as well as a review
of literature on effective professional development practices will be reviewed. Following the
general research review, the chapter explains the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic
Conceptual Framework on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences’
methodological frame used in this study. Next, the chapter turns attention to defining the types of
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences examined and the assumed teacher
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on teachers’ ability to execute TCS’s
organizational goal of 100% implementation of SDL in all classrooms. The chapter ends with a
presentation of the conceptual framework guiding this study.
Learning to Learn
Dewey (1934) stated, “The purpose of education has always been … to give the young
the things they need to develop in an orderly, sequential way into members of society” (p. 3).
But, by 1991, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development’s (ASCD, 2012)
purpose of education reflected a societal shift from education bring a benefit to society, to the
growth of the individual, stating, “The one continuing purpose of education…has been to bring
people to as full a realization as possible of what it is to be a human being” (p. 14). Students
were to develop into thinkers with a capacity to keep learning after the completion of their
13
formal education, instead of being those trained to be productive members of the workforce with
the goal being the growth of the economy.
Historical Perspective: Work Readiness versus Learning to Learn
In the early 1900s, there was a robust progressive movement in education which called
for students to have the ability to develop their learning naturally, in a manner that was rooted in
personal interests, with teachers facilitating student learning (Montessori, Waldorf [Steiner], the
Reggio Emilia Approach, and the Dalton Plan [Parkhurst] to name a few). Dewey (1938) called
for a change away from teacher-centered Essentialism and for a focus on a student-driven
Constructivist approach, though this approach became less prominent after World War II when
much of the world became focused on the pragmatic work skills needed to rebuild economies
after the war (Thompson, 2015).
From the 1950s to the second half of the 20
th
century, education trended towards a more
traditional approach of transmitting knowledge and academic skills through direct instruction
and assessments based on normative standards. In the United States, the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 2001 (No Child Left Behind [NCLB], 2002) reflected the
conservative approach of setting high standards which required that schools prove a certain level
of academic achievement to receive federal school funding. The narrow focus on standardized
testing, which did not result in higher student achievement, reawakened a movement that called
for the development of skills required for the 21
st
century (Little, 2013).
The research mentioned above examines the purpose of education as either skill-based
preparation for the workforce or as a means of preparing students to be adaptive critical thinkers.
Both the public and private sectors have developed many frameworks identifying skills and
abilities that are believed to be necessary for success in the 21
st
century, which differs from the
14
historical approach which focused on work-ready skills. 21
st
-century skills, instead, focus on
building learner’s ability to adapt to new and evolving environments. Within the 21
st
-century
approach to learning, the subject is less important than the ability to understand the ‘why, the
‘what,’ and the ‘how’ of what is being studied. The ability to question and create new
applications for what is being examined is valued over memory recall for a test. Heckman,
Stixrud, and Urzua (2006) found that while in the past, low-skill labor markets valued docility,
dependability, and persistence, but in today’s market critical thinking, creativity, and adaptability
are more valued traits in employees.
Self-Directed Learning
SDL has been, according to Jarvis (1992), a nebulous term that lacks a precise definition,
and others have concurred, stating that the term can often be co-opted for many purposes which
vary with the individual writer (Candy, 1991; Brockett and Hiemstra, 1991). In addition to
researchers inconsistently defining SDL, some see it as a process with skills to be mastered by
the learner (Avdal, 2013; Arkan, Elif, and Hatice, 2016) but others see it as attributes within an
individual which may include motivation, stress management skills, or requires one to have
responsibility for their learning (Alharbi, 2018; Van Wyk, 2017). While a precise definition is
lacking in the field, SDL is considered to be a critical competency that allows adults to adapt
accordingly to complex environments (Abele and Wiese, 2008; Helterbran, 2017; Kranzow and
Hyland, 2016; Marsick and Watkins, 1992, 1996). SDL is often presented as a result of a student
having high self-esteem and/or self-efficacy. Hoban and Hoban (2004) explain that one’s sense
of self-worth and their sense of having an ability or competence to complete a task is validated
by successful experiences. In addition, high self-efficacy and high self-esteem do have a positive
effect when applied to many life endeavors, including the enhancement of one’s ability to be a
15
successful learner, but it cannot be assumed that one is unable to be a self-directed learner unless
they have high levels of self-esteem and self-efficacy. Bloyd, Hoban, and Wall (1995) state that
self-efficacy is not an all or nothing phenomenon, but rather can be seen as a percentage of one’s
belief in their ability to complete a task or reach a goal. Bandura (1992) wrote, “The stronger the
perceived self-efficacy, the higher the goals people set for themselves and the firmer the
commitment to them” (p.10). When students practice SDL successfully, their positive
experiences of reaching goals and receiving positive feedback from teacher-facilitators can result
in an increased sense of self-efficacy.
SDL is a construct that shifts away from traditional teacher to student transmission of
knowledge to instead the activation of student’s interest in learning through process-oriented
teaching where the responsibility for learning is placed on the student, regardless of the
methodology of instruction. Process-oriented learning occurs when the teacher facilitates
independent learning by supporting students as they dive deeper into fields that prepare them for
life-long learning (Bolhuis & Voeten, 2001). According to Agran (1997), one of the primary
instructional activities that can promote student self-regulation of learning and aid in the
promotion of self-determination is the use of student-directed learning strategies. These
strategies, which include self-management strategies, involve teaching students to modify and
regulate their own behavior allowing students to gradually build self-efficacy skills to work more
independently while being supported by teachers to recognize the social and emotional aspects of
building knowledge (Darling-Hammond, et al., 2019). A study conducted by Bolhuis and Voeten
(2013), showed that students gained greater levels of self-efficacy when teachers were successful
at acting as coaches who guided students through the learning process and did not focus on
transmitting knowledge. Lee, Tsai, Chai, and Koh (2014), who conducted a quantitative study of
16
719 secondary students examining their perceptions of practicing SDL and collaborative learning
through either using or not using technology, stated that fostering self-directed learning and
collaborative learning is a vital component of cultivating life-long learners in the 21
st
-century.
Lee et.al. (ibid) found that students who perceive themselves to be self-directed learners develop
the ability to plan their own learning goals, use appropriate learning methods, and assess their
learning outcomes.
While much of the research conducted on self-directed learning has been at the university
level, the concept of self-directed learning includes students’ abilities to self-monitor, self-
manage, and self-modify behavior that supports their learning process (Fisher, King, & Tague,
2001; Hoban et. al., 2005; Rashid & Asghar, 2016). These practices allow students to be self-
sufficient and have self-control as they learn which can result in their ability to transfer what they
have learned to several different contexts. According to Zimmerman (2000), these skills need to
be explicitly taught, especially to primary and secondary students. As students develop the
practice of being self-directed while in a formal educational setting, it can lead to the
continuation of learning throughout their lives. Faure (1972), Dobson (1982), and Merriam et al.
(2007) saw lifelong learning as a deliberate and inevitable human activity that is essential for the
realization of human potential. Once individuals complete formal education, learning takes place
in the workplace, within voluntary associations, and in social contexts. The tools learned as self-
directed learners in a school setting continue to be used as lifelong learners.
Models of Professional Development
For teachers to be able to act as facilitators of SDL, it is ideal that they engage in learning
and are willing to participate in change-evoking, high-level educational pursuits (Wiggins &
McTighe, 2006). Aguinis and Kraiger (2009) posited that the most effective training programs
17
are those that include both interpersonal and cognitive skills, followed by training that focused
on procedures necessary to complete a task. The study showed that after individuals had
undergone effective training, an increase in knowledge (principles, attitudes, and skills) occurred
in both subjective measures (self-reporting) and objective measures (standardized tests). To
attain long-term behavioral changes across an organization, new information and skills are
mastered when individuals have to understand both the ‘when’ and the ‘why’ of how to
implement what they have learned (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). This section will examine the
transition from teachers as providers of knowledge to facilitators of the process of learning and
personal/collaborative models of effective professional development for supporting this
transition.
Teachers as Learning Facilitators
For many teachers, the shift from being a subject matter expert to a facilitator of the
learning process requires a daily practice of metacognitive reflection on one’s practice and being
open to changing it for the benefit of building student ownership of the process. Schleicher
(2012) found that routine rule-based knowledge, which is easiest to teach and to test, is also
easiest to digitize, automate, and outsource so students must develop conceptual understandings,
the ability to transfer knowledge to different settings, and the ability to use that knowledge in
new and creative ways. Teachers are required to facilitate learning that includes developing
student’s curiosity and self-direction, managing interconnected information, building one’s
synthesis of information online, about dealing with ambiguity, developing healthy skepticism, an
inquiring mindset, and interpreting and resolving conflicting pieces of information. According to
Schleicher (ibid), the past was about delivering knowledge in the classroom from the teacher to
all of the students in the same manner, but the challenge now is to foster user-generated
18
understanding among teachers and school leaders so that the learning needs of the diverse
student population are met through individualized student-centered pedagogy.
Webber and Miller (2016), posit that teachers should develop pedagogies that engage
available resources and include diverse ways of learning, are supple in responding to changing
environments and educational needs, and prepare students for lifelong learning and civic
engagement. While there is a normative practice among pre-service teachers to rely upon
specialized knowledge in subject areas and subject area methodologies, they should be
encouraged to believe that it is necessary to effectively teach an integrated curriculum. Teacher
education is seen as a way to develop a capacity for integrating knowledge and linking subjects,
leading to an interdisciplinary, integrated, and inquiry-based approach to facilitating learning
amongst students which encourages students to take an active role in the learning process by
getting them curious about a topic and encouraging them to discuss it with their peers. According
to Crockett, Jukes, and Churches (2011), using inquiry-based learning is one of the most
effective ways to help students develop skills in SDL because it encourages deeper engagement
in the learning process.
Research shows that within the last decade, there has been a shift towards teachers as
facilitators which requires that educators move away from disciplinary silos and work towards
fluid, reciprocal relationships with multiple partners in education who may include community
groups, parents, students, and members of the administration. This is the educational approach to
learning that is embraced at TCS.
Personal/Collaborative Models of Professional Development
Many schools aim to be places where the educators are themselves engaged in learning
and collaboratively share their energy, knowledge, and skills with other educators, creating a
19
high-growth environment which inspires the students. A key component of self-directed learning
is the concept that the journey of learning does not end but is instead a life-long curiosity. To
facilitate self-directed learning, it is necessary for teachers to both see themselves as life-long
learners and to value its importance as they teach it to students (Fink, 1997).
Tarrant (2013) stated that as an important part of professional development, reflective
practice creates a level of accountability in which the individual teacher works to extend their
growth in the profession so that they are facilitating their student’s learning to the best of their
ability and making necessary changes to improve their practice. This process allows teachers to
collaborate by forming ‘communities of practice’ which refer to the process of social learning
when professionals are working towards a common interest or implementing a particular
pedagogical approach. Communities of practice share the common goal of interacting frequently
to improve the process of their work. These groups develop their practice through a variety of
methods, including problem-solving, requests for information, seeking the experiences of others,
reusing assets, coordination, and synergy, discussing developments, visiting other members,
mapping knowledge, and identifying gaps which creates a non-hierarchical flow of information
across networks of reciprocity (Wenger and Snyder, 2000). As teachers work to implement self-
directed learning, communities of practice could be beneficial to standardize practices across
grade-levels and subject areas.
Finally, as teachers work to facilitate self-directed learning, working with a mentor with
systematic frequent feedback for teachers new to TCS would provide a framework for new
teachers to develop their practice of facilitating student learning. There could also be
collaborative joint lesson planning and peer observations to allow new teachers to develop
supported best practices in their classrooms and to reflect on classes in which students struggled
20
so that they can be viewed as learning opportunities to develop strategies for improvement.
Simon, Campbell, Johnson, and Stylianidou (2011) state that the motivation to learn comes from
within a teacher as they reflect on the outcomes of practice and perceive a need to change.
Educators with a growth mindset who are willing to make the process of learning visible to their
students through modeling their learning, learning from mistakes, collaborating with peers, and
using metacognitive reflection, are then able to build their student’s self-efficacy as self-directed
learners.
In summary, research has demonstrated that embedding teacher’s professional
development into their practice through strategies such as mentoring/coaching, co-teaching to
model effective practices, professional learning collaboratives, the practice of meta-cognitive
reflection, and feedback sustained over time are more effective than traditional one-day
workshops, which many schools tend to rely on for the dissemination of new strategies across the
organization (Kaiser, Rosenfield, & Gravois, 2009; Klein & Riordan, 2011). Each of these
practices has been identified as being a component of effective professional development for
teachers, has the capacity to positively influence teacher knowledge and practice and, in turn,
student learning (Darling-Hammond, Hyler, & Gardner, 2017).
Case Studies: Self-Directed Learning in the Classroom
Building SDL skills in students is a practice occurring around the world. Bolhuis and
Voeten (2001) conducted a study in six Dutch schools where 68 teachers in grades 10 -12 were
observed over two lessons. The researchers were looking for patterns of teaching where teachers
used process-orientated teaching to facilitate SDL, but the researchers found that this occurred
infrequently in the classrooms. While traditional teaching was not observed the majority of the
time, two observed patterns of activating teaching occurred: one where teachers focused on
21
subject matter as they interacted with students and another where teachers acted as a coach and
supervised students working independently. When traditional teaching occurs, the time spent
explaining the subject matter dominates the learning experience. Activating teaching lessens the
time spent on explaining the subject matter and more time is spent on students working. Finally,
process-oriented teaching was almost absent in the observations but is what is closely tied to
developing SDL skills in students. This includes explaining, questioning, and providing feedback
concerning the learning process. The findings of this case study were that without the explicit
teaching of process-orientated guidance as students learn, many will be expected to be more
independent, but have no idea of how to manage their autonomy. Bolhuis and Voeten (ibid) are
concerned that especially for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, support for being
self-directed may not be in place and the lack of support may result in higher dropout rates.
The second case study was based in New Zealand and examined students’ use of
evaluative constructivism to measure students’ awareness of their learning strengths and needs as
related to their level of academic achievement in essays that they wrote. The implications of this
research can help teachers have a better understanding of the support they can provide students
to be more self-directed learners. In this study, Conner (2014) was the classroom biology teacher
and therefore acted as a participant-observer. The class was comprised of 21 year 13 students
(seniors) who were tasked to conduct an inquiry into the social and ethical issues associated with
cancer. Of the 21 students, 16 chose to be part of the study and observed as they worked.
Students were interviewed prior to the evaluative constructivism task and interviewed after the
task. All of the students' notes, brainstorming sheets, and drafts were reviewed as well. The
researcher used two main agendas to focus on student work. The first asked students to develop
their intentions for learning – “what do I need to know or do?” and the second increased the
22
knowledge and awareness of the choices of learning procedures and allowed the students to
freely make choices for how and what they learned. The findings showed that students had a
wide range of learning awareness, use of learning strategies, the ability to derive specific
learning intentions, and the ability to deliberately choose what to do as it linked to their essays.
Those who could do these things well produced the highest quality essays. The implications for
this case study are that metacognitive strategies can enhance students’ awareness of their
learning needs and can help students derive intentions and make appropriate choices for learning
processes.
The third case study was conducted in the United States and looked at self-directed
activity-based learning (SDABL) and achievements in two high school chemistry classes.
Bassett, Martinez, and Martin (2014) studied one class of 24 students as they were given pretest
results, a list of standards to be mastered, and a chart of activities categorized by difficulty level.
Students were asked to select activities that met their learning needs and preferences. A second
class of 24 students was studied as students were provided teacher-led instruction. The 48
students were randomly assigned to either the SDABL class or the teacher-led class. The
researchers found significantly higher achievement gains and more consistent participation in
teacher-led classes and most students believed that they learned better by teacher-led
instructional methods. While the researchers’ findings focused on the student preference of
teacher-led classes and their academic growth between the pre- and post-tests in each classroom
setting, it is important to note that the SDABL class did achieve a higher mean for pre- and post-
tests. The SDABL class had a pre-test mean of 54.04 and a post-test mean of 92.88. The teacher-
led class had a pre-test mean of 43.58 and a post-test mean of 92.54. Finally, the researchers
23
agree that SDABL has the potential to be an effective pedagogical approach for high school
chemistry if more student preparation is part of the strategy.
As the case studies have shown, SDL is a multi-faceted construct, and for teachers to be
able to purposefully teach students how to build these skills in their learning processes, they
should understand the many components of SDL. To help build autonomy in student learning,
teachers can ensure that students are provided opportunities to take increasing ownership of their
learning; are provided time to plan their learning; facilitate students use of metacognition; help
students reflect on what they have learned; and help students self-monitor their learning process
and their progress (Educator Impact, 2019).
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) developed a model to diagnose performance gaps in organizations
which include three factors: (1) people’s knowledge and skills; (2) their motivation to meet the
stated goal; and (3) barriers at the organizational-level which may include inefficient policies,
counterproductive procedures, or the lack of resources necessary for the individual to meet the
goal. Knowledge itself comprises different types of understanding which include factual
knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, strategic knowledge, and belief-based
knowledge (Krathwohl and Anderson, 2009). Knowledge exists at multiple levels within an
organization and includes individuals, groups, and the organization.
In addition to knowledge, motivation is a necessary component when considering if a
goal can be met or not met. Pintrich (2003) asserts that motivation is a central theme of how and
why some people learn and thrive in a particular learning environment, while others struggle to
develop the knowledge and cognitive resources that are available in that same environment.
24
Motivation includes an individual’s thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors with regards to choice,
persistence, and effort and is influenced by one’s social-cognitive constructs.
Finally, organizational influences are needed for an organization’s ability to achieve its
goals because all attempts at improving performance are filtered through the culture of the
organization. If the culture is inefficient due to inadequate policies, procedures, or missing
materials, knowledge, and motivation are not enough to overcome these gaps. The Clark and
Estes (2008) gap analysis is carried out in a purposeful, systematic manner so that both
observable and concealed barriers are identified, resulting in the ability to develop appropriate
strategies for moving TCS towards the goal of 100% of all teachers implementing self-directed
learning across all grade levels by 2020.
Knowledge Influences
Davenport and Prusak (1998) define knowledge as the framework that one uses to
evaluate new experiences and information which is filtered through previous experiences,
contextual information, one’s values, and insight in the mind of the knower. As an organization
works towards meeting the goals that it has set, it is critical that the knowledge and skills of
those who are expected to implement those goals are clearly understood, because those
individuals are the drivers of the implementation of each of the components of the goal. This
knowledge includes the how, what, when, why, and who of the goal and requires clear
communication and dissemination of information at all levels within the organization (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
According to Bryk (2010), as an organization undergoes change, leadership needs to
establish strategic priorities for using resources to buffer externalities that may distract from the
reforms taking place. This process may include ensuring that teachers receive specific
25
professional development sessions to increase their conceptual knowledge of strategies included
in a stated goal or that resources are allocated to train teachers on procedural knowledge such as
the collection, analysis, and implementation of student data into instruction. Knowledge exists at
multiple levels within an organization and includes individuals, groups, and the organization.
Because of the multiple levels, as the organization undergoes reform, the processes for that
reform needs to be shared both horizontally and vertically through an open flow of information
(Ipe, 2003).
The following sections will examine three knowledge influences that are necessary for
TCS to meet its 2018 – 2020 goal of having 100% of all teachers implementing the strategies and
skills necessary for all students to be increasing the self-efficacy skills needed to become self-
directed learners. The types of knowledge necessary to meet the goal include conceptual and
procedural knowledge, as well as metacognitive reflection on the practice of facilitating SDL.
Increasing an understanding of self-directed learning
The first knowledge influence that teachers need to achieve TCS’s global goal of having
all teachers supporting self-directed student learning is to enhance their conceptual
understanding of the components of SDL. The role of the teacher shifts from the traditional view
of the teacher holding knowledge that he or she disseminates to their students over time to that of
a facilitator of the learning process (Bolhuis & Voeten, 2001). Teachers shift from direct
instruction of content to providing students with learning environments that provide students
with opportunities to develop mastery through acquiring skills, practicing the integration of those
skills into their work, and understanding why and how they are important so that they can
determine when to apply them in the future helps move knowledge into long term memory
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). SDL at TCS is defined as a student’s ability to self-monitor their
26
progress during the learning process, self-manage their workload across classes, and self-modify
any behavior that is counter-productive to their learning goals. When teachers allow students to
practice the constructs within SDL through inquiry-based or project-based learning, it fosters
meaningful learning experiences and helps students have greater autonomy over their learning
process, with the long-term goal being that through mastery a pattern of life-long learning will
emerge (Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn, 2007). Teachers need to develop their knowledge so
that they can provide students with autonomy to develop SDL skills while providing instruction
that includes the content required by the New Zealand curriculum.
Scaffolding self-directed learning into New Zealand curriculum
The second knowledge influence that teachers need for TCS’s global goal is to be able to
scaffold SDL into the content knowledge requirements of the New Zealand curriculum through
the strengthening of procedural knowledge of how to do this effectively. This is challenging
because when specific content must be covered, it takes the ownership of learning away from the
student, and learning becomes directed by the teacher. While this constrains student choice, it
does not necessarily provide a barrier to student engagement. If teachers have procedural
knowledge to support and facilitate SDL skills, they can scaffold student’s abilities to plan their
learning, build upon prior knowledge by assessing what they already know, develop a student’s
responsibility for the learning process, and help students apply learning strategies when they
become disengaged (Ayyildiz & Tarhan, 2015). Because the acquisition of long-term knowledge
and skills are largely dependent on practice, the framework of SDL skills can be applied to any
content area, through interwoven practice that allows skills to be practiced using several methods
and approaches for the same task (APA, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education,
2015). Teachers need to have a clear understanding of each of their individual students’ levels of
27
learning needs in order to facilitate learning that is appropriate for each student’s zone of
proximal development (Chu et al, 2017; Scott & Palinscar, 2006). As students’ abilities as SDLs
increases, teachers can remove scaffolds, such as assignments chunked into smaller pieces with
specific due dates attached to each and allow students themselves to determine how they pace
their performance task.
Metacognitive reflective practice
Flavell (1979) posits that metacognitive knowledge rests on a personal belief system that
is built up from prior metacognitive experiences and individual acknowledgments of causes and
consequences. The use of metacognitive reflection is linked to professional growth as an
educator because it allows for the development of professional values and attitudes. But, as
Tarrant (2017) noted, it is not a common practice to reflect on what those are for most teachers,
often due to perceived time constraints. Tarrant believes that teachers, as professionals, need to
be provided time to reflect on their practice to focus on how their practice impacts those they are
responsible for, as well those they are responsible to. Teachers serve as facilitators of the
learning process at TCS, and in doing so, need to purposefully scaffold the skills that students
need to develop to learn effectively throughout their lives.
To support SDL, teachers have the task of reinforcing the concept of learning as an
ongoing process, while also being responsible for covering the content outlined in the New
Zealand curriculum. Kolb’s Learning Cycle, as outlined in Vince (1998), is a useful process for
how teachers could support SDL skills in students. It begins with the teacher’s formation of the
abstract concepts comprised within SDL and generalizations for how to transfer information.
Teachers would then test the implications of those concepts in new learning situations through
concrete experiences provided within their lessons. Finally, teachers would observe student
28
learning and reflect on how to modify student learning to improve or reinforce student outcomes
and their use of the skillset within SDL. The step of metacognitive reflection is necessary
because it allows for the process of creating knowledge that reflects the interaction between the
teacher’s subjective experiences teaching and the more objective cultural experience of how the
teacher’s strategies impact their student’s learning and practice of SDL (Vince, 1998).
Table 2.1 shows the organizational goals, the global goals, the two types of knowledge
influences, and how to assess them.
Table 2.1
Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Analysis
Organizational Mission
The Community School will enhance children’s learning by:
Providing high-quality learning programs matched to the needs of individual students and those
that are aimed at promoting their eventual full participation in society; establishing a supportive
school community; treating all children equally and providing them with both the skills and the
environment to work well with their peers and the wider community, while developing the self-
efficacy to become life-long self-directed learners.
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of the three-year strategic plan (2018 – 2020), 100% of all teachers will implement
Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for supporting self-directed learning at TCS.
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers will integrate the facilitation of self-directed learning into their classroom teaching and
into learning conversations outside of formal classroom teaching.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type (i.e.,
declarative (factual or
conceptual), procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge Influence
Assessment(s)
Teachers need
knowledge of the
concepts behind self-
directed learning.
Declarative – Conceptual Survey; interview
I understand the concepts
involved in self-directed learning.
(Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
29
Teachers need to know
how to incorporate self-
directed learning into the
New Zealand curriculum.
Procedural Survey; interview
I know how to scaffold the skills
necessary for learners to become
self-directed learners. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided,
agree, strongly agree)
Teachers need
metacognitive reflection
on their facilitation of
SDL.
Metacognitive Survey; interview
I believe that metacognitive
reflection is a necessary
component of successfully
facilitating SDL. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided,
agree, strongly agree)
Motivation Influences
Motivation is a necessary component when considering if a goal can be met or not met
because of how motivated one is to complete the task. This depends on one’s choice, persistence,
and the level of mental effort needed, and each of these components is then, in turn, influenced
by one’s self-efficacy, values, interests, attributions, goals and goal orientation, and one’s
emotions at the time. Pintrich (2003) asserts that motivation is a central theme when researching
how and why some people learn and thrive in a particular learning environment, while others
struggle to develop the knowledge and cognitive resources that are available in that same
environment. Motivation includes an individual’s thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors with regards to
choice, persistence, and effort and is influenced by one’s social-cognitive constructs. Pintrich
(ibid) has drawn from the literature to frame learning through a motivational framework and
concludes that: (1) adaptive self-efficacy and competence beliefs motivate learners; (2) adaptive
attributes and control beliefs motivate learners; (3) higher levels of interest and intrinsic
motivation motivates learners; (4) higher levels of value motivate learners; and (5) goals
motivate and direct learners. Mayer (2011) agrees but adds the social component of learning and
30
states that when learners believe that those facilitating learning are their partner in the process,
they are more successful in meeting their learning goals.
When considering TCS’s global goal of 100% of all teachers implementing strategies of
self-directed learning, motivation is an important piece of ensuring that the goal is met. Teachers
may have the knowledge and organizational supports to be successful in meeting the goal but
lack the motivation to do so. This could be derived from their own values that may reflect a weak
desire to integrate the concept of life-long learning into their student’s coursework or they may
believe that the time required to implement SDL skills is just too much and has caused them to
lose a desirable work/life balance that is highly valued in New Zealand culture. In addition to
this, there have been many initiatives that have come from the TCS national team recently and
Clark and Estes (2008) have identified that vague and constantly changing performance goals are
an element of a work environment that destroys motivation over time. Therefore, TCS’s global
goal needs to inspire teachers to form mastery goals around reinforcing the skills necessary for
SDL in their students without overwhelming or demotivating the teachers.
The next section will focus on two specific motivational constructs, self-efficacy, and
value, to determine any motivational gaps as TCS moves to meet its strategic goal. Bandura
(1986) asserts that individuals’ self-beliefs are critical to their motivation and determine the level
of self-efficacy to complete a task. In the case of TCS, a teacher’s belief of having the
knowledge and ability to facilitate student’s learning in an SDL platform is a determinant for that
teacher’s success or level of challenges in the implementation of the strategies in the classroom.
In addition to self-efficacy, teachers themselves need to believe that life-long learning (as a
component of SDL) is an important mindset to develop in their students and be willing to put the
time necessary into developing curriculum and learning experiences that are relevant and
31
engaging to students. These are examples of attainment and cost belief values. The first speaks to
the degree in which the goal reflects one’s value system (the greater alignment, the greater
chance of success), and the second speaks of one’s perception of how much attaining the goal
will cost the individual. This may be measured in time, stress, anxiety, or social consequences of
success or failure. If the cost is too high, there is a greater chance that the individual may not
begin the task or persevere over time to meet the goal (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).
Self-efficacy theory as related to teacher’s motivation to facilitate SDL
An individual’s self-perception is directly linked to their ability to begin, perceiver, and
complete a given task or activity and is influenced by their perceived level of knowledge if they
have failed or succeeded at the task in the past and can be influenced by the type and amount of
feedback they receive (Rueda, 2011). Self-efficacy plays a central role in social cognitive theory
because it is the foundation for one’s well-being, one’s sense of accomplishment, and one’s
motivation. Without a belief that something can be accomplished, there is little incentive to even
begin. Because self-efficacy is rooted in the self-perception of one’s ability, it can also be a
major deterrent if an individual has developed a negative feed-back loop around their ability to
be successful in a given area. This may lead to increased levels of stress, anxiety, and depression
if one is confronted with a task or activity that they don’t believe that they can do (Pajares,
2006).
Bandura (1977) postulated that individuals evaluate information based on their
accomplishments, observed experiences of others around them, forms of persuasion from others,
and physiological indexes to determine their sense of efficacy to carry out a task. Individual
successes raise efficacy and failures lower it, but once the individual has a sense of efficacy,
failures have less of an impact on the individual’s willingness to carry out a task. Schunk (1991)
32
stated that motivation is enhanced when individuals perceive that they are making progress and
that regular feedback helps individuals gain and maintain a sense of self-efficacy as the
individual becomes more skilled in the task that they are completing. In the case of teachers
facilitating SDL at TCS, their self-efficacy as a component of motivation to support SDL will
vary as a function of aptitude and prior experience facilitating SDL. It is expected that those who
are more motivated to facilitate SDL will do so more frequently.
Expectancy value theory as related to teacher’s motivation to facilitate SDL
Wigfield and Eccles (2000) constructed a theoretical model of expectancy-value that
examined students’ expectations for success and the value that they attached to various options
perceived to be available. The model considered several variables such as the cultural milieu that
the student-operated within; the goals that the student had set for themselves; their expectation of
success; their perceived task value; and the student’s interpretation of the learning experience.
These variables frame the student’s perception of how they felt about the task and required them
to articulate if they could do the task at hand and if they wanted to do the task at hand (Eccles,
2006). If a student believed that he or she could perform the task, it was a predictor of a student’s
willingness to persevere when faced with challenging tasks. In addition to this, if a student
valued the task, there was a stronger probability of success. Wigfield and Eccles (2000) broke
down value into four distinct constructs which include: (1) intrinsic interest (the level of
enjoyment gained); (2) attainment value (the level of the task being aligned with the student’s
identity or beliefs); (3) utility value (how much the task is tied to the student’s long-range goals);
and (4) the perceived cost of engaging in the activity.
These constructs can be examined from the level of teacher implementation of new
teaching and learning strategies at TCS. Teachers can become more motivated to build a practice
33
of life-long learning if they believe that they are an important member of a learning community
that operates in a culture of knowledge-sharing. When teachers are known to be subject experts
who can share their knowledge with others and have reciprocity in areas that they need support
in, it develops a professional community where sharing knowledge is valued and celebrated (Ipe,
2003). This builds capacity in attainment value and is a predictor for the successful
implementation of SDL in the classroom at TCS. The development of the knowledge-sharing
community also influences the teacher’s perceived cost of implementing the strategies because
unit plans, lesson plans, and resources can be shared among the learning community, removing
the need for every teacher to be developing their own materials.
Table 2.2 shows the organizational goals, the global goals, and the two motivational
influences and methods to assess them.
Table 2.2
Motivational Influences and Assessments for Analysis
Organizational Mission
The Community School will enhance children’s learning by:
Providing high-quality learning programs matched to the needs of individual students and those
that are aimed at promoting their eventual full participation in society; establishing a supportive
school community; treating all children equally and providing them with both the skills and the
environment to work well with their peers and the wider community, while developing the self-
efficacy to become life-long self-directed learners.
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of the three-year strategic plan (2018 – 2020), 100% of all teachers will implement
Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for supporting self-directed learning at TCS.
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers will integrate the facilitation of self-directed learning into their classroom teaching and
into learning conversations outside of formal classroom teaching.
Assumed Motivational Influence Motivational Influence Assessment
34
Self-efficacy: Teachers need to believe they
can integrate SDL into the TCS learning to
learn framework.
Survey Questions: I believe that I can
integrate self-directed learning into what I
teach in my classes.
I believe that I can facilitate SDL with
students outside of my scheduled classes.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided,
agree, strongly agree)
Value (Attainment): Teachers need to believe
that life-long learning (as a component of SDL)
is an important mindset to develop in their
students.
Teachers need to believe that shifting from a
subject matter expert to a facilitator of self-
directed learning is beneficial to students as
life-long learners.
Interview Questions: Can you describe any
activities that you participate in that reflects
life-long learning, including formal or
informal learning? How, if at all, do you
encourage your students to learn outside of
your classroom? Can you give an example of
how you balance facilitating SDL with
covering specific subject content?
Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes’ (2008) third influence of organizational performance gaps focuses on
inadequate material resource allocation, procedures, and/or policies that may inhibit employee’s
ability to meet the organizational goals. Housed within organizational influences is the culture of
the organization which determines how things are done and affects efforts to improve
performance. Culture is defined by Clark and Estes (ibid) as “the core values, goals, beliefs,
emotions, and processes learned as people develop over time in families and work environments”
(p. 108). Because individuals are part of many different cultures as they move throughout their
communities, cultural influences can be difficult to identify within an organization, but they play
a significant part in an organization’s performance.
Christenson and Reynor (2013) also stress the importance of an organization’s values as
they work towards meeting goals that disrupt the norms set in the organization and highlight how
new values can be created through processes that are defined or evolve to address specific tasks
needed to reach goals. The creation of new organizational values can be complicated and must be
35
viewed from multiple lenses including the culture of the organizational environment, the culture
of dynamic groups within the organization, as well as the culture of the individuals which
reflects unconscious culturally learned knowledge and motivational patterns. To deconstruct the
cultural influences within TCS, cultural models, which encompass the values, beliefs, and
attitudes of employees, but are not visible and automated, will be examined. Also, cultural
settings, which encompass visible, concrete manifestations of the cultural models, and appear as
activities and practices among employees, will be examined (Clark and Estes, 2008). Without an
understanding of how cultural practices within TCS, both visible and unseen, impact attempts at
improved teacher facilitation of SDL, maintaining the organizational goal over time will be
difficult to achieve.
Cultural models
Cultural models refer to the established way of thinking of the stakeholders within the
organization (Clark and Estes, 2008). They are reflected in the way that teachers approach their
work at TCS, their attitudes towards change, and how they feel about collaboration,
metacognitive reflection, and participating in professional development to build upon their
ability to facilitate SDL. The two assumed cultural models that will be explored are the
organization’s need for a culture of accountability at all levels and the organization’s need for a
culture of collaboration between leadership and teachers to support teacher’s ability to facilitate
SDL.
Need for a culture of accountability across organizational levels
Accountability is an important piece for ensuring that an initiative is carried out as it was
designed to be carried out and the culture of accountability in an organization has a direct effect
on how people interact (Biesta, 2004). Hentschke and Wohlsetetter (2004) define it as a
36
contractual agreement between two parties where the directors (leadership) have the power to
reward or punish the providers (teachers) for their performance, but Burke (2005) sees it as being
carried out in different frameworks, including bureaucratic, professional, political, managerial,
market, or managed market. He also recognizes that accountability isn’t necessarily one-
directional with directors only holding providers accountable, though the relationship between
subordinates and superiors is reflected in Burke’s upward accountability. There is also
downward accountability where a manager is being responsible to subordinates during the
process of participatory decision making; inward accountability where individuals are acting to
meet ethical or professional standards; and outward accountability when those individuals are
responsible to external key stakeholders in the larger community.
Because of the multiple levels found within the organizational framework at TCS
(international teams, national teams, regional teams, and site teams), the what and the how of
accountability can get convoluted as it moves through the different layers. Waters, Marzano, and
McNulty (2003) see leadership as being responsible for not only knowing the what, but also
having a strong understanding of the when, how, and why to meet the organization’s goals.
Leithwood and Riehl, (2003) concur with Waters, Marzano, and McNulty and add that the two
functions of leadership are to provide direction and exercise influence. Leaders work with others
to build a shared sense of purpose when working towards a goal; they establish conditions where
others collaborate and can work effectively; they disperse leadership opportunities throughout
the organization to build a sense of community and purpose among the larger team. TCS has a
clear global goal but the challenge for leadership is their lack of ability to understand how well
teachers are implementing the facilitation of SDL both inside and outside of their classes.
Leadership is dispersed across different organizational levels, but this has led to fractured
37
systems of communication because of the lack of onboarding when new leaders join the team at
different points. Knowing who to contact for information or who to include when sharing
information takes time to learn and the flow of information is disrupted at many points in the
organization. Finally, while gathering student data is common and a part of the TCS culture,
gathering data on the implementation process of the strategic plan at the teacher-level is not,
resulting in teachers not knowing if they are facilitating SDL well or if they need to modify their
strategies to improve student outcomes.
Need for a culture of systematic communication and collaboration
Clear systematic communication and collaboration at TCS need to be increased at all
levels. As teachers are supposed to be providing students with clear expectations and scaffolding
to ensure their success, the TCS national team should understand that the strategies that teachers
are implementing in their classrooms also need to be used on teachers as a means of building
their self-efficacy skills and knowledge as learners themselves. Teachers need clear goals for
how to make data-driven decisions, as a component for measuring student learning, and receive
feedback from supervisors so that they may receive the support and resources needed to reach
their goals. As TCS leadership supports teacher’s self-efficacy to carry out their job well, it also
builds a teacher’s ability to share that information and collaborate with others as members of a
knowledge-sharing community as they develop best practices for teaching SDL skills in the
classroom. Knowledge is, according to Ipe (2003), “dynamic in nature and is dependent on social
relationships between individuals for its creation, sharing, and use” (p. 355), and all levels within
the TCS organizational framework should encourage better communication and collaboration to
share it.
38
Cultural settings
Within an organization, cultural settings focus on specific elements within the
environment that helps to create the organization’s cultural model, which affects people’s
experiences and influences how people perceive the organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001). Sarason (1972) sees cultural settings encompassing the visible interactions between two
or more people who come together over time to accomplish something. Bronfenbrenner (1979)
posited that individuals operate in a social-ecological system that radiates from the individual to
a microsystem (school, family, peers), a mesosystem (interactions between two microsystems),
an exosystem (mass media, social services, neighbors), and a macrosystem (attitudes and
ideologies of the culture). What happens in one ecological setting can then influence another
setting. For example, if a teacher is being required to serve on several committees by an
administrator, it may then affect the teacher's time dedicated to collaborating with other teachers
on lessons. Each additional setting that the teacher finds themselves participating in takes time
away from another setting. These practices are framed within the values and beliefs of the
organization’s cultural model. Examples of cultural settings at TCS would include teachers
meeting to collaborate on teaching strategies across the curriculum; when those in leadership
positions observe teachers in their classrooms; when meetings take place to provide feedback on
observations; or when leadership and teachers meet to work together to set performance goals for
the year.
Need for consistent performance goals and feedback for teachers
Fullan (2000) examined how those looking to implement organizational change were able
to create conditions where professional collaboration became the norm across the organization.
In many schools, teachers work within a cellular model based on subject or grade-level, but
39
when a school-wide teaching strategy is identified as the global organizational goal and is
implemented across all levels, a culture of collaboration is necessary for the change to be
sustained over time. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2010) identified four essential change elements
when examining school reform: (1) collaboration on goal setting; (2) clear performance
indicators; (3) assistance for teachers who are struggling to implement the new strategy; and (4)
feedback from leadership who collaborated with teachers as they met to discuss, plan, and
implement classroom strategies to improve student outcomes. Danielson (2007) identified four
domains for professional practice in teaching which include planning and preparation, the
classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities. When feedback is provided
to teachers through these lenses, teachers can clearly understand their performance level within
each domain based on administrator observations and can then either provide support to others if
their performance is distinguished or receive support from others if there is a need for
improvement. This process of feedback and collaboration on performance goal setting helps
create a cultural setting that values professionalism, collaboration, and improved student
outcomes across all levels.
Table 2.3 shows the organizational influences and how to assess them.
Table 2.3
Organizational Influences and Assessments for Analysis
Organizational Mission
TCS will enhance children’s learning by:
Providing high-quality learning programs matched to the needs of individual students and those
that are aimed at promoting their eventual full participation in society; establishing a supportive
school community; treating all children equally and providing them with both the skills and the
environment to work well with their peers and the wider community, while developing the self-
efficacy to become life-long self-directed learners.
40
Organizational Global Goal
By the end of the three-year strategic plan (2018 – 2020), 100% of all teachers will implement
Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for supporting self-directed learning at TCS.
Stakeholder Goal
Teachers will integrate the facilitation of self-directed learning into their classroom teaching and
into learning conversations outside of formal classroom teaching.
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organization Influence Assessment
Cultural Model Influence 1: The organization
needs a culture of accountability at all levels.
TCS has a culture of accountability. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
Cultural Model Influence 2: The organization
needs a culture of collaboration between
leadership and teachers.
TCS has a culture of collaboration between
leadership and teachers. (Strongly disagree,
disagree, undecided, agree, strongly agree)
Cultural Setting Influence 1: The
organization’s leadership needs to provide
teachers with consistent performance goals
and feedback.
TCS’s leadership provides teachers with
consistent performance goals. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
Interactive Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and
Motivation and the Organizational Context
Maxwell (2013) defines a conceptual framework as “the system of concepts,
assumptions, expectations, beliefs, and theories that supports and informs [one’s] research” (p.
39). Conceptual frameworks are derived from conducting an empirical and theoretical literature
review on one’s topic, personal experience, and conducting thought experiments that guide
methodology, research questions, and how one approaches the study. The conceptual framework
grounds one’s research in what is already known in the field, focuses the contribution that will be
made to the field, and explains the theoretical framework that informs the study. The conceptual
framework that is used in this study is derived from Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis which
includes a six-step process. It begins with a clear identification of business goals, performance
goals, and performance gaps. The gaps are analyzed through the lens of knowledge/skills,
41
motivation, and the organizational culture and the results are used to either improve the system
or modify the goals.
When analyzing TCS and its goal of 100% implementation of self-directed learning
across all TCS campuses in New Zealand by 2020, it is important to consider the
interconnectedness of organizational culture, teacher’s knowledge, and motivation. This is
reflected in the nesting of teacher’s knowledge and motivation in the culture of the organization
in the conceptual framework. One of the knowledge influences that teachers need to achieve
TCS’s global goal of having all teachers supporting self-directed student learning is to enhance
their conceptual knowledge of the components of SDL. This is linked to the motivational
influence of self-efficacy. For teachers at TCS to feel confident in integrating SDL into the TCS
learning framework of the assignments, the lessons, and the study that comprises student
learning, they must believe that they possess a deep conceptual understanding of SDL. Both
knowledge and motivational influences are nested within the organizational culture where many
teachers enjoy classroom autonomy and are resistant to the alignment of curriculum, teaching
strategies, the structure of Canvas pages, or sharing unit or lesson plans. Hargreaves (1994)
discussed the micropolitics that occur within a school and how, depending on the culture,
collaboration could be either spontaneous, voluntary, pervasive across time and space, and
development-oriented or contrived partnerships that are administratively regulated, compulsory,
fixed in time and space, and is implementation-orientated. Information sharing between teachers
informs practice, as does collaboration across the curriculum when reinforcing strategies to
strengthen student learning, but as Pollack (2011) stated, the density of information flow can be
overwhelming. Identifying potential gaps and working to provide suggestions to assist TCS in
meeting its organizational goal is the purpose of this research.
42
Figure 2.1
Conceptual Framework for TCS
TCS
Cultural Models (CM) and Cultural Settings (CS)
CM1: The organization needs a culture of accountability at all levels.
CS1: The organization’s leadership needs to provide teachers with
consistent performance goals and feedback.
CM2: The organization needs a culture of collaboration between
leadership and teachers.
100% implementation of self-
directed learning across all
TCS campuses in New
Zealand by 2020.
Teachers
Knowledge:
Declarative Conceptual: Teachers need to understanding
concepts of self-directed learning (SDL). Procedural: Teachers
need to know how to incorporate SDL across all grade-levels.
Metacognitive: Teachers need to practice metacognitive
reflection on their facilitation of SDL.
Motivation:
Self-Efficacy: Teachers need to believe that they can integrate
SDL into the TCS learning framework. Teachers need to
believe that shifting from a subject matter expert to a facilitator
of self-directed learning is beneficial to students as life-long
learners. Value (Attainment): Teachers need to believe that
life-long learning (as a component of SDL) is an important
mindset to develop.
43
The conceptual framework of TCS is comprised of a large blue circle with a smaller
green circle nested within it. The blue circle represents TCS as an organization and identifies
cultural influences. The smaller green circle represents the stakeholder knowledge and
motivation of teachers working at TCS. The green circle is nested within the blue circle because
it represents how organizational culture influences the knowledge and motivation of stakeholders
as they work to carry out the organizational goal of TCS. The goal is stated in the yellow box
below the circles and is connected by a one-directional downward arrow. The goals are below
the circles because if the culture of TCS and the knowledge and motivation of the teachers are
aligned, then the organizational goal would be met.
Conclusion
Based on a comprehensive review of both theoretical and empirical literature, there is a
justification for conducting a case study of TCS’s ability to implement its organizational goal
across multiple campuses in New Zealand. This is an important area of investigation because
students at TCS go directly into employment at church member businesses upon graduation from
secondary school and if they lack self-directed learning (SDL) skills, the competitiveness of
church member businesses in the global market is at stake. Therefore, examining teacher’s
ability to facilitate this type of learning through the lens of Clarke and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
of knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational resources will help to determine if they
can meet the organizational goal of 100% implementation of self-directed learning by 2020. The
research shows that when teachers facilitate the concepts of SDL through inquiry-based or
project-based learning, it fosters meaningful learning experiences and helps students have greater
autonomy over their learning process, with the long-term goal being that through mastery, a
pattern of life-long learning will emerge. This directly mirrors the global goal of TCS’s mission
44
to develop each student’s ability to ‘learn how to learn.’ Chapter Three will include a discussion
of the research design, data collection, and data analysis, which has been determined by the
literature in this chapter.
45
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which teachers are achieving the
stakeholder goal of facilitating SDL within and outside of their classes to support student’s
ability to self-monitor, self-manage, and self-modify behavior so that those behaviors support
their learning process. TCS developed a strategic plan which stated that by the end of the three-
year strategic plan (2018 – 2020), 100% of all teachers will have implemented Dr. Selina
Samuels’ strategies for supporting self-directed learning at TCS. The design of the project was a
mixed-methods study using an explanatory sequential design to collect quantitative data through
a survey, followed by qualitative interviews to gain a deeper understanding of teachers’ survey
responses. Document review was used to assist in the creation of the survey and interview
questions for triangulation purposes. Because TCS’s HR department provided the names of the
campus principals to this researcher, who then emailed the survey to all of the teachers on their
campuses, a single-stage design was used for both the quantitative and qualitative stages of the
research. Analysis of the survey and interviews focused on knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences relating to the stakeholder goal. The questions that guided this study
were as follows:
1. To what extent is TCS meeting its goal of 100% of teachers implementing self-directed
learning skills into their classrooms across New Zealand by 2020?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to TCS
achieving its organizational goal?
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholders chosen for this study are the teachers who work for TCS and whose
responsibility it is to implement the organizational global goal of facilitating SDL both in and
46
outside of their classes. Teachers at the primary level teach face-to-face classes, but at the
secondary level, teachers may teach face-to-face classes, teach over Zoom, or have a
combination of the two. This stakeholder group was chosen specifically because teachers are the
only stakeholders who can accurately identify KMO organizational gaps from which
recommendations can be derived.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The world view that guided this research was one that is rooted in pragmatism, which is
defined by Creswell (2015) as a philosophy of research focused on the consequences of research,
the problem, and what works in real-world practice. This is because the purpose of this study is
to assess TCS in the form of an organizational gap analysis so that barriers can be identified, and
strategies developed to help TCS meet its stated goal. This descriptive research sought to
develop recommendations that were practical to be implemented and reflected the values and
pedagogical approaches of TCS. An explanatory sequential design was used over two phases.
The first phase was the collection of quantitative data to measure teacher perceptions of KMO
influences and how many of the 150 teachers at TCS are purposefully facilitating self-directed
learning in their classrooms. The quantitative results provide thematic areas from which in-depth
qualitative data was gathered to derive a deep understanding of the KMO influences on teacher’s
ability to facilitate SDL. Document review of material provided by TCS and related to SDL was
reviewed throughout the study to triangulate themes and inform survey and interview questions.
According to Creswell (2015), surveys allow conclusions to be drawn across large samples and
provide specific relationships that can be investigated during the analysis of the results, or in this
case, during the third qualitative phase of the research. The second qualitative phase was
conducted as a follow-up to the quantitative results to help explain the quantitative results. In this
47
exploratory follow-up, twelve individual interviews were conducted with a smaller nested,
purposeful sample of six primary teachers and six secondary teachers to better understand how to
close the identified gaps in the implementation process of self-directed learning. Twelve teachers
were chosen for the sample because according to Guest, Brunce, and Johnson (2006) who
conducted a metanalysis of 60 studies, a saturation of themes occurs within the first twelve
interviews, although basic elements for meta-themes were present as early as six interviews.
Interviews allow for a deeper understanding of teacher’s knowledge and motivation to
implement self-directed learning and TCS’s organizational effectiveness, in terms of processes
and resources. The interviews were conducted via Zoom because the twelve teachers are located
throughout New Zealand. Mixed-methods were used because it was critical that the research first
identify what was happening at the classroom-level as the organization worked to implement
self-directed learning skills as the primary pedagogical approach across all campuses, followed
by the examination of how gaps in the implementation process could be filled to improve TCS’s
goal of 100% implementation of SDL in all classrooms.
In addition to the survey and interviews, document review took place as a thematic
analysis of text. According to Trochim (2001), this process allows the researcher to identify
themes or major ideas in documents. This process began before the commencement of the data
collection phase so that themes identified informed survey items and interview questions and
continued until data collection was concluded or when themes found in the documents had
reached saturation. Document review provided triangulation and either corroborated or
contradicted the data collected in the surveys and interviews. According to Yin (2017), if the
thematic analysis of text contradicts what is discovered in the surveys and interviews, then the
researcher must pursue the problem by inquiring further into the topic. In addition to reviewing
48
the content of documents, researchers are also able to make inferences from the documents. This
may include drawing inferences based on who is included on a particular distribution list and
who is left off of the list. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) specify six types of documents which
include public records, personal documents, popular culture documents, visual documents,
physical material and artifacts, and researcher-generated documents and artifacts. For this
research, documents that are directly linked to teachers’ knowledge and motivation of self-
directed learning, and the organization’s development of documents pertaining to self-directed
learning were examined. All of these were available to teachers and leadership on a shared drive
housed on the TCS server and include training documents, rubrics developed for teachers
regarding SDL, professional development PowerPoint slide decks, Canvas folders with
documents on SDL, and email distributions regarding SDL in addition to other documents.
Survey Instrument
The survey measured the status of TCS’s organizational goal of 100% implementation of
SDL across all classrooms. The purpose of the survey was to provide a formative snapshot of
what teachers were doing at the time of the survey and how it aligned with the organizational
goal, it also examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences impacting
teacher’s implementation of the goal. The survey included constructs covering teacher
facilitation of self-directed learning in the classrooms and learning centers on each site;
perceptions of knowledge influences, motivational influences, and organizational influences
including cultural models and settings. The survey was comprised of 50 questions using a 5-
point Likert scale for most questions and took less than 30-minutes to complete on Qualtrics.
According to Trochim (2001), Likert scaling is a unidimensional scaling method, so it is
49
assumed that the researcher is measuring a one-dimensional concept. See Appendix A for the
survey protocol.
Survey Procedures
The survey was conducted after IRB approval and was the first phase of data collection.
The Human Resource department at TCS had agreed to facilitate the survey by providing all of
the principal’s email addresses who then sent the introductory email asking all teachers on their
campuses to complete it, and by providing time specifically allocated for taking the survey
during a weekly professional development session. All teachers have their own laptops and the
confidential survey link was provided to them through email by Qualtrics, as well as being sent
as a link in the introductory email from campus principals. To avoid the survey going into the
teacher’s spam filter, IT was contacted to white list Qualtrics prior to the email being sent to
teachers. This administration mode was chosen because, as Robinson and Firth Leonard (2019)
state, it is one of the most cost-efficient ways to reach a large sample for a self-administered
survey due to scheduled email reminders and built-in analysis tools.
Survey Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Teachers at TCS New Zealand are comprised of 150 junior and senior school teachers
who work both full-time and part-time. Because the research questions addressed teachers
implementing self-directed learning skills into their classrooms, only teachers who have had the
opportunity to do so will be included in the sample. The following criterion was created to
identify the sample.
Criterion 1
Teachers included in the sample must have been employed by TCS from the start of the
2020-2021 school year beginning on January 21, 2020. If teachers began their employment after
50
the start of the school year, they will not receive a survey due to not having enough familiarity
with facilitating SDL.
Survey Sampling Strategy and Rationale
The survey sample should be approximately 150 teachers working for TCS New Zealand,
and while it is expected that not all will choose to participate, seeking responses from the total
population of teachers is the most effective way to answer the research questions. The survey
was comprised of 50 items, with five items per construct including Knowledge-Declarative
Conceptual, Knowledge-Procedural, Knowledge-Metacognitive, Motivation-Self-efficacy,
Motivation-Value, Organization-Cultural Model, and Organization-Cultural Setting, three
demographic and ten items which inquire about teacher’s frequency of facilitating SDL. The
survey was administered after the researcher conducted a structured review of TCS’s documents
related to SDL. This document review informed the items included in the survey instrument.
Interview Instrument
The second phase of data collection included 12 interviews (six primary teachers and six
secondary teachers), which sought to gain a deeper understanding of teacher’s facilitation of self-
directed learning in both their classrooms and was identified in phase one of the data collection
period. Miles and Huberman (1994) state that interviewees should be identified based on a
purposeful sampling strategy. The sample for TCS was purposely split between primary and
secondary teachers because self-directed learning is done differently in primary and secondary
schools and this researcher wanted to better understand the reasons for the differences in
frequency if they were found to be present. Interview questions were designed to derive a deep
understanding of the KMO influences on teacher’s willingness to support student’s self-directed
learning. The focus of this phase of data collection was on the second research question: What
51
are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to TCS achieving its
organizational goal? Interviews were necessary for this phase because according to Merriam and
Tisdell (2016), interviews are needed to understand those things that cannot be observed, such as
what influences one’s behaviors, thoughts, and feelings. Therefore, interviews were necessary to
understand the teacher’s conceptual understanding of self-directed learning and their
motivational drive to implement it inside of their classrooms.
Interview Protocol
The interviews that were administered were semi-structured due to themes emerging
from open-ended questioning. There were 15 interview questions and they were divided into
areas that covered teaching experiences at TCS, knowledge of self-directed learning, motivation
to facilitate self-directed learning, collaboration, goals at TCS, teacher autonomy, and life-long
learning. The interview questions were designed to match the research constructs of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences found in Clark and Estes (2008) organizational gap
analysis. The conceptual framework of this research looked to understand how teacher’s
declarative conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge of self-directed learning, as
well as their self-efficacy, cost belief, and attainment as it related to their motivation to facilitate
SDL. These concepts were nested in the organization’s cultural settings and models that include
accountability, collaboration, communication, goal setting, and feedback. See Appendix A for
the interview protocol.
Interview Procedures
Interviews were the last phase of data collection and were held a week after the surveys
were conducted. Beginning a week after the survey was conducted allowed for the survey data to
be analyzed before interviews were conducted. Document review was an ongoing process until
52
the interviews were complete or until saturation of themes had occurred. The interviews were
held over two weeks with six individual interviews being conducted per week. It was estimated
that each interview should take approximately 30 minutes to complete. The formal interviews
were conducted via Zoom meetings due to interviewees being located across TCS’s campuses
throughout New Zealand. The interviews were formal because the questions were purposeful,
rooted in a pragmatic approach that aimed to derive an understanding of gaps surrounding the
teacher’s ability to facilitate SDL and strategies to fill the identified gaps. While new themes
were welcome as part of qualitative research which aimed to build an understanding of the
interviewee’s perspective, the interview was meant to be semi-structured so that certain
constructs were explored. Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2011) posit that standardizing open-
ended interview questions increases the comparability of the responses and therefore facilitates
the organization and analysis of the data, but Merriam and Tisdell (2016) believe that because
less-structured formats assume that individual respondents see the world in unique ways, so that
less structure is ideal. The interviews were, therefore, semi-structured to support the flexibility of
capturing individual experiences, thoughts, and feelings, but in a manner that addressed all of the
constructs of the conceptual framework. To support uniformity in data collection, the Zoom
meetings were recorded, and the cameras were on to facilitate a natural conversation, but only
the transcription of the interview was used. As soon as the transcription was copied and saved on
a password-protected laptop with the other data being collected, the video of the meeting was
deleted. In addition to the Zoom transcript, a secondary handheld recorder was available to be
used as a back-up in the case of technical issues occurring on the Zoom platform.
53
Interview Sampling Criterion and Rationale
Of the 150 teachers surveyed, a random sample will be drawn from six junior
schoolteachers and six senior schoolteachers. The survey included a question that asked if they
were willing to be interviewed to further discuss their facilitation of SDL and the KMO
influences that affect that facilitation. If more than twelve teachers responded, the process of
drawing random names would have been conducted until the sample consisted of six individuals
from both the junior and senior levels.
Criterion 1
Teachers must be employed at TCS at the time of the survey.
Criterion 2
Six interview participants will be teachers at the junior school level.
Criterion 3
Six interview participants will be teachers at the senior school level.
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale
Twelve teachers, six from the junior-level and six from the senior-level, were identified
by their indication of being willing to be interviewed at the end of the survey. Both junior and
senior-level teachers were interviewed because SDL is facilitated differently at the junior and
senior levels. The purpose of the interview was to gain a deeper understanding of the KMO
influences that either positively or negatively affects the teacher’s ability to facilitate SDL inside
of their classes. Successes and gaps were identified and presented in the recommendations found
in chapter 5. The interview was the final phase of data collection.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To increase the credibility of one’s research, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggest
54
triangulation. This includes using multiple methods to collect data, collecting the data from
multiple sources, using multiple investigators, and multiple theories to confirm one’s findings.
This research utilized triangulation through a mixed-methods approach of document analysis, a
survey, and interviews; data was requested from all teachers in a census survey and then in-depth
interviews of both primary and secondary teachers were conducted; multiple investigators
examined the findings when the dissertation committee reviewed the study; and theories of
learning, professional development models, and the KMO gap analysis grounded the study. In
addition to triangulation, rich data from the transcripts of all of the interviews were collected.
These were verbatim, and while specific to TCS and self-directed learning, others may have
access to the transcripts once all of the identifiers have been removed. Finally, as in the
quantitative section on validity, undergoing the process of reflexivity to have a deep
understanding of this researcher’s own bias and how it impacts the research is critical. This
researcher currently works for the organization and has experienced a lack of follow-through
regarding student support that has impacted student learning opportunities. This was addressed
and reflected on so that issues that arose personally did not impact how interviews were
conducted with other teachers. Trustworthiness came with the consistency of how this researcher
conducted interviews, followed protocol, and created an unbiased environment in which teachers
felt comfortable discussing their facilitation of self-directed learning and perceived KMO
influences on their ability to do so.
Validity and Reliability
Given that the first research question for this study asked to what extent TCS is meeting
its organizational goal of having all teachers facilitating self-directed learning within their
classrooms, the survey included questions on the frequency that teachers are supporting student
55
self-directed learning in different capacities, as well as teacher’s perceptions of KMO influences.
Threats to external validity may have occurred due to an invalid or unreliable survey instrument
or researcher bias due to this researcher’s position in the organization. To increase the validity of
the survey instrument, peer review from other doctoral students, as well as those working at TCS
in non-teaching roles were sought to strengthen the survey questions with a focus on content
validity. Once the survey instrument had undergone peer review, an instrument item sorting
process was implemented, as explained in Agarwal (2011), to satisfy construct validity through
addressing both convergent and discriminant validities. This process involved individuals who
were not familiar with the research to act as sorters of questions into categories which they
believed were present in the survey instrument. This process is unstructured, and any number of
categories can be devised by the sorters. This allowed ambiguous and confusing questions to be
removed and edited to be more clearly connected to their intended category. This process was
then repeated with two new sorters in a structured manner where the categories are specified
beforehand.
This researcher’s own biases were identified as part of a metacognitive reflective process
so that they were addressed and their possible impact on the research is identified. In terms of
reliability, it was expected that the response rate should be relatively high because the survey
was being introduced and supported through the campus principals electronically using Qualtrics
during a professional development session where all of the teachers would be participating
across all sites. It was important to keep in mind that because teachers are in different locations,
there may be external variables that differ from one participant to the next that would affect the
survey results.
56
Ethics
Creswell (2014) states that researchers need to protect their research participants through
building trusting relationships, promoting integrity in their research, and anticipating and
addressing possible ethical issues that may arise as a study is carried out. This study was
conducted with three ethical principles framing the research. These include respect for persons,
beneficence, and justice. This study ensured that all participants know that their participation is
voluntary; they were provided separate informed consent forms for both their participation in the
study and to be recorded; and understood that they were free to withdraw from the study at any
time. Participants understood the purpose of the research and knew what the researcher was
asking them to do or discuss. Also, if any possible harmful effects could have been derived from
their participation, participants were aware of those risks. Any information that participants
shared was confidential and the data gathered from them was stored in a password-protected file
to maintain its confidentiality and any data shared with others had all of its identifiers removed.
Beneficence maintains that the research does not harm participants and that any possible harm is
minimal as compared to the benefits of the research findings. Finally, justice ensures that
benefits outweigh burdens and that subject populations are not chosen for the convenience of the
researcher but are chosen because they represent the population that can answer the research
questions being studied (Glesne, 2011). To ensure that this researcher followed the ethical
principles outlined above, before conducting any collection of data, a proposal was submitted to
the University of Southern California's Internal Review Board and all of their guidelines for
protecting the rights and welfare of participants in this study were followed. This researcher has
also completed the Collaborative Institute Training Initiative (CITI) for Basic Human Research
in Social-Behavioral Human Subjects on September 27, 2019.
57
This researcher holds a mid-level leadership position as an employee of TCS who is in
charge of two small campuses with a total student enrollment of forty students. The campuses are
part of a four-campus regional site and the researcher reports directly to the principal in charge of
all four campuses. Because there are seventeen sites across New Zealand, this researcher’s
position neither raises power issues within the group of teachers who will be surveyed or
interviewed nor does the researcher’s role lead to influence over others as they consider their
willingness to participate in the study. Only three teachers of the 150 nation-wide teachers work
at the two campuses that the researcher oversees, but the researcher does not serve in the
capacity of being their direct supervisor. If at any point the researcher believed that ethical issues
were arising, Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggest that it is the responsibility of the researcher to
be conscious of these and examine his or her philosophical orientation to address the issues.
In addition to this researcher’s leadership position, serving as an English teacher for
students in years 9 and 10 is included in the researcher’s responsibilities. This introduces a bias
due to the experiences that the researcher has had when seeking support from leadership for
students who are struggling. It will be important for the researcher to maintain a neutral position
when interviewing other teachers and not be influenced by personal experiences. To mitigate the
potential for bias this researcher will keep a journal to record possible biases before conducting
interviews and then provide metacognitive reflection after the interview to identify how the
researcher’s lens may skew how data is coded.
Finally, this researcher is conducting research in New Zealand but has only lived in New
Zealand for a year and a half. Patton (2012) posits that cross-cultural inquiries add layers of
complexity to the already complex interactions that take place during an interview. As an
American, what this researcher may consider being socially appropriate may not be so to a New
58
Zealander. Therefore, it is important to remember that researchers are not in the field to change
or judge social norms or values in a different culture, but to better understand the perspectives of
others. This researcher included metacognitive reflection on cultural biases and differences in
social norms to the journaling process to avoid affecting the coding process.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this research include the number of teachers who chose to complete the
survey, as well as the number of those who were willing to be interviewed. While this research
aimed to survey all junior and secondary teachers, due to the limitation of time, only twelve were
interviewed. Another limitation is that teachers were taking the survey on each of their
campuses, so environmental factors cannot be controlled. In addition to this, the truthfulness of
teacher’s responses cannot be predicted or controlled. A delimitation of this research is that it is a
case study of one school’s implementation of a strategic plan. The research is focused on a gap
analysis of one pedagogical approach that the school has as a focus and does not examine any
other possible pedagogical approaches. Another delimitation of the study is that the population
studied is limited to teachers who are facilitating SDL in their classrooms. While it would be
beneficial to understand how students are using SDL in their learning process, they are outside of
the scope of this study.
Conclusion
This chapter details the methodology used to conduct the study and includes the sampling
criteria, data collection and protocol, how the data was analyzed, credibility and trustworthiness,
validity and reliability, ethics, and limitations and delimitations of the study. The research took
place in three stages, beginning with an ongoing systematic review of documents related to SDL,
followed by an explanatory sequential design to collect quantitative data through a survey,
59
followed by qualitative interviews to gain a deeper understanding of teachers’ survey responses
as they pertain to the KMO influences found in levels of knowledge and motivation, as well as
the organization’s culture that affects teacher facilitation of SDL. Chapter Four will analyze the
findings of the document review, survey, and interviews and present those findings.
60
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources for teachers who are expected to be facilitating SDL in
their classrooms. Most church businesses require employees to be able to pick up new
information quickly, work collaboratively, be responsible for problem-solving, and for
employees to have the ability to pace themselves through long-term projects. Because the
behaviors and skills of SDL have been identified by church business owners as attributes that
they deem to be important in employees, it is the responsibility of teachers at TCS to build those
skills in their students, because if new employees are lacking SDL practices there can be direct
implications for the future success of church member businesses.
The process of analyzing the needs of teachers as they facilitate SDL began by generating
assumed gaps and then systematically working to validate those gaps. Those needs included,
among other things, teacher’s understanding of the components of SDL, teacher’s belief in their
ability to facilitate SDL, and an organizational culture that supports their facilitation of SDL
through goal setting and feedback. Because teachers are the ones supporting student’s
development of SDL, they were the targeted stakeholder group for this study.
Research Questions
The following questions will guide the research:
1. To what extent is TCS meeting its goal of 100% of teachers implementing self-directed
learning skills into their classrooms across New Zealand by 2020?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to TCS
achieving its organizational goal?
61
Data collection for this study included the following:
• A 51-question survey (see Appendix A) on teacher facilitation of SDL at TCS that
included four demographic questions, ten frequency questions, and 34 questions
on teacher knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
• Interviews with 9 teachers who volunteered to be interviewed, five of whom were
secondary teachers and four of whom were primary teachers, using a 14-question
protocol (see Appendix B).
• A document review of all SDL training materials and resources for teachers was
examined to create items for the survey instrument and interview questions.
Using these three mixed methods, this researcher gathered information relevant to
answering the research questions developed for this study. This chapter examines the data results
gathered and findings.
Participating Stakeholders
There were approximately 150 teachers at TCS in the 2020 academic year. For this study,
37 teachers participated in the data collection. For the survey instrument, 37 teachers completed
the survey with a completion rate of 24.66% compared to the total number of teachers. The
demographics of teacher participants are listed in the following table:
Table 4.1
Demographic Profiles Distribution
Demographic Value Frequency Percentage
Teaching Level Primary Teachers 16 43%
Secondary Teachers 21 57%
Gender Female 28 76%
Male 9 24%
Prefer not to disclose 0 0%
Less than 1 year 9 24%
62
Years of Service Over 1 year but less than 5
years
16 43%
Over 5 years 12 33%
Level of Education Secondary school 0 0%
Bachelor’s degree 30 81%
Master’s degree or higher 7 19%
Definition of Validation
Each of the influences presented in this chapter as identified gaps were either validated,
partially validated, or not validated based on the data presented. While a validated gap in this
study is one where 50% or more of the respondents disagreed on the survey, there were several
cases where there was a large discrepancy between what teachers claimed to do on the survey
and what they reported in the interview. These discrepancies reflected evidence that the influence
impacted the teacher’s ability to facilitate SDL, and therefore validated the gap if the majority of
interviewees reported not practicing behavior that supports building SDL skills in students.
Those influences that were determined to be partially validated were identified if they impacted
teachers’ ability to facilitate SDL, but there was no consensus that the facilitation of SDL was
affected. An influence that was deemed to be not validated was done so if the majority of the
participants (more than 18 survey respondents and/or more than 5 interviewees) concluded that
the influence cited in the literature was not affecting their ability to facilitate SDL in their
classes.
Results and Findings
Teachers at TCS received the survey on June 22, 2020, during a weekly professional
development session. This researcher requested that campus principals share the survey link with
all teachers with an introduction to the study and a request to complete the survey. This process
was repeated a week later on June 29, 2020, with a small number of teachers completing the
survey after the second request. The survey questions were derived from reviews of surveys on
63
employee self-efficacy, declarative knowledge, and metacognition, as well as literature on
effective professional development, self-directed learning, and a review of training documents
provided to teachers at TCS from the national leadership team. Questions were divided into
frequency, knowledge (K), motivation (M), and organizational (O) cultural sections. Within each
section there were sub-sections. Knowledge questions included declarative, procedural, and
metacognitive; motivational questions included those on self-efficacy and value; and
organizational culture included items on organizational models and organizational settings. The
survey was conducted on the Qualtrics survey platform and to avoid confusion, survey questions
used a six-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree, disagree, somewhat disagree,
somewhat agree, agree, and strongly agree. A middle neutral point was removed to force the
response to one side or the other.
As part of a mixed-method approach, this researcher also conducted interviews in
addition to the survey described above. The interview questions were divided into questions
regarding knowledge, motivation, and organizational culture. Harding (2013), stated that the
purpose of thematic analysis is to look for commonality, relationships, and differences. These
became clear after the interview data was analyzed. The interviews were conducted over two
weeks from July 20, 2020, to August 3, 2020, and four primary teachers and five secondary
teachers completed the interviews. Three teachers opted out of participating in the interview
process, and after several attempts to replace them had not been successful, it was decided that
the data would be analyzed with a total of nine participants.
Table 4.2 summarizes the results of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that were either validated, partially validated, or not validated as barriers to teachers
facilitating SDL in their classrooms.
64
Table 4.2
Summary of Results of KMO Influences
Type Knowledge Validated
(Yes, Partially, No)
Declarative Teachers need knowledge of the
concepts behind self-directed
learning.
Partially
Procedural Teachers need to know how to
incorporate self-directed
learning into the New Zealand
curriculum.
Yes
Metacognitive Teachers need metacognitive
reflection on their facilitation of
self-directed learning.
Partially
Motivation
Self-Efficacy Teachers believe they can
integrate SDL into the TCS
learning to learn framework.
Yes
Value Teachers believe that shifting
from a subject matter expert to a
facilitator of self-directed
learning is beneficial to students
as life-long learners.
Partially
Value Teachers believe that life-long
learning (as a component of
SDL) is an important mindset to
develop in their students.
No
Organizational
Cultural Model The organization needs a culture
of accountability at all levels,
including the support of teacher
accountability.
Yes
Cultural Model The organization needs a culture
of collaboration between
leadership and teachers through
increased systematic
communication and
collaboration.
Partially
Cultural Setting The organization’s leadership
needs to provide teachers with
consistent performance goals
and feedback.
Yes
65
Research Question 1: To what extent is TCS meeting its goal of 100% of teachers
implementing self-directed learning skills into their classrooms across New Zealand by
2020?
This study’s first research question asked to what extent teachers at TCS were facilitating
SDL in their classrooms through the collection of frequency data in the survey. The frequency of
teacher facilitation of SDL was collected during the survey to answer research question one. The
differences between primary and secondary teachers were analyzed due to the differences in
pedagogical approaches at the primary and secondary levels. On almost all frequency survey
items, the majority of both primary and secondary teachers reported facilitating SDL one to five
times over the last week. When asked if teachers worked with students to reflect on what they
need to know next as they learn a specific topic, secondary teachers practiced this more
frequently than primary teachers, but when it came to teachers working with students to develop
their own success criteria for a task, the majority of primary teachers practiced this learning
strategy and the majority of secondary teachers did not, most likely due to inquiry-based learning
at the primary level and the NCEA framework found at the secondary school.
While the frequency data captured how frequently teachers claimed to be practicing the
facilitation of SDL in their classes, it is important to understand if teachers have the procedural
knowledge necessary to facilitate SDL. When teachers responded to procedural knowledge
questions, they answered with either “agree” or “strongly agree” with a range of 54.1% to 73.0%
with an overall declarative knowledge percentage mean of 62.2%. Those areas of procedural
knowledge covered in the survey included teacher’s perception of knowing how to scaffold SDL
skills, use their professional training to help students self-manage, self-manage, and self-modify
their behavior as they engage in learning. This researcher found that the facilitation of SDL at a
66
frequency of one to five times was possibly high and this was confirmed during the interviews
where lower levels of facilitating SDL were reported by the five secondary level teachers who
were required to teach over Zoom. Qualitative interviews were used to uncover what this looked
like in the classrooms when teachers were asked to provide examples of how they facilitated
SDL learning skills.
Teacher’s procedural knowledge showed significant differences between those who teach
at the primary and secondary levels, with additional differences between secondary teachers who
either teach face-to-face or over Zoom. Most interviewees who teach at the secondary level who
are teaching over Zoom said that they use Canvas to facilitate SDL by putting the resources on
the platform that students need to be successful in their learning, but many reported that not all
students are using the platform at the level that is needed for successful learning. Teachers
mentioned that scaffolding for students on how to use the platform has not always been explicitly
taught and Canvas pages are populated differently within and between departments. Teachers
also reported that some students claim to not know where to go to access resources. At the
primary level, there was a much higher level of procedural knowledge of SDL and in almost all
cases, the practice of embedding SDL into the classroom culture was strong.
Two of the knowledge items have revealed areas for improvement in the teacher’s
practice. Both of the items were procedural knowledge with the first being 59.5% indicating that
they know how to help students self-monitor their behavior as they learn and the second being
54.1% knowing how to scaffold the skills necessary for learners to become self-directed learners.
These two gaps show that teachers lack an understanding of how to facilitate components of
SDL, especially when it needs to be scaffolded for students at different levels in their
classrooms.
67
Research Question 2: What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
related to TCS achieving its organizational goal?
The study’s second research question aimed to uncover influences in knowledge,
motivation, and organizational culture that either positively or negatively affect the teacher’s
ability to facilitate SDL in their classes. The following outlines the results in areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences and identified gaps that may then be filled through
targeted training so that teachers may improve their practice of facilitating SDL. The knowledge
results are presented in the following section and outlined in Table 4.3.
Knowledge Results
Table 4.3
Knowledge Influences, Interview Results
Interview Questions Knowledge
Type
Themes Identified
Q3: Can you please define
self-directed learning for
me.
Declarative SDL:
• A set of behaviors
practiced by students who:
• Drive their learning;
• are engaged;
• curious;
• use resources (texts; peers; research; teachers)
to further learning;
• students understand where they are in learning
journey;
• students can self-manage, self-monitor, and
self-modify as they learn.
Q5: Can you provide
examples of how you
facilitate self-directed
learning skills in your
classes?
Procedural Facilitation of SDL:
Primary level:
• Embed explicit teaching of SDL into class
activities and hands-on workshops;
• Students create their success criteria;
• Students can verbalize where they are in their
learning;
• Students understand SDL in a genuine,
authentic context which is explicitly taught,
modeled, and reinforced
Secondary level:
• The teacher works to eliminate distractions;
68
• Resources put on Canvas;
• Class is leveled on Canvas and the teacher
meets with lower-level more frequently;
• clear tasks and timeframes for different levels;
• Faster students help slower ones;
• Breakout rooms for group work
Q6: What are some of the
reflective practices that you
do that focuses on your
facilitation of SDL?
Metacognitive Practice of Metacognitive Reflection:
Primary Teachers:
• Reflection embedded into teaching and
practiced by students and teacher;
• Reflection is the key to where we go next as a
class;
• Reflective collaboration with team on lessons,
but not specific to SDL
Secondary Teachers:
• Not aware of what metacognitive reflection is
consisted of;
• No formal practice of reflection;
• Not a lot of reflection this year, but I used to
practice reflection;
• Only rely on immediate reaction from
students;
• I only did reflection when we used Educator
Impact
Only asked if the teacher
practiced metacognitive
reflection -
Q6a: How frequently do you
reflect on your facilitation of
SDL?
Only asked if the teacher
practiced metacognitive
reflection -
Q6b: Can you provide an
example of how this
reflection changes how you
practice the facilitation of
SDL?
The interviews with teachers identified gaps that were not initially evident in the survey
results where teachers responded to all five of the declarative knowledge questions with either
“agree” or “strongly agree” ranging from 62.2% to 91.9% with an overall declarative knowledge
mean of 72.9%. Those areas of declarative knowledge covered in the survey included the
teacher’s understanding of SDL and their understanding of how to support student’s practice of
SDL as they engage in learning, including skills like providing students with opportunities to
plan their approach to their learning or providing students with opportunities to take ownership
of their learning. Teachers' lowest response (62.2%) in declarative knowledge was when they
were asked if they understood how to help their students self-monitor their learning as they
progressed. This was explained during the collection of qualitative data, which will be elucidated
below when secondary teachers explained that when they were teaching face-to-face they could
react to student’s body language much faster and make adjustments to their teaching to help
69
students self-monitor their learning, but that over Zoom, this was difficult to do because it was
much harder to recognize body language.
The smallest knowledge gap was found in the teacher’s declarative knowledge due to the
teacher’s perceptions of holding high levels of declarative knowledge on the survey responses
and defining SDL well in the interviews. Almost all of the teachers interviewed were able to
define SDL in a manner that reflected the literature and while primary teachers held a deeper
sense of SDL because it is more embedded in their practice, secondary teachers also understood
that SDL is a set of behaviors that students implement as they are learning.
Regarding metacognitive knowledge, teachers responded to all three of the metacognitive
knowledge questions with either “agree” or “strongly agree” with a range of 81.0% to 94.6%
with an overall metacognitive knowledge mean of 86.5%. The areas of metacognitive knowledge
covered in the survey included teacher’s reflection on their practice of teaching, their value of
metacognitive reflection, and if metacognitive reflection changes their teaching practice. This
researcher removed two questions from the metacognitive analysis because they were not clearly
worded and resulted in some respondents leaving the item unanswered.
The largest discrepancy between the survey and the interviews was metacognitive
knowledge. While 82.4% of survey respondents reported practicing metacognitive reflection and
using that reflection to modify their practice, only one of the survey respondents reported having
embedded metacognitive reflection into their practice. All of the other interviewees reported to
not have any formalized process for metacognitive reflection on their practice of SDL. While
many teachers regularly think about how their classes went after teaching, this process did not
include reflection on building SDL skills in their students.
70
Knowledge Findings
Using the aforementioned data collection tools, the assumed procedural, declarative, and
metacognitive knowledge influences were examined. The questions directed at participants were
aimed at understanding if knowledge influences highlighted in the literature were critical to their
facilitation of SDL, either serving as supports or hindrances to each teacher’s practice. The
findings showed that while nearly all teachers can define SDL, they vary greatly on the
implementation of it depending on being a primary or secondary teacher, and almost none of the
teachers are practicing metacognitive reflection on their facilitation of SDL.
Knowledge Theme 1. Teacher’s declarative understanding of SDL is necessary for it
to be facilitated and embedded in their practice. Both the survey and the interview results
indicated that teachers have a strong declarative knowledge of SDL. The majority of participants
could offer a definition that closely reflected the definition within the literature as it is applied to
TCS. Agran (1997) stated that one of the primary instructional activities that can promote student
self-regulation of learning and aid in the promotion of self-determination is the use of student-
directed learning strategies. Teachers were able to identify these strategies, which include self-
management strategies, involve teaching students to modify and regulate their own behavior
allowing students to gradually build self-efficacy skills to work more independently while being
supported by teachers to recognize the social and emotional aspects of building knowledge
(Darling-Hammond, et al., 2019).
Teacher 7, who is a secondary teacher, said “when students are self-directed, they are
more curious and want to take the next steps to learn. They ask a lot of questions.” Teacher 5,
who is also a secondary teacher, said “students know who to go to if they have questions and
they make good decisions, like either working independently or with a peer because they have a
71
clear understanding of where they are in their learning.” Teacher 8, who teaches primary
students, said “students drive their own learning and actively engaged in their learning.” Teacher
4, who is a primary teacher, defined SDL as “a set of behaviors to help students direct own
learning and students are responsible for managing, monitoring, and modifying behavior as they
learn,” which is the definition from the literature as it is applied at TCS.
The responses from the teachers reflected a strong level of declarative knowledge of SDL
at both the primary and secondary levels. While this is necessary prior to teachers gaining
procedural knowledge, and the results in both the survey and interviews show that declarative
knowledge is high, this researcher has indicated that the gap is partially validated due to teacher
turnover. Providing training on declarative Knowledge must remain as an ongoing component of
the training program at TCS and the results indicate that in terms of declarative knowledge, the
training that is currently being offered is meeting the learning needs of teachers at all levels at
TCS.
Knowledge Theme 2. Teachers at all levels need to understand how to embed SDL into
their teaching. On the survey, only 62.2% of teachers indicated that they had a procedural
understanding of how to facilitate SDL. This gap was shown to be a divide between primary and
secondary levels in the interviews. If teachers have procedural knowledge to support and
facilitate SDL skills, they can scaffold student’s abilities to plan their learning, build upon prior
knowledge by assessing what they already know, develop a student’s responsibility for the
learning process, and help students apply learning strategies when they become disengaged
(Ayyildiz & Tarhan, 2015). According to Zimmerman (2000), SDL skills need to be explicitly
taught, especially to primary and secondary students. This researcher found that while most
72
primary teachers knew how to embed these skills into their classroom practices, secondary
teachers, especially those teaching over Zoom, struggled to know how to do this.
Teacher 6, a secondary teacher, said that to practice SDL, “I put groups of students in a
breakout room to research a topic, and then they need to present it back to the class a couple of
periods later.” Teacher 7, a secondary teacher, said “I use Canvas to provide students with
resources and divide my class into leveled groups, meeting with the lower level more frequently,
and setting clear timeframes for when assignments are due based on each level.” Both of these
teachers teach over Zoom and what they consider to be SDL is neither purposefully scaffolding
teaching strategies specific to SDL which allow students to develop their ability to self-manage,
self-monitor, and self-modify their behavior as they learn nor are teachers removing the scaffolds
as students are independently able to demonstrate SDL skills.
In contrast to the secondary Zoom teacher experience, primary teachers can facilitate
SDL well in their face-to-face classrooms. Teacher 9, a primary teacher facilitates SDL be using
“Three before me” where a student finds three other resources to answer a question
before asking the teacher; earning students an “independent learner badge” when they
demonstrate SDL well over time, which provides them freedoms like studying in the
library.
Teacher 4, who also teaches primary students, said
SDL is explicitly taught so that students can verbalize the components and reflect on
where they are as they learn. Students build success criteria and understand SDL in a
genuine, authentic context that is explicitly taught, modeled, and reinforced. I am sure to
vocalize my own learning process and practice of questioning so that students see this as
a normal part of learning.
73
Both of the above primary teacher quotes are examples of primary teachers at TCS
having a clear understanding of each of their individual students’ levels of learning needs, as
reflected in their purposeful facilitation of SDL. Teachers must possess this understanding in
order to facilitate learning that is appropriate for each student’s zone of proximal development
(Chu et al, 2017; Scott & Palinscar, 2006). At the primary level, SDL is embedded in the
curriculum in an authentic manner where students can develop a deep understanding of what
being self-directed looks like in themselves and others. According to the survey and interview
results, this practice diminishes as students move from face-to-face classes in primary to
secondary school, especially if the secondary students are taught over Zoom, revealing a gap in
procedural knowledge at the secondary level. This indicates a need for training, especially at the
secondary level to allow teachers to build their procedural knowledge of how to facilitate SDL at
the secondary level, especially over Zoom.
Knowledge Theme 3. To improve one’s facilitation of SDL, teachers should regularly
practice metacognitive reflection. Teacher’s survey responses showed that 86.5% claimed to
value and practice metacognitive reflection, but when interviewed, only one primary teacher was
found to be formally implementing metacognitive reflection into their practice daily and it was
not specific to their facilitation of SDL. The differences between the survey and results reflect a
partial gap in metacognitive knowledge in teachers at TCS. According to Vince (1998),
metacognitive reflection is necessary because it allows for the process of creating knowledge that
reflects the interaction between the teacher’s subjective experiences teaching and the more
objective cultural experience of how the teacher’s strategies impact their student’s learning and
practice of SDL. Of the nine teachers who were interviewed, eight reported to not be practicing
metacognitive reflection formally, but six claimed to do a quick daily reflection on how their
74
classes went and adjusted their lessons the next day based on their reflection on their perceived
levels of student engagement, though none focused specifically on their facilitation of SDL.
Teacher 4, who teaches primary students and formally practices metacognitive reflection,
said “I embed reflection into my teaching so that the kids and I are always thinking about how
well different lessons went. This is a key piece to where we go next as a class.” All other
teachers said things like, “I don’t really practice reflection in any formal way.” “Can you explain
what metacognitive reflection is to me?” “I don’t really do any reflection specific to SDL, I just
think about how my day went.” “I only did metacognitive reflection when we had Educator
Impact; I don’t really practice reflection in any formal way now.” The interview results show a
gap in metacognitive knowledge due to teachers reporting that they are not intentionally
reflecting on their practice of SDL. Training is needed in this area to strengthen teacher’s
metacognitive reflective practice of SDL in their classrooms.
Motivation Results
The survey and interview items on motivation included questions derived from validated
survey instruments on motivation, a document review of TCS SDL materials, and literature on
motivation as it is related to self-efficacy and attainment value. The survey showed evidence of
teachers holding lower levels of self-efficacy than attainment value of SDL and this was shone to
be true in the interviews as well, except when it came to teachers valuing the transition from
content specialist to a facilitator of SDL. Almost all secondary teachers believed that students
needed to hold content knowledge before becoming self-directed in their learning. The
motivation interview results are outlined below in Table 4.4.
75
Table 4.4
Motivation Influences, Interview Results
Interview Questions Motivation Type Themes Identified
Q4: Can you please describe
to me your level of
confidence as a facilitator of
self-directed learning in your
classes?
• What factors led you to
say that you are___?
Self-efficacy • Confidence levels are reported to be
considerably higher at the primary level
where SDL is more embedded in student
learning;
• Secondary teachers reported higher
levels of confidence in facilitating SDL
in face-to-face classrooms than over
Zoom;
• Breakout rooms do not provide teachers
with an opportunity to supervise
students working in groups, which has
led to teachers using words and phrases
like ‘anxiety’ and ‘err on the side of
caution,’ as opposed to allowing
students to demonstrate SDL by
working independently or in groups
unsupervised;
• A teacher said, “SDL isn’t happening on
Zoom,” which represented the feelings
of several secondary teachers.
Q7: How is life-long learning
a part of your life?
• If it is, can you describe
any activities that you
participate in that
reflects life-long
learning?
Value • The majority of teachers considered
themselves to be life-long learners and
demonstrated this by enrolling in
graduate studies, learning digital
technologies, and learning new content
in their subject areas.
• Several teachers felt tired recently, so
shifted their focus to learning things
that they considered to be fun, like
cooking and robotics.
Q8: How, if at all, do you
encourage your learners to
be life-long learners?
Value • As stated previously, SDL is strongly
embedded in most primary classrooms
and life-long learning is purposefully
and explicitly taught;
• At the secondary level, teachers model
curiosity for learning and the research
process to encourage life-long learning
in their students.
Q9: Can you provide an
example of how you have
shifted your teaching from
that of a subject-matter
expert to that of a facilitator
of SDL?
Value • At the primary level, SDL is embedded,
so inquiry-based learning which is
grounded in questioning leads to the
facilitation of learning;
• Secondary teachers were more apt to see
themselves as subject-matter experts
who for the most part believed that
76
content knowledge was necessary before
students being able to build a stronger
SDL skillset.
The interviews corroborated the findings of the survey by identifying gaps in secondary
teacher’s self-efficacy and highlighting teacher’s struggles to facilitate SDL over Zoom. In the
survey, teachers responded to the motivation – self-efficacy survey items with a range of 48.6%
to 83.8% with a mean of 65.4%. The areas included in the survey were comprised of items on
teacher’s beliefs that they can integrate SDL into their teaching, that they can model SDL to their
students, support SDL in all levels of students within their classes, model learning tools for
students, and deal with the unexpected as issues arise in the classroom. The survey results found
three gaps in self-efficacy of teachers: 1) teachers do not believe that they are modeling learning
tools for students (48.6%), 2) teachers do not believe that they are modeling SDL well in their
classrooms (62.2%), and 3) teachers do not believe that they are differentiating SDL skills well
in their classes (54.0%). These gaps connect to the related procedural knowledge questions
which showed that teachers lack an understanding of how to facilitate components of SDL,
especially when it needs to be scaffolded for students at different levels in their classrooms. The
interviews also uncovered that for most secondary teachers who were teaching on Zoom (4),
instead of engaging their students in activities that built SDL skills, they tended to revert to direct
instruction because they were concerned that students would not work independently. This will
be explained in more detail below when the findings are unpacked.
Teachers responded to all attainment value questions with a range from 75.6% to 100%
with a mean of 89.7%. This reflects a very high level of attainment value of SDL and the
attributes that students need to develop as life-long learners. The items covered in the survey
included questions on developing a mindset in students so that they can become life-long
77
learners who can understand the phases that they go through as they learn. An item asked
teachers if they felt that the time required to plan lessons around building SDL skills in students
was important, as well their belief that self-directed learners become life-long learners who can
apply their learning to a number of areas throughout their lives. The question that showed the
lowest level of attainment value (75.6%) asked teachers if they believe that shifting from a
subject matter specialist to a facilitator of self-directed learning is beneficial to their students.
This question reflected a gap due to four of the five secondary teachers who were interviewed
stating that they valued being a content specialist rather than one who facilitates learning around
concepts. The interviews also helped this researcher see the established pattern of primary
teachers holding higher levels of self-efficacy and attainment value of SDL due to it being
embedded in their pedagogical practice, while secondary teachers were less clear on how to
integrate it into the NZ curriculum which requires specific content knowledge and does not allow
for an inquiry-based approach grounded in questioning.
Teacher’s levels of self-efficacy followed the same pattern of higher levels in primary
teachers and lower levels in secondary teachers that has been evident throughout the data
collected. Most secondary teachers who were interviewed reported that because they were unable
to be in different breakout rooms at the same time, they were not comfortable leaving students
unsupervised as they conducted group work. This was not found to be a problem in face-to-face
classes because groups are supervised when working in a classroom. Some teachers reported to
be learning how to teach on Zoom and lacked self-efficacy when it came to the platform itself
and therefore were not comfortable facilitating learning in a manner that builds SDL skills in
their students, instead of reverting to more traditional pedagogy like lecturing, assigning work,
and then correcting the student’s assessments.
78
Discrepancies between the survey and the interviews became apparent as data were
analyzed. For example, 83.8% of survey respondents believed that they could deal with the
unexpected as things arose in their classrooms, but in the interviews, more than one teacher
reported being more afraid of the lesson changing over Zoom. One teacher reported wanting to
control the content more on Zoom than in their face-to-face lessons and another reported to feel
anxious if the class discussion got off topic on Zoom because students cannot be supervised in
breakout rooms as they can in a face-to-face classroom, which is important due to the school’s
policy of gender-based segregation. Almost all teachers at the secondary level felt that they were
not modeling tools to support SDL or their learning process well enough and this was mirrored in
the survey results as well.
Motivation Findings
Teacher’s motivation was examined through the assumed influences of self-efficacy and
attainment value. The research questions that grounded this study asked 1) to what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100% of teachers implementing self-directed learning skills into their
classrooms across New Zealand by the end of the 2020 academic year and (2) what are the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to TCS achieving its organizational
goal? The questions directed at participants were aimed at understanding if motivation
influences highlighted in the literature were critical to their facilitation of SDL, either serving as
supports or hindrances to each teacher’s practice. The findings showed that most teachers in a
face-to-face setting had high levels of self-efficacy and believed that they could integrate SDL
into their lessons and react well when the unexpected arose in their classes. This was not true for
teachers who are teaching over Zoom. In terms of teacher’s attainment value, many teachers
interviewed and surveyed saw themselves as life-long learners who believe that life-long
79
learning is an important skillset to build in their students. On the secondary level, most of the
teachers interviewed saw themselves as subject matter experts instead of learning facilitators and
many held this belief because they think that students need a certain level of content knowledge
before focusing on how to apply it to different contexts.
Motivation Theme 1. Teachers need to believe they can integrate SDL into TCS’s
learning to learn framework at the primary and secondary levels, both face-to-face, and over
Zoom. In the interviews, confidence levels concerning the integration of SDL were reported by
all four primary teachers to be considerably higher at the primary level due to SDL being more
embedded in student learning. Conversely, of the five secondary teachers interviewed, all
reported to be more confident when teaching face-to-face, but found the facilitation of SDL over
Zoom to be more challenging. This revealed a gap between the survey results, where 78.4% of
teachers believed that they could integrate SDL into their lessons, and the interviews where
secondary teachers were unsure of how to support SDL skills over Zoom. According to Pajares
(2006) having low levels of self-efficacy may lead to increased levels of stress, anxiety, and
depression if one is confronted with a task or activity that they don’t believe that they can do.
Rueda (2011) stated that an individual’s self-perception is directly linked to their ability to begin,
perceiver, and complete a given task or activity and is influenced by their perceived level of
knowledge.
Teacher 2, who teaches secondary students, explained their feelings of self-efficacy by
sharing their different experiences teaching face-to-face and over Zoom by saying
When face-to-face, I’m a lot more confident because I can ask questions and probe them
more. I’m a lot less anxious about a plan changing and I don’t actually mind getting off-
80
topic and letting students take the lead, but I hesitate to do this in a self-directed way on
Zoom because I can’t supervise them in breakout rooms the way I can in a classroom.
Teacher 2 expressed a difference in their level of self-efficacy regarding the facilitation of SDL
in a face-to-face class and over Zoom. Differences in levels of self-efficacy were expressed by
all of those teaching on Zoom and this is important for leadership to know because TCS is
moving to expand teaching on the Zoom platform, lowering the number of face-to-face classes.
Teacher 7, who also teaches secondary students added, “I’m less confident on Zoom because I’m
not 100% sure about the capabilities so I tend to err on the side of caution by using more
traditional methods of teaching.” Teacher 5, who also is at the secondary level reported, “I feel
like I can facilitate SDL pretty well in my classroom, but it’s just not happening over Zoom
because my students are at very different levels in my Zoom classes and I don’t know how to
promote SDL in that platform.”
In contract, primary teachers who teach all classes face-to-face reported high levels of
self-efficacy. “I am very confident facilitating SDL in my classroom because it’s embedded into
everything that we do” and “I’m very confident because SDL is something that I’m passionate
about and have presented as part of my inquiry.” These comments reflect the theme found
throughout the study that shows confidence levels, and overall SDL facilitation skills, to be
considerably higher at the primary level where SDL is more embedded in student learning.
Motivation Theme 2. Both primary and secondary teachers need to believe that
shifting from a subject matter expert to a facilitator of self-directed learning is beneficial to
students as life-long learners. Teachers at TCS have very high levels of attainment value, with
100% of all survey respondents reporting to value life-long learning and encouraging it in their
students, but when it came to shifting from a content specialist to a facilitator of learning, 75.6%
81
reported to ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ and during the interviews, primary teachers demonstrated
the facilitation of learning, while most secondary teachers believed that the delivery of content
was initially more important than SDL skill-building. Wigfield and Eccles (2000) define
attainment value as the level of the task being aligned with the [teacher’s] identity or beliefs.
While Webber and Miller (2016), posit that teachers should develop pedagogies that engage
available resources and include diverse ways of learning, are supple in responding to changing
environments and educational needs, and prepare students for lifelong learning, this isn’t always
practiced at the secondary level at TCS. According to Crockett, Jukes, and Churches (2011),
using inquiry-based learning is one of the most effective ways to help students develop skills in
SDL because it encourages deeper engagement in the learning process, and this is occurring well
at the primary level at TCS.
All four of the primary teachers were more used to facilitating learning and found it to be
an organic teaching process. “Inquiry-based learning results in facilitating learning as opposed to
teaching subjects.” “When facilitating learning, you sit back and see where the students take
things through their research by asking questions and getting them to think deeply.” Primary
teacher 2 said
My own inquiry on the facilitation of SDL really helps because using questioning can
lead students to take their learning in all different directions. I spend a lot of time
brainstorming with students and openly discuss that it’s not my job as a teacher to know
everything but to teach students how to find the answers themselves.
For teacher 2, SDL has become something that they consider a passion, and seeing their
students becoming more self-directed is a rewarding process. In sharp contrast, secondary
teacher 1 said, “I tend to like the old school way of teaching and think, if it’s not broken, there’s
82
no need to fix it.” Others echoed their position, “I see myself as more of a subject expert than a
facilitator because students need to know content before being self-directed” and “I tend to think
of myself as a subject matter expert in areas that I know a lot about, but I know that there are
always new things for me to learn too.” This researcher found that at the primary level, the
pedagogical approach is inquiry-based, but as students enter into secondary school, there is a
sharp transition to a content-driven pedagogical approach that is frequently taught over Zoom,
which frequently diminishes the student’s voice and choice regarding how and what they learn.
Organization Results
The survey and interview items included in the questions on organizational influences
were derived from validated survey instruments, a document review of TCS SDL materials, and
literature on organizational accountability, collaboration, performance goals, and feedback. The
survey showed evidence of teachers identifying organizational influences, as being the largest
hindrance to their ability to facilitate SDL, but this was not always reflected in the interviews.
Table 4.5 examines the themes uncovered in the interviews.
Table 4.5
Organizational Influences, Interview Results
Interview Questions Motivation
Type
Themes Identified
Q10: Can you describe any
feedback from leadership
that you have received on
how well you facilitate SDL
in your classes?
Cultural
Setting –
Clear
Feedback
• Five teachers reported receiving feedback on
the facilitation of SDL from their campus
principal during walk-throughs and Zoom
lesson observations.
• Two teachers reported that they don’t get
feedback from leadership, but instead
receive feedback from parents and other
teachers when they discuss their Inquiries.
• Two teachers reported that they haven’t
received any feedback.
Q10a: How has that
feedback provided you with
clear classroom strategies
Cultural
Setting –
• The strategies for how to facilitate SDL come
more often from teacher collaboration than
from national leadership. This is stronger at
83
for how to better facilitate
SDL?
Clear
Feedback
the primary level than the secondary level
because there is less collaboration between
teachers at the secondary level.
Q11: How does TCS’s
leadership provide teachers
with consistent performance
goals?
Cultural
Model –
Clear Goal
Setting
• Teachers were aware of systems, such as
Educator Impact, Appraisal Connector, and
their inquiry that helped them form
performance goals, but rarely were these
developed by leadership and communicated
to teachers individually.
• Teacher appraisal systems have been
removed this year due to cuts in the budget,
and teachers were unsure of what
performance goals were for the 2020 school
year.
• Teachers did not feel that their inquiry work
was looked at by leadership.
Q11a: Are you comfortable
with the amount of time that
you are provided with to
meet a performance goal?
Why or why not?
Cultural
Model –
Clear Goal
Setting
• The interview results ranged from teachers
reporting to have enough time, to “it
depends on what the performance goal is,” to
have enough time to meet and adjust their
performance goals.
Q11b: Do you believe that
TCS’s leadership provides
teachers with clear goals
without introducing new
initiatives before
implementation has taken
place?
Cultural
Setting -
Removed
This question was eliminated during the
interviews based on the replies that were
received in questions 11 and 11a.
Q12: Can you please
describe, in your experience,
the collaboration between
leadership and teachers at
TCS?
Cultural
Model –
Culture of
Collaboration
• At the local level, almost all teachers
reported that collaboration with leadership
was positive and supported their work in the
classroom.
• Many teachers felt that when initiatives came
down from national, they could be better
communicated, and more time could be
given before implementation.
• Teachers who had gone to national leaders
for help or clarification felt that those
leaders were open to helping them and were
willing to be flexible if need be.
Q12a: When have you been
provided with time to
collaborate with other
teachers to plan how to
develop SDL skills in your
students?
Cultural
Model -
Culture of
Collaboration
• While all teachers reported collaborating
with other teachers, half had experiences of
discussing and planning how to increase SDL
skills in students, and the other half reported
to focus on subject content.
Q13: What does a school’s
‘culture of accountability’
mean to you?
Cultural
Model -
Culture of
Accountability
• For most teachers, a culture of
accountability meant that there was good
communication, that people were responsible
for what they said that they would do, and
84
were responsible for building good
relationships.
• Others reported that having a culture of
accountability meant that everyone is
accountable for themselves in terms of their
achievement and learning.
Q13a: Do you see TCS’s
‘culture of accountability’
as being weak or strong?
Why?
Culture
Model -
Culture of
Accountability
• There is a weak culture of accountability at
TCS:
• Teachers believe that there is room for
improvement because the chain of command
for several isn’t clear beyond the campus
principal, due to different messages coming
down from various positions at the top,
which can be confusing to those below.
• Poor communication has led to teachers
feeling like they are being held accountable
for initiatives that they don’t know a lot
about.
While the survey identified large organizational gaps as being present at TCS, the
interviews did not always corroborate the survey finding. On the survey, teachers responded to
all five of the organizational culture model questions with either “agree” or “strongly agree”
ranging from 13.5% to 40.6% with an overall organizational culture model mean of 26.1%. The
areas of organizational culture model influences that were covered in the survey included
teacher’s perceptions of TCS’s culture of accountability, a culture of collaboration, clear
guidelines for teacher’s facilitation of SDL, the time allotted for collaboration, and collaboration
across curriculum areas. In the interview, teachers were asked cultural model questions which
included topics on leadership providing teachers with consistent performance goals, the
collaboration between teachers and leaders, the time allotted for meeting performance goals and
collaborating with others, and TCS’s ‘culture of accountability.’ Interviewees reported to enjoy
collaborative teams and feedback from supportive principals and peers, but they did not perceive
the ‘culture of accountability’ as being strong at TCS due to poor systems of communication
throughout the levels of the school. Teachers also reported not feeling like they had any clear
85
performance goals, especially during the 2020 academic school year when the contracted teacher
performance system was terminated due to budget cuts.
Regarding the organizational settings at TCS, teachers responded to all five of the
organizational culture model questions with either “agree” or “strongly agree” ranging from
5.4% to 30.6% with an overall organizational culture setting mean of 12.1%. The areas of
organizational culture setting influences that were covered in the survey included teacher’s
perceptions of TCS’s leadership providing clear performance goals, feedback on their facilitation
of SDL, clear strategies for the facilitation of SDL, examples of student evidence to support
SDL, and leadership providing time to implement initiatives before additional initiatives being
introduced. In the interview, teachers were asked cultural setting questions that focused on
feedback that they had received from leadership regarding how well they facilitated SDL in their
classes and if they had received specific strategies from leadership on how to better facilitate
SDL. On the campuses where principals regularly conduct walk-throughs and provide feedback,
teachers valued the process, but on other campuses, teachers relied on feedback from peers or
parents, and still, others reported that they have not received any feedback from leadership.
Though, teachers reported that the feedback is frequently about behavioral issues and not focused
on their facilitation of SDL. When it came to specific strategies for how to facilitate SDL, this
most frequently came from peers rather than from leadership.
Organization Findings
TCS’s organizational culture was examined through the assumed influences of cultures of
accountability and collaboration, as well as the need for clear feedback and goal setting. The
questions asked participants were intended to build an understanding of how TCS’s
organizational culture influences highlighted in the literature were critical to teacher’s facilitation
86
of SDL, either serving as supports or hindrances to each their practice. The findings showed that
the culture of accountability is weak at TCS as evidenced by poor communication through the
different layers of the organization which has led to teachers feeling that they are being held
accountable for initiatives that are unclear to them. The culture of collaboration appeared to be
weak when the survey data was analyzed, but teachers reported strong collaborative efforts on
the local level through supportive peers and principals, as well as positive interactions with the
national leadership team. Lastly, teachers reported the lowest levels on the survey when
answering items related to feedback and goal setting, but when interviewed, they reported that
due to the high levels of autonomy at TCS, most of the feedback and goal setting was done at the
local level with supportive principals who offered concrete strategies for teachers to improve
their classroom management and SDL or with peers when meetings occurred at the grade or
department level.
Organization Theme 1. The organization needs a culture of accountability at all levels,
including the support of teacher accountability. When teachers were asked to define ‘culture of
accountability’ they primarily focused on good systems of communication, being responsible for
one’s behavior, as well as being responsible for the relationships that they formed within TCS
with leaders, peers, students, and parents. For many, this meant that all were responsible for their
achievements and their learning. According to Biesta (2004), accountability is an important piece
for ensuring that an initiative is carried out as it was designed to be carried out and the culture of
accountability in an organization has a direct effect on how people interact. Because of the
multiple levels found within the organizational framework at TCS, the what and the how of
accountability can get convoluted as it moves through the different layers. Waters, Marzano, and
McNulty (2003) see leadership as being responsible for not only knowing the what, but also
87
having a strong understanding of the when, how, and why to meet the organization’s goals and
these need to be communicated from the top organizational levels to the bottom with consistent
messaging.
When asked if the culture of accountability was weak or strong at TCS, all teachers
reported that they believed that there was room for improvement and on the survey, only 37.8%
reported to “agree” or “strongly agree” that TCS has a culture of accountability. One interviewee
explained that once a teacher went above a campus principal for assistance, they found that there
were frequent discrepancies in the messages coming from others at the national leadership level.
Three teachers found that poor communication led to the feeling that they were being held
accountable for initiatives that they did not know a lot about. Teacher 2, a secondary teacher,
said
I think that the culture of accountability is weak. I find that a lot of the time, students
know about something before I know about it. It’s really frustrating to be held
accountable for stuff that we don’t know about or have very little time to implement.
Sometimes I feel like the expectations are unclear and that we’re not listened to if we say
that we need better communication.
Teacher 1, also a secondary teacher, mirrored Teacher 2’s position by saying
I think that there is room for improvement here at TCS. I know that I can go to my
campus principal if I need support, but after that, it gets a bit vague for me. I sometimes
feel like I get one message from my CP and then hear something different from my
department and something different from national. It can be confusing.
Both of the secondary teachers are referring to their perception of poor communication from the
top level down to teachers on each site, which has led to their perception of a weak culture of
88
accountability. At the primary level, accountability was perceived to be better, but only recently.
Teacher 3 reported that “Accountability depends on the level. Locally, the staff is good at being
accountable and I do feel like recently, it’s gotten better at the national level. But in the past, it
hasn’t been great.” These comments reflect an overall organizational culture gap and a need for
improved levels of accountability at all levels, beginning with more consistent and clear
communication of not only the what, but also the how, and the why.
Organization Theme 2. The organization needs a culture of collaboration between
leadership and teachers through increased systematic communication and collaboration.
While teachers reported low levels of collaboration between leadership and teachers on their
surveys with only 13.5% responding ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ when questioned about TCS’s
culture of collaboration, these responses were in contrast to interview questions where teachers
reported strong levels of collaboration at the local level and support provided from the national
leadership team if a teacher reached out for assistance. Collaboration is important to an
organization because, according to Ipe (2003), knowledge is “dynamic in nature and is
dependent on social relationships between individuals for its creation, sharing, and use” (p. 355),
and all levels within the TCS organizational framework should encourage better collaboration
and communication to share it. At the local level, almost all teachers reported that collaboration
with leadership was positive and that leadership supported their work in the classroom. Several
teachers felt that when initiatives came down from national, they could be better communicated,
and more time could be given before implementation, but for teachers who had gone to national
leaders for help or clarification, they felt that those leaders were open to helping them and were
willing to be flexible if need be. While all teachers reported collaborating with other teachers,
half had experiences of discussing and planning how to increase SDL skills in students, and the
89
other half reported to focus on subject content, therefore revealing a gap in the culture of
collaboration that is focused on increasing the facilitation of SDL.
Teacher 5, who teaches at the secondary level reported strong levels of collaboration by
stating
I think that there is good collaboration on my campus. I like being able to get immediate
feedback from my principal and walk down the hall to meet with another teacher. It’s a
bit harder and takes more time when trying to meet with teachers off-site.
Others found collaboration with leadership, especially at the national level, to be less
transparent. Teacher 2, a secondary teacher stated
My department has great collaboration, but from the national leadership team up, some
things just get rolled out like “here do this” and it’s like the day before. I’m not sure if it’s
because they have time management problems because I think that they should give us
accurate information with enough time to do what they want.
The above quotes reflecting positive perceptions of TCS at the local level where peers
worked well together or campus principals were seen as offering support to teachers, but as
teachers discussed leadership at the national level, systematic collaboration became less regular.
When it came to collaborating with other teachers specifically to improve their facilitation of
SDL, half of those interviewed (5) reported that their collaboration was not focused on SDL, but
instead focused on content for their classes. For one, secondary Teacher 5, time was a constraint.
“As a curriculum leader, I am given non-contact hours to collaborate with other teachers in my
department, but I usually use them for my planning. I don’t use that time to focus on SDL
specifically.” Secondary Teacher 7 concurred, “I don’t talk about SDL with other teachers. We
focus on content available to students and how to make it more accessible.” While almost all
90
teachers reported having good collaborative relationships with their peers and leadership, there is
still a gap in the transfer of knowledge between all levels of the organization that could be
improved through the formation of purposeful systems of collaboration and communication.
Organization Theme 3. The organization’s leadership needs to provide teachers with
consistent performance goals and feedback. When teachers were asked if TCS’s leadership
provided them with clear feedback on their facilitation of SDL, only 5.4% reported ‘agree’ or
‘strongly agree’ and 30.6% reported that they believed that leaders set clear performance goals
for them. The survey results were counter to the interviews which indicated that the majority of
teachers reported receiving feedback on the facilitation of SDL from their campus principal
during walk-throughs and Zoom lesson observations, but that performance goals were not clearly
outlined by leadership. According to Gallimore and Goldenberg (2010), four essential change
elements when examining school change are collaboration on goal setting; clear performance
indicators; assistance for teachers who are struggling to implement the new strategy; and
feedback from leadership who collaborated with teachers as they met to discuss, plan, and
implement classroom strategies to improve student outcomes. Because teacher’s perceptions of
feedback and performance goals are reported at low levels it reflects on leadership’s ability to
systematically communicate to teachers what their performance goals are and how teachers are
expected to meet them.
When it came to performance goals, teachers were aware of systems, such as Educator
Impact, Appraisal Connector, and their inquiry that helped them form performance goals, but
rarely were these developed by leadership and communicated to teachers individually. Vendor
teacher appraisal systems were removed this year (2020) due to cuts in the budget, and teachers
reported being unsure of what their performance goals were for the 2020 school year. Also, some
91
teachers did not feel that their inquiry work was looked at by leadership, and while they found
the inquiry process to be valuable, in most cases they did not see it being used for anything
beyond themselves. While this was not perceived as being a detriment by all teachers, it did
concern others. Teacher 9, who teaches primary school said
I don’t have any performance goals that I am aware of. I think that our school is self-directed
for teachers too. They provide you with the resources and tools and if you can’t have the
common sense and the initiative to action that for yourself, then you probably would struggle
in this school because you are not spoon-fed.
Teacher 2, a secondary teacher lamented that changes in performance goal systems were
confusing.
It used to be Educator Impactor and portfolios before that. I think that they used to look at it,
but it’s not checked now. The problem is that we are asked to do all of this work and then no
one ever looks at it.
Teacher 1, who also teaches at the secondary level shared Teacher 2’s sentiment and said, “I am
fine with learning new things, but if leadership wants me to do certain things, they need to tell
me what to do.”
The above quotes reflect a sense of confusion that was reported by all of the nine
interviewees who enjoyed knowing what their performance goals for the year are and what they
need to do to achieve them. Feedback was reported to be stronger than the performance goal set
by many teachers. The majority of teachers reported receiving feedback on the facilitation of
SDL from their campus principal during walk-throughs and Zoom lesson observations. A few
teachers reported that they don’t get feedback from leadership, but instead receive feedback from
parents and other teachers when they discuss their inquiries, and a couple of teachers reported
92
that they haven’t received any feedback. When asked about feedback regarding their facilitation
of SDL, it most frequently came from teacher collaboration than from national leadership. This
was stronger at the primary level than the secondary level because there is less collaboration at
the secondary level.
Teacher 9, a secondary teacher, reported
My principal is great at coming in to do several observations of my classes and also logs into
Zoom. They give great feedback in email and then ask that we screenshot the email to put
into our OneNote folder for evidence. I’ve learned a lot from the feedback, and it’s been
really helpful to my teaching.
Teacher 6, also a secondary teacher concurred by saying, “My principal provides me with
feedback on how to have students set their success criteria and help me to use the language of
learning better in my classes.” Teachers 9 and 6’s positive experiences are specific to their
campus principals’ practice of walk-in observations, which does not occur on all TCS campuses
across the country. For primary Teacher 8, feedback was not common. “I don’t think that I’ve
had feedback from leadership. We practice SDL too as teachers and have the tools to do our job.
It’s up to us to have the common sense and the initiative to use the tools.” Feedback and
performance goals are both necessary for teachers to be able to effectively facilitate SDL in their
classes and based on a review of the data, there is an organizational culture gap present at TCS
that needs to be addressed if all teachers are to meet the organizational goal.
Synthesis
The survey results and interview findings validated and/or partially validated almost all
of the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to teachers
facilitating SDL at TCS. In the dimension of knowledge, the quantitative results from this
93
study’s survey reveal that teachers believe that their declarative knowledge of SDL is strong, and
all teachers reported to value SDL as a component of life-long learning. While survey data
reflected high levels of declarative knowledge, the interviews uncovered that many of those
reporting to be able to define SDL had difficulty knowing how to facilitate it, revealing low
levels of procedural knowledge of SDL. This pattern was repeated when teacher’s survey results
highlighted high levels of metacognitive knowledge regarding their facilitation of SDL, but the
interviews uncovered that very few were practicing metacognitive reflection on their pedagogical
practice of facilitating SDL, or in most cases, at all.
In the dimension of motivation, the survey reflected a high level of teacher’s value of
SDL, but when asked if they saw themselves as facilitators of student’s learning or subject matter
experts, most secondary teachers believed that it was important for students to hold content
knowledge before building SDL skills. Secondary teacher’s self-efficacy was linked to their
procedural knowledge, as reflected in the survey’s low levels of teachers reporting to model
learning tools or their learning as a means of building SDL in students. While teachers generally
believe that SDL is a necessary skill to build in their students, they are not doing all that they can
in their classrooms at the secondary level to support SDL. At the primary level, this is not the
case because students participate in inquiry-based learning which naturally facilitates SDL.
In the dimension of organizational culture, the pattern was reversed showing survey
results that were quite low, but interview responses uncovered that teachers were receiving more
support than what was reflected in the survey. On the culture of accountability at TCS, teachers
reported feeling frustrated with initiatives not being presented to them before being held
accountable for the outcomes. Teachers reported a strong sense of a culture of collaboration,
especially at the local level, where teacher-teams worked well together to plan student learning.
94
With regards to receiving feedback, most teachers received positive feedback from their campus
principals during walk-throughs and from peers when lessons were planned and reflected on
upon completion. Most teachers acknowledged that the feedback did not frequently focus teacher
facilitation of SDL, but instead focused on classroom management or content. Regarding goal
setting, most teachers reported on both the survey and on the interviews that there were not clear
performance goals set for teachers on their facilitation of SDL. This may be due to the contract
with the outside vendor, Educator Impact, being canceled due to budget cuts and teachers being
unclear of what their performance goals are for the 2020 academic year. Recommendations for
closing gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational culture are offered in chapter five.
95
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. The knowledge influences in Table 5.1 represent the complete list of
knowledge influences and their probability of being validated based on survey results and the
most frequently mentioned knowledge influences related to teacher’s achieving the stakeholders’
goal mentioned during formal interviews. These knowledge influences are also supported by a
literature review, including Clark and Estes (2008), who suggest that declarative knowledge
about something is often necessary to know before applying it to classify or identify, as in the
case of teachers facilitating self-directed learning in their classes. Table 5.1 shows the
recommendations for these partially and fully validated influences based on theoretical principles
and the final column specifies if the recommendation is specifically for primary, secondary, or
all teachers.
Table 5.1
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Knowledge
Influence
Validated as a
Gap?
Yes, High
Probability, or
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Primary, Secondary,
Both
(P, S, B)
Teachers need
knowledge of the
concepts behind
self-directed
learning. (D)
HP Y Cognitive load
theory: Managing
intrinsic load by
segmenting
complex material
into simpler parts
and pre-training,
among other
strategies, enables
learning to be
enhanced
(B) Provide training on
self-directed learning
(SDL).
Before training:
Present information in
manageable parts and
provide pre-training on
complex content
(Mayer, 2011).
During training:
96
(Kirshner,
Kirshner, & Paas,
2006).
Learning is
enhanced when a
learner’s working
memory capacity
is not overloaded
(Kirshner et al.,
2006)
Provide concrete
examples and case
studies at both the
primary and secondary
levels (Anguinis &
Kraiger, 2009).
Provide adequate
guidance via
scaffolding and
modeling (Krishner et
al., 2006).
Present information in
the context of a
familiar situation at
both primary and
secondary levels
(Mayer, 2011).
Teachers need to
know how to
incorporate self-
directed learning
into the New
Zealand
curriculum. (P)
Y Y Information
processing theory:
How individuals
organize
knowledge
influences how
they learn and
apply what they
know and to
develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them,
and know when to
apply what they
have learned
(Schraw &
McCrudden,
2006).
Procedural
knowledge
increases when
declarative
knowledge
required to
perform the skill
in known (Clark et
al., 2008)
After training:
(B) Provide a job aid
that provides clear
examples of how to
incorporate SDL into
the NZ curriculum at
both the primary and
secondary levels. This
would include work
samples and scaffolded
facilitation strategies
for all levels of
students.
Teachers need
metacognitive
reflection on their
facilitation of self-
HP Y Metacognition:
Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners set goals,
After training:
(B) Provide time for
teachers to engage in
metacognitive
reflection weekly to
97
directed learning.
(M)
monitor their
performance, and
evaluate their
progress towards
achieving their
goals (Ambrose et
al., 2010; Meyer,
2011).
Metacognition
allows individuals
to identify prior
knowledge before
engaging in a
learning task
(Mayer, 2011).
Metacognitive
reflection allows
teachers to engage
in guided self-
monitoring and
self-assessment, as
well as debrief the
thinking process
upon completion
of the learning
task (Baker, 2006).
reflect on their
facilitation of SDL.
This can be done in a
short Likert survey that
asks questions like the
following:
1 (never do this) - 5
(always do this)
● I ask myself
periodically if I am
meeting my
teaching goals.
● I am aware of the
strategies that I use
when I teach.
● I have a specific
purpose for each
strategy that I use.
(Schraw & Dennison,
1994).
Knowledge type for each influence listed: (D)eclarative; (P)rocedural; (M)etacognitive
Teachers need knowledge of the concepts behind self-directed learning. The findings
of this study show that teachers need to unpack the construct of self-directed learning. It is
recommended that before training teachers on how to facilitate self-directed learning,
information on what self-directed learning is composed of at TCS is pre-trained through
introducing SDL in manageable parts rather than referring to the whole construct. According to
Mayer (2011), the evidence-based instructional principle of managing essential processing
includes segmenting which allows people to learn better when a complex lesson is presented in
manageable parts. Because self-directed learning (SDL) is, according to Jarvis (1992), a
nebulous term that lacks a precise definition, breaking the construct down into pieces that
teachers can understand and use to facilitate SDL in their classrooms is important. To allow
teachers to successfully understand all of the components of SDL, it is recommended that before
98
holding a training on how to facilitate SDL, the components of the construct are pre-taught and
defined according to how SDL is understood at TCS.
SDL at TCS is defined as a student’s ability to self-monitor their progress during the
learning process, self-manage their workload across classes, and self-modify any behavior that is
counter-productive to their learning goals. The role of the teacher shifts from the traditional view
of the teacher holding knowledge that he or she disseminates to their students over time to that of
a facilitator of the learning process (Bolhuis & Voeten, 2001). Teachers learn to provide students
with learning environments that allow students opportunities to develop mastery through
acquiring skills, practicing the integration of those skills into their work, and understanding why
and how they are important so that they can determine when to apply them in the future, helping
move knowledge into long term memory (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Providing training on
how to facilitate self-monitoring, self-managing, and self-modifying behavior in students, and
pre-teaching how to make these practices visible, will support all teachers in their facilitation of
SDL in their classrooms.
Teachers need metacognitive reflection on their facilitation of self-directed learning.
The assumed results of this study are expected to show that teachers need to undertake
metacognitive reflection on their facilitation of SDL. It is recommended that the process of
metacognitive reflection will allow teachers to contemplate their facilitation of SDL and make
the necessary changes to their pedagogical approach to increase its effectiveness. According to
Baker (2006), metacognitive reflection allows teachers to engage in guided self-monitoring and
self-assessment, as well as debrief the thinking process upon completion of facilitating learning
tasks. Teachers, as learners and facilitators of learning, will benefit from metacognitive reflection
because this process allows teachers to focus on how their practice impacts those they are
99
responsible for in their classrooms. Therefore, after receiving SDL training, the recommendation
is to provide teachers with allocated time to engage in metacognitive reflection every week to
reflect on their facilitation of SDL.
Kolb’s Learning Cycle, as outlined in Vince (1998), is a useful process for how teachers
could support SDL skills in students. It begins with the teacher's formation of the abstract
concepts contained within SDL and generalizations for how to transfer information. Teachers
would then test the implications of those concepts in new learning situations through concrete
experiences provided within their lessons. Finally, teachers would observe student learning and
reflect on how to modify student learning to improve or reinforce student outcomes and their use
of the skillset within SDL. The final step of metacognitive reflection is critical because it allows
for the process of creating knowledge that reflects the interaction between the teacher’s
subjective experiences teaching and the more objective cultural experience of how the teacher’s
strategies impact their student’s learning and practice of SDL (Vince, 1998). This evidence
affirms the importance of metacognitive reflection and supports that teachers need time to
consistently perform the process as part of their professional practice.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. The motivation influences in Table 5.2 represent the complete list of
assumed motivational influences and their probability of being validated is based on the
literature reviewed, the motivational theories examined, and informal discussions with teachers
at TCS. Motivation includes an individual’s thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors with regards to
choice, persistence, and effort and is influenced by one’s social-cognitive constructs (Clark and
Estes, 2008). For teachers to be successful in facilitating self-directed learning in their
classrooms, they need to be motivated to do so. The data showed that while SDL is embedded
100
into the inquiry-based pedagogical approach found at the primary level, it needs to be reinforced
at the secondary level. Therefore, the final column in Table 5.2 offers specific recommendations
for increasing secondary teacher’s motivation to facilitate self-directed learning at TCS.
Table 5.2
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Validated as a
Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Primary, Secondary,
Both
(P, S, B)
Self-efficacy: Teachers
believe they can
integrate SDL into the
TCS learning to learn
framework. (SE)
V Y Feedback and
modeling
increase self-
efficacy
(Pajares, 2006).
(S) Provide coaching
sessions to secondary
teachers as they are
growing their
knowledge of SDL.
During coaching
sessions: Provide
goal-directed practice
coupled with frequent,
accurate, credible,
targeted, and private
feedback on progress
in learning and
performance (Pajares,
2006).
Value (Attainment):
Teachers believe that
shifting from a subject
matter expert to a
facilitator of self-
directed learning is
beneficial to students as
life-long learners. (V)
HP Y Learning and
motivation are
enhanced if the
learner values
the task (Eccles,
2006).
(S) During coaching
sessions, all materials
and activities should
be relevant and useful
to teachers, connected
to their interests, and
based on real-world
tasks (Eccles, 2006).
Value (Attainment):
Teachers believe that
life-long learning (as a
component of SDL) is
an important mindset to
develop in their
students. (V)
N N Not validated Not validated
Motivation construct type for each influence listed: Self-efficacy (SE); Value (V)
101
Self-efficacy Influence Written as Solution Statement
Increase the self-efficacy of teachers. The findings of this study show that secondary
teachers need to increase their belief that they can integrate self-directed learning into TCS’s
learning to learn framework. This recommendation is grounded in the literature on self-efficacy
theory with the intent of closing the gap in declarative knowledge. Pajares (2006) stated that
feedback and modeling increase self-efficacy. This suggests that if secondary teachers are
provided with accurate feedback on how to facilitate SDL, their self-efficacy will be increased. It
is recommended that new teachers to TCS or those struggling to facilitate SDL receive coaching
as they develop their knowledge of SDL and that coaching sessions provide goal-directed
practice coupled with frequent feedback on progress in learning and performance (Pajaraes,
2006).
Self-efficacy plays an important role in social cognitive theory because it is the
foundation for one’s sense of accomplishment, well-being, and one’s level of motivation. If
secondary teachers lack the belief that they can integrate SDL into their teaching, on the
individual level, there is little incentive to begin to do so. Schunk (1991) stated that motivation is
enhanced when individuals perceive that they are making progress and that regular feedback
helps individuals gain and maintain a sense of self-efficacy as the individual becomes more
skilled in the task that they are completing. From a theoretical perspective, it is expected that
teachers who are more motivated to facilitate SDL, will do so more frequently and that frequent
feedback with clear learning goals will add to teacher’s increased self-efficacy.
Value Influence Written as Solution Statement
Teachers value being a facilitator of SDL. This study found that secondary teachers
need to believe that shifting from a subject matter expert to facilitators of SDL is beneficial to
102
students as life-long learners. A recommendation rooted in expectancy-value motivational
theory, specifically attainment, has been selected to close this gap in task value belief. Eccles
(2006) posited that learning and motivation are enhanced if the learner values the task. As
secondary teachers increase their attainment value in the importance of facilitating SDL and
building life-long learning skills in their students, it will become an important part of their self-
schema. To build secondary teacher’s attainment value as SDL facilitators, it is recommended
that during all coaching sessions, materials used and activities conducted should be relevant and
useful to teachers, connected to their interests, and based on real-world tasks that they can then
use in their classrooms (Eccles, 2006).
Wigfield and Eccles (2000) constructed a theoretical model of expectancy-value that
examined students’ expectations for success and the value that they attached to various options
perceived to be available and they found that if a student believed that he or she could perform
the task, it was a predictor of a student’s willingness to persevere when faced with challenging
tasks. In addition to this, if a student valued the task, there was a stronger probability of success.
Wigfield and Eccles (2000) broke down value into four distinct constructs which include: (1)
intrinsic interest (the level of enjoyment gained); (2) attainment value (the level of the task being
aligned with the student’s identity or beliefs); (3) utility value (how much the task is tied to the
student’s long-range goals); and (4) the perceived cost of engaging in the activity. From a
theoretical perspective, increasing a teacher's attainment value in the facilitation of SDL in their
classrooms can then increase the frequency of that facilitation, resulting in students being
encouraged to become self-directed learners.
103
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. The organizational influences in Table 5.3 represent the assumed
organizational influences and their probability of being validated based on the most frequently
mentioned organizational influences during informal conversations and the findings of the
survey. One of the reasons that organizational goals are not met in an organization is a lack of
alignment between stakeholder goals and the organization’s mission and goals (Clark & Estes,
2008). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) identified two constructs about culture which include
cultural models, or the underlying beliefs and values shared by individuals in groups, and
cultural settings, or the settings and activities in which performance occurs. The processes and
cultural models and settings must align throughout the organization’s structure to achieve the
mission and goals. Table 5.3 shows the recommendations for these influences based on
theoretical principles.
Table 5.3
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence
Validated as a
Gap
Yes, High
Probability, No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Primary,
Secondary, Both
(P, S, B)
Cultural Model
Influence 1: The
organization needs a
culture of
accountability at all
levels, including the
support of teacher
accountability. (CM)
V Y Measurement of
learning and
performance are
essential
components of an
effective
accountability
system capable of
improving
organizational
performance
(Marsh & Farrell,
2015).
(B) Provide
teachers with
clearly articulated
examples of the
facilitation of SDL
as well as how that
facilitation will be
measured when
teachers are
assessed on their
practice.
104
Cultural Model
Influence 2: The
organization needs a
culture of
collaboration
between leadership
and teachers through
increased systematic
communication and
collaboration. (CM)
HP Y Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders encourage
open lines of
communication
(Mezirow, 2000).
(B) Develop a
system for
collecting formal
and informal
“organizational
intelligence” which
understands
teacher’s strengths
and challenges
regarding the
facilitation of SDL
across the junior
and senior levels at
TCS at any given
point.
Cultural Setting
Influence 1: The
organization’s
leadership needs to
provide teachers with
consistent
performance goals
and feedback. (CS)
V Y Providing feedback
to further the
strategic goal, and
to transfer
information, can be
achieved through
strategic
communication.
Clear
communication can
have the desired
outcome of creating
an identified effect
such as meeting a
specific goal.
Supervisors affect
how the feedback is
interpreted by staff
(Berger, 2014).
(B) Provide
teachers with
consistent
performance goals
and feedback so
that teachers
facilitate SDL as it
aligns with TCS’s
strategic
organizational goal.
Influence is a Cultural Model (CM) or Cultural Setting (CS).
Cultural Models
Building a culture of accountability across all levels of the organization. TCS
leadership needs to promote a culture of accountability at all levels, including the support of
teacher accountability. A principle grounded in accountability theory has been identified to close
this gap. Research has shown that measurement of learning and performance are essential
components of an effective accountability system capable of improving organizational
105
performance (Down & Shieh, 2013; Golden, 2006; and Marsh & Farrell, 2015). This suggests
that if the organization is explicit in fostering accountability, teachers will more likely be able to
consistently facilitate SDL. The recommendation is to provide teachers with clearly articulated
examples of the facilitation of SDL, as well as how that facilitation will be measured when
teachers are assessed on their practice.
Cultural models refer to the established way of thinking of the stakeholders within the
organization (Clark and Estes, 2008). Accountability is an important piece for ensuring that an
initiative is carried out as it was designed to be carried out and the culture of accountability in an
organization has a direct effect on how people interact (Biesta, 2004). Because of the multiple
levels found within the organizational framework at TCS (international teams, national teams,
regional teams, and site teams), the what and the how of accountability can get convoluted as it
moves through the different layers. Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003) see leadership as
being responsible for not only knowing the what, but also having a strong understanding of the
when, how, and why to meet the organization’s goals. Therefore, the literature suggests that the
organization’s focus on accountability across multiple levels could have a positive influence on
meeting the organization’s goal of all teachers facilitating SDL in their classrooms.
Cultural Settings
Provide teachers with consistent performance goals and feedback. The organization’s
leadership needs to provide teachers with consistent performance goals and feedback. A
principle rooted in communication theory has been identified to fill the gap. Berger (2014)
posited that providing feedback to further the strategic goal and to transfer information, can be
achieved through strategic communication. Clear communication and feedback can have the
desired outcome of creating an identified effect such as meeting a specific goal and leadership
106
affects how the feedback is interpreted by staff. Therefore, leadership should understand that
they are influential to internal communications and the effects of feedback because employees
watch to determine if the leader’s behavior should be followed (Berger, 2014). The
recommendation is for leadership to provide teachers with consistent performance goals and
feedback so that teachers facilitate SDL as it aligns with TCS’s strategic organizational goal.
Within an organization, cultural settings focus on specific elements within the
environment that helps to create the organization’s cultural model, which affects people’s
experiences and influences how people perceive the organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001). Fullan (2000) examined how those looking to implement organizational change were able
to create conditions where professional collaboration became the norm across the organization.
Danielson (2007) identified four domains for professional practice in teaching which include
planning and preparation, the classroom environment, instruction, and professional
responsibilities. When feedback is provided to teachers through these lenses, teachers are able to
clearly understand their performance level within each domain based on observations from
leadership and can then either provide support to others if their performance is distinguished or
receive support from others if there is a need for improvement. Therefore, the literature supports
the creation of a culture of communication and feedback between leaders and teachers so that
clear goals can be set and teacher performance of the facilitation of SDL can be measured.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation framework that informs this study is the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model is derived from the
Kirkpatrick Four-Level Model of Evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006), but instead of
107
working towards a goal, the New World Kirkpatrick Model begins with the organizational goals,
working backward from results, to behavior, to learning, and then to reaction. This change
occurred because Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) found that too much emphasis was being
put on the first two levels (reaction and learning) and levels three (behavior) and four (results)
were seen as being too difficult and possibly too expensive to evaluate. To offset this perception,
the New World Kirkpatrick Model begins with the formation of an evaluation plan as
organizational goals are identified and then works backward so that the leading indicators that
connect the recommended solutions to meet the organization’s goals are identified and aligned
with those goals. The New World Kirkpatrick Model is presented below in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1
The New World Kirkpatrick Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
Level 4 results focus on the degree to which targeted outcomes transpire as a result of the
training and support, as well as the outlined accountability package found in the leading
indicators. Level 3 behavior is the degree to which employees apply what they learn during
108
training when they return to their jobs. Level 2 learning is the degree to which participants
acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment through
participation in training. Level 1 reaction is the degree to which participants find the training
engaging and relevant to their jobs. Designing the implementation and evaluation plan in this
manner allows links between employee buy-in, immediate solutions to challenges, and the larger
organizational goals (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The organizational mission of TCS is to enhance children’s learning by providing high-
quality learning programs matched to the needs of individual students and those that are aimed at
promoting their eventual full participation in society; establishing a supportive school
community; treating all children equally and providing them with both the skills and the
environment to work well with their peers and the wider community while developing the self-
efficacy to become life-long self-directed learners. To accomplish this, TCS has set an
organizational goal of 100% of all teachers implementing Dr. Selina Samuels’ strategies for
supporting self-directed learning by the end of a three-year strategic plan, which runs from 2018
- 2020. Therefore, all teachers are expected to integrate the facilitation of self-directed learning
into their classroom teaching and into learning conversations outside of formal classroom
teaching. This study examined the knowledge and skills, motivational, and organizational
barriers that prevent teachers from facilitating SDL. The proposed solution to barriers includes
increases in declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge, increases in self-efficacy and
attainment value, as well as organizational accountability, and a culture of communication with
clear feedback and goal setting. Changes in these areas should result in teachers’ ability to
facilitate SDL across both primary and secondary levels at TCS.
109
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 5.4 shows the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators in the form of
outcomes, metrics, and methods for both external and internal outcomes for TCS. It is expected
that the external outcomes will be met if the internal outcomes are met through training and
organizational support for teachers.
Table 5.4
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
1. The perception of new
TCS graduates being
self-directed learners
who are work-ready is
reflected in the Church
community businesses.
1. The number of employers who
indicate agree to highly agree
on questions related to work-
readiness and self-directed
learner attributes in new
employees.
1. Solicit data from an annual
employer survey.
Internal Outcomes
2. Increased teacher
confidence in their
ability to facilitate SDL
within the ‘learning to
learn’ framework at
TCS.
2a. The number of times that SDL
is facilitated in the classroom.
2a. Document during annual
classroom observations conducted
by leadership.
2b. The number of teachers who
voice confidence in their ability to
facilitate SDL within the ‘learning
to learn’ framework at TCS at the
agree to highly agree level on
questions related to facilitating
SDL at TCS.
2b. Document during mid-year and
annual teacher self-assessment
survey.
3. Increased teacher
engagement in the
facilitation of SDL at
the secondary level.
3. The number of teachers who
voice engagement in their practice
of teaching SDL skills within the
‘learning to learn’ framework at
TCS at the agree to highly agree
level on questions related to
facilitating SDL at TCS.
3. Document during mid-year and
annual teacher self-assessment
survey.
4. Decreased teacher mid-
year turnover.
4. The number of teachers who give
notice mid-year.
4. Exit survey solicits reasons for
leaving which include perceived
110
levels of organizational support
and training.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors. Teachers at TCS are the stakeholders of focus. It has been outlined
previously that teachers need to apply the SDL behaviors that have been taught during training
sessions to their classrooms to meet the organizational goal of all teachers facilitating SDL. The
first critical behavior is that teachers purposefully integrate components of SDL into their lesson
plans. The second critical behavior is that teachers use metacognitive reflection to evaluate their
classroom facilitation of SDL. The third critical behavior is that teachers work with mentors to
increase their understanding of SDL and how to facilitate it in the classroom. The specific
metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome behaviors appear in Table 5.5.
Table 5.5
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical
Behavior
Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. All teachers
purposefully
integrate components
of SDL into their
lesson plans.
1. The number of
completed lessons and
unit plans that include
SDL skills.
1. Department heads to
conduct a quarterly review
of teacher lessons and unit
plans on Canvas or
OneNote.
1. Ongoing -
Quarterly (Terms 1, 2,
3, and 4) review
during term
department meetings.
2. All teachers use
metacognitive
reflection to evaluate
their classroom
facilitation of SDL.
2. The number of
teacher metacognitive
reflection notes
recorded in OneNote.
2. Teacher mentors have
access to teacher mentee
metacognitive reflections
on OneNote and will
conduct a quarterly
review.
2. Monthly review of
mentee metacognitive
reflection by the
mentor teacher.
3. Secondary
teachers work with
mentors to increase
their understanding
of SDL and how to
facilitate it in the
classroom.
3. Number of meeting
notes that document
mentor/mentee
discussions on strategies
for the facilitation of
SDL.
3. Mentor/mentee
meetings will begin with
structured discussion
points that include the
construct and facilitation
of SDL before
unstructured discussions
based on specific mentee
needs.
3. Weekly meetings
between 30 and 45
minutes between
mentors and mentees.
111
Required Drivers. Teachers require self-efficacy to facilitate SDL and need to value the
construct of SDL to build SDL skills in their students. The organization needs a culture of
accountability at all levels, including the support of teacher accountability. In addition, the
organization needs a culture of collaboration between leadership and teachers through increased
systematic communication and collaboration with the organization’s leadership providing
teachers with consistent performance goals and feedback. Table 5.6 shows the recommended
drivers to support the critical behaviors of teachers.
Table 5.6
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Support
Reinforcing
Self-directed learning is
practiced by all teachers as they
plan lessons to build those skills
in their students.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Job aid provides teachers with
definitions and examples of
strategies for how to facilitate
SDL during each of the stages of
student learning at the primary
and secondary levels.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Mentors provide SDL strategies
to secondary teacher mentees.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Feedback and coaching from
mentor to secondary teacher
mentee regarding their SDL
facilitation.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Leadership recognizes all
teachers who are facilitating
SDL well during all-school
meetings and their strategies are
shared with others across New
Zealand.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Accountability
Monitoring
112
Members of the leadership team
will conduct classroom
observations of all teachers
facilitating SDL.
Annually 1, 2, 3
All teachers will self-monitor
their facilitation of SDL through
metacognitive reflections.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
All teachers participate in a mid-
year and annual teacher self-
assessment survey.
Bi-annually 1, 2, 3
As needed, secondary teachers
participate in mentor/mentee
meetings with a partial focus on
the facilitation of SDL.
Weekly 1, 2, 3
Organizational Support. Time will need to be allocated in order to implement the
organizational change plan at TCS. The national leadership team will need to build time into the
teacher’s schedules for the recommended collaborative meetings, metacognitive reflection, and
lesson planning required to facilitate SDL well across the organization. In addition to this,
organizational policies and communication need to be aligned with the goal of all teachers
facilitating SDL through reinforcing the importance of these activities. Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) have demonstrated that organizations spend relatively little time on pre-
training and follow-up activities that translate into the positive behavior changes that they hope
to see in their employees. Learning professionals must, therefore, redefine their roles, highlight
expertise within the organization, and be involved in influencing change in an ongoing manner.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals. Following the completion of the recommended solutions, specifically
working closely with a mentor, teachers will be able to:
1. Explain the components of SDL within the Learning to Learn framework at TCS. (D)
2. Classify strategies for facilitating SDL into the Learning to Learn framework which
includes navigate, orientate, and explore. (D)
113
3. Apply differentiated strategies to the facilitation of SDL in the classroom. (P)
4. Create appropriate timeframes for students’ SDL learning goals to be identified and met
with a clear plan to remove SDL teacher scaffolding as student skills increase. (P)
5. Plan and monitor lessons that purposefully build SDL skills in students. (P, M)
6. Value the time that it takes to reflect on their facilitation of SDL in the classroom. (Value,
M)
7. Value the planning and facilitation of SDL skills in students. (Value)
8. Indicate confidence that they can facilitate SDL well both in a face-to-face setting and on
Zoom. (Confidence)
Program. The learning goals outlined in the previous section will be achieved with a
training program that will be followed by an ongoing coaching program that focuses on the
growth and performance of teachers. The learners, primary and secondary teachers at TCS, will
study the components of self-directed learning and strategies to engage students at the levels of
‘navigate,’ ‘orientate,’ and ‘explore’ and understand the strategies needed to scaffold student’s
SDL skills. The program is blended, consisting of two phases: 1) a one day face-to-face six-hour
training session followed by 2) two-hour-long e-learning modules for a total completion time of
8 hours. The skills acquired during the training sessions will then be reinforced by weekly one-
on-one coaching sessions between teachers and their mentors which will focus on the growth of
the teacher's ability to facilitate SDL. This training is specific to teachers who have been
identified through observations conducted by leadership as those struggling with the facilitation
of SDL or those who are new to the organization and need support as they learn how to facilitate
SDL.
114
During the initial training session, all teachers will learn about the components of SDL in
the context of TCS and understand how to differentiate and scaffold skills as students gain higher
levels of SDL skills. All teachers will be trained in how to facilitate SDL in both face-to-face
classes and over Zoom. Teachers will be taught to gather specific examples of student work to
provide evidence of SDL skills in their students and to facilitate student metacognitive reflection
on their learning process which will be standard across all class levels and subjects as a
component of establishing a portfolio of student growth in SDL. Teachers will understand the
importance of SDL skills, how to facilitate it, and how to integrate the skills into their lessons.
The two asynchronous e-learning modules will provide teachers with a job aid of key concepts,
the steps for including SDL student assignments in Canvas, as well as templates for
metacognitive reflection that will guide discussions between teachers and their mentors. These
modules will remain on teacher’s Canvas pages as ‘flipped-learning’ modules that can be
referred back to at any time.
During the academic year, all teachers who have been employed by TCS for under a year
or those struggling to facilitate SDL will be paired with a more experienced mentor teacher. The
mentor and teacher will meet weekly to review the facilitation of SDL, lesson plans, and discuss
the metacognitive reflection of growth and practice of the facilitation of SDL skills in the
classroom. Teachers can share a short 10-minute clip of their teaching from the week and
mentors can provide feedback on their practice and offer strategies to focus on for the upcoming
week. Leadership at TCS will provide mentors with resources and support for mentoring and
best practices for the delivery of feedback. This collaboration and support will help build a
culture of collaboration and professional growth through the improvement in the practice of the
facilitation of SDL.
115
Evaluation of the Components of Learning. Being able to demonstrate declarative
knowledge is usually necessary before one can apply that knowledge to solve problems.
Therefore, it is important to evaluate learning for both the declarative and procedural knowledge
that is being taught during the training sessions offered to teachers. It is also important that the
teachers value the training as a prerequisite to using their newly acquired knowledge and skills
on the job. Additionally, teachers must also be confident that they can succeed in applying their
knowledge and skills and be committed to applying them in their classrooms. As such, Table 5.7
lists the evaluation methods and timing for these components of learning.
Table 5.7
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks using multiple choice. During the workshop and in the two
asynchronous e-learning portions of the
‘flipped-learning’ modules.
Knowledge checks through discussions, “pair, think,
share” and other individual/group activities.
Periodically during the day-long in-person
training and documented in notes that groups
share back to all participants.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
During the asynchronous portions of the course using
classroom scenarios of SDL with multiple-choice
items.
In the asynchronous portions of the course at
the end of each module/lesson/unit
Demonstration in groups and individually of using the
job aids to successfully perform the skills.
During the workshops.
Quality of the feedback from a mentor during group
sharing
During the one-on-one weekly mentoring
sessions.
Individual application of the skills in lesson plans that
include building SDL skills in students.
Weekly when mentors review lesson plans.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment survey
asking participants about their level of proficiency
before and after the training.
At the beginning and the end of the workshop.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
116
Trainer’s observation of participants’ statements and
actions demonstrating that they see the benefit of
what they are being asked to do on the job.
During the workshop.
Discussions of the value of what they are being asked
to do on the job.
During weekly one-on-one mentoring
sessions.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment items. Before and after the day-long training.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey items using scaled items. Following each module/lesson/unit in the
asynchronous portions of the course.
Discussions following practice and feedback. During the training and every week with
mentors.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment items. Before and after the course and the e-learning
modules.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback. During the training.
Create an individual action plan. During the training.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment items. Before and after the course.
Level 1: Reaction
The New World Model developed by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) defines Level 1:
Reaction as the degree to which participants find training favorable, engaging, and relevant to
what they need to do in their jobs. To gauge how learners are reacting throughout a training,
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick suggest that several formative assessments be incorporated into the
training to measure engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction, modifying the training as
it takes place to meet the needs of the participants. A summative assessment in the form of a
survey is a useful pre- and post-test in time increments which may include before and
immediately after the training, four to six weeks after the training, and at the end of a term to
measure the quality of the program and then if the participants apply their learnings to their jobs.
Table 5.8 presents detailed methods, tools, and timing to measure components of Level 1.
117
Table 5.8
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Observation of engagement by the trainer during
the training session
During the training.
Completion of the asynchronous e-learning
modules
Ongoing during the on-line modules.
Attendance During the training, start/stop times during online
modules, and weekly meetings with mentors.
Observations of the teacher by mentor During weekly one-on-one weekly meetings.
Course evaluation Two weeks after the day-long training.
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants via a survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing)
After the training and every on-line module.
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Customer Satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants via a survey
(online) and discussion (ongoing)
After the training and every on-line module.
Observations during one-on-one mentoring
sessions
During weekly meetings between teacher and
mentor.
Course evaluation Two weeks after the course
Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation. For the evaluation of Level 1’s
day-long training, the trainer will conduct periodic brief pulse-checks by asking the participants
about the relevance of the content to their work and the organization, delivery, and learning
environment. Level 2 evaluation will include checks for understanding using learning scenarios
or competition among groups in responding to questions drawn from the content.
During the asynchronous online modules, the learning analytics tool in the learning
management system (LMS) will collect data about the start, duration, and completion of modules
by the participants. These data will indicate the engagement with the course material. The LMS
118
will also administer brief surveys after each module requesting the participant to indicate the
relevance of the material to their job performance and their overall satisfaction with the content
and delivery of the online course.
Delayed for a Period After the Program Implementation. Approximately two weeks
after the implementation of the training, and then again at 10 weeks (end of the academic term),
leadership will administer a survey containing open and scaled items using the Blended
Evaluation approach to measure, from the participant’s perspective, satisfaction and relevance of
the training (Level 1), confidence and value of applying their training (Level 2), application of
the training to the facilitation of SDL in the classroom and the support from mentors and peers
they are receiving (Level 3), and the extent to which their performance of the facilitation of SDL
skills in students across all levels and classrooms at TCS.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goal of all teachers facilitating SDL in their classes at TCS will be measured
by increases in confidence and satisfaction in their work. These indices will be measured two-
weeks after the training and then ten weeks after the training and will be reported at the end of
each term using bar graphs comparing each training report to overall ten-week terms over time.
119
Figure 5.2
Level 4 Training Report
The Level 3 goal of teachers applying their training to their facilitation of SDL will be
measured at two-weeks after the training and then ten-weeks later at the end of the term. These
data will be reported using pie graphs comparing the facilitation of SDL by secondary and
primary teachers at TCS.
Figure 5.3
Teachers Implementing SDL Strategies in the Classroom
120
The Level 2 goal of increasing all teacher's declarative, procedural, and metacognitive
knowledge, as well as their value and commitment to facilitating SDL will be measured two-
weeks and ten-weeks after the training. This data will be reported by primary and secondary
teachers using line graphs showing fluctuations in each of the five areas listed above.
Figure 5.4
Post-Training Percentage of Level Criteria
Attainment 2-Weeks After Training
121
The Level 1 goal of increasing the satisfaction and relevance of the training for the
participants will be measured throughout the training, after the training, and two weeks after the
training. These data will be reported using bar graphs depicting overall levels of satisfaction and
perceived relevance of the training divided into face-to-face and asynchronous online training
modules.
Figure 5.5
Overall Level 1 Training Satisfaction and Perceived Relevance
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was chosen to guide the planning and training of
teacher’s facilitation SDL due to its focus on the importance of gathering data. Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2026) recommend that building the training around data collection and analysis is a
vital approach so that those designing teacher training can both predict and maximize future
mission-critical outcomes. Because the training both considers the organizational goal, as well as
the stakeholder goal, the training should enhance the opportunities to have teachers increase their
facilitation of SDL. By constructing the training backward, the most important results are
addressed first (Level 4) and the lowest level in terms of return over the long-term (Level 1) are
122
addressed at the end. Because the New World Kirkpatrick Model combines implementation and
evaluation, the model aligns what is taught to what is asked of participants after the training has
taken place. This alignment keeps the focus on the overall goals and ensures that the training
effectively addresses the reasons for either change in teacher behavior or the lack of changes in
behavior that allows the trainer to return to the planning stage to improve the next training. The
New World Kirkpatrick Model allows TCS to operate in a cycle of continuous improvement
where teachers participate in the growth of their professional practice and the facilitation of SDL.
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this research included the small number of teachers who chose to
complete the survey, as well as the number of those who are willing to be interviewed. While
this research aims to survey all 150 junior and secondary teachers only 37 participated in the
survey after two attempts to increase the number of participants. It was also expected that twelve
teachers would be interviewed, but only nine volunteered, and attempts made to increase the
sample to twelve were not successful. In addition to this, the truthfulness of teacher’s responses
could not be predicted or controlled. This was evident when there were large discrepancies
between what survey participants reported as fairly high frequencies of behaviors that were not
reported in the interviews. A delimitation of this research is that it is a case study of one school’s
implementation of a strategic plan and the research focused on a gap analysis of one pedagogical
approach that TCS has as a focus and does not examine any other possible pedagogical
approaches. Another delimitation of the study is that the population studied is limited to teachers
who are facilitating SDL classrooms, but it does not seek to understand how students are using
SDL in their learning process because they are outside of the scope of this study.
123
Future Research
It is important to note that this study took place from 2019 to 2020 during the Covid-19
pandemic. TCS is unique in that it already uses Zoom as a platform for many of its secondary
classes, so the change of going from a campus setting to home during the four weeks of Level 4
lockdown in New Zealand was not drastic for most students. Primary teachers had to shift
quickly to delivering lessons on an online platform during the four-week lockdown, but there
were many experienced online teachers at TCS to aid with the transition, and parents were
present at home to continue to facilitate inquiry-based learning. What is relevant for future
research is that even for a school like TCS that is experienced with teaching online using Zoom,
this research uncovered gaps in teacher’s procedural knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, and
self-efficacy when it came to delivering lessons on Zoom versus delivering lessons in a face-to-
face environment. Teachers struggled with building relationships with students and
differentiating lessons over Zoom, and with student behavior like turning off cameras, being off
task during breakout rooms, and holding side conversations when teachers were providing
directions for tasks. Many of these challenges are not as persistent in a classroom where a
teacher can move around the room and respond to a student’s body language, redirecting the
student back to the task at hand.
At a time when much of the world has moved its educational delivery to online platforms,
it is important to further research teacher training programs specific to online teaching, as well as
how to evaluate teacher performance on online teaching platforms that focus on goal setting and
feedback from leadership. It is also important to research the effects that moving to online
educational delivery systems have on students. Many students rely on relationships with teachers
124
to build their self-efficacy as learners and teachers have identified that building those
relationships in an online platform are difficult.
Conclusion
This evaluation study focused on the factors that contribute to teachers' facilitation of
SDL in their classes. By using Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis framework, this researcher
explored the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact teachers as they
build SDL skills in their students. The triangulation of document review, survey results, and
interview findings validated or partially validated ten influences.
In the dimension of knowledge, teachers reported high levels of declarative knowledge,
but low levels of procedural knowledge, reflecting their ability to define SDL, but not necessarily
know how to facilitate it in their classrooms. Another gap was revealed in metacognitive
knowledge with high levels reported in the survey, but only one teacher out of nine interviewed
had embedded it into their practice. In the dimension of motivation, all teachers believed that
SDL encompasses skills and attributes that are important for life-long learners to develop, but at
the senior-level, teachers believed that it is first important to gain an understanding of content
and then to develop SDL skills. Therefore, at the secondary-level teachers could be doing more
to facilitate SDL. At the primary-level, SDL is embedded in the inquiry-based learning that takes
place in the classrooms. Finally, the organizational dimension revealed low levels found on the
survey, but higher levels being found in the interviews. Teachers would like to see more
accountability at TCS which for many of them meant clear communication between all levels of
the school. Teachers reported a strong culture of collaboration, but it was usually found at the
local level with peers, rather than with leadership at the national level. Goal setting and feedback
were also reported to be more consistent and clearer at the local level, but teachers would like
125
more consistent systems in place throughout all levels of the organization so that they know what
is expected of them and what they need to do to meet their performance goals.
Applying the New World Kirkpatrick Model, recommendations were proposed for all ten
KMO influences which led to an implementation plan. Following, an evaluation plan was created
to ensure that the recommendations for the validated and partially validated influences were
effectively implemented. This study provides TCS leadership with the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors for developing a program to better support all teacher’s facilitation of
SDL in all classrooms across TCS in New Zealand.
126
References
Abele, A. E., & Wiese, B. S. (2008). The nomological network of self-management strategies
and career success. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 733-
749.
Agarwal, N. K. (2011). Verifying survey items for construct validity: A two‐stage sorting
procedure for questionnaire design in information behavior research. Proceedings of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1-8.
Agran, M. (1997). Student-directed learning: Teaching self-determination skills. Pacific Grove,
CA: Brooks/Cole.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474. doi:
10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Alharbi, H. A. (2018). Readiness for self-directed learning: How bridging and traditional
students differs. Nurse Education Today,61, 231-234.
Ambrose, S.A., Kirst, M.W., Lovett, M.C., et al. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-
based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
American Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education.
(2015). Top 20 principles from psychology for PreK–12 teaching and learning. Retrieved
from http://www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/top-twenty-principles.pdf
Arkan, B., Elif, U. A., & Hatice, Y. S. (2016). Locus of control and self-directed learning
relation on Nursing students. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 9(2), 514–519.
ASCD. (2012). What is the purpose of education? Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/edupdate/eu201207infographic.pdf
127
Avdal, E. U. (2013). The effect of self-directed learning abilities of student nurses on success in
Turkey. Nurse Education Today, 33(8), 838–841.
Ayyildiz, Y., & Tarhan, L. (2015). Development of the self-directed learning skills
scale. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(6), 663-679.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/
metacognition/.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral
change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191.
Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359-373.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In A.
Bandura. (Ed.). Self-efficacy in changing societies. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Bassett, M. M., Martinez, J., & Martin, E. P. (2014). Self-directed activity-based learning and
achievement in high school chemistry. Education Research and Perspectives, 41, 73.
Berger, B. (2014). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of
strategic employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public
Relations, 1(1).
Biesta, G. J. (2004). Education, accountability, and the ethical demand: Can the democratic
potential of accountability be regained? Educational Theory, 54(3), 233–250.
128
Bloyd, R. Hoban, G, & Wall, D. (1995). Self-efficacy and the adult learner: Implications for the
teaching of writing. In H. B. Long & Associates (Eds.), New directions in self- directed
learning (pp. 197- 217). Norman, OK: Public Managers Center, College of Education,
University of Oklahoma
Bolhuis, S., & Voeten, M. (2001). Toward self-directed learning in secondary schools: what do
teachers do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 837–855.
Brockett, R. G., & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in learning. Perspectives in theory,
research and practice. London, UK: Routledge.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Bryk, A. S. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(7), 23-30.
Burke, J. C. (2004). Achieving accountability in higher education: Balancing public, academic,
and market demands. In J. C. Burke (Ed.), The many faces of accountability (pp. 1–24).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Candy, P. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: A comprehensive guide to theory and
practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carneiro, P., Crawford, C., & Goodman, A. (2007). The impact of early cognitive and non-
cognitive skills on later outcomes. Centre for the Economics of Education. London:
London School of Economics.
Christensen, C., & Raynor, M. (2013). The innovator's solution: Creating and sustaining
successful growth. Harvard Business Review Press.
Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). 21st-century
skills development through inquiry-based learning. Singapore: Springer.
129
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. 7
th
(Edition)
London: Routledge.
Conner, L. N. (2014). Students’ use of evaluative constructivism: comparative degrees of
intentional learning. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(4),
472-489.
Council, E. U. (2002). Council resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning. Official Journal
of the European Communities, 9
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Crockett, L., Jukes, I., & Churches, A. (2011). Literacy is not enough: 21st-century fluencies for
the digital age. Corwin Press.
Cunha, F., & Heckman, J. J. (2008). Formulating, identifying, and estimating the technology of
cognitive and noncognitive skill formation. Journal of Human Resources, 43(4), 738-782.
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2019).
Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied
Developmental Science, 1-44.
130
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (with Espinoza, D.). (2017). Effective
teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved
from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-
files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT .pdf
Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what
they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Dewey, J. (1934). Individual psychology and education. The Philosopher 12 (1):1-6.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan Company.
Dobson, J.R.A. (1982). Life-long learning in voluntary association. A study of non-formal
education in Atlantic Canada. Department of Adult Education, St. Francis Xavier
University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia.
Educator Impact. (2019). EI for teachers: The competencies.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy-value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Fabriz, S., Dignath-van Ewijk, C., Poarch, G., & Büttner, G. (2014). Fostering self-monitoring of
university students by means of a standardized learning journal—a longitudinal study
with process analyses. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 29(2), 239-255.
Faure, E. (1972). Learning to Be. Paris: UNESCO.
Fink, L.D. (1997). Instructional consulting: A guide for developing professional
knowledge. Practically speaking: A sourcebook for instructional consultants in higher
education. Brinko, K.T., & Menges, R. J. (eds.). Stillwater, Oklahoma: New Forums
Press.
131
Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G. (2001). Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale
for nursing education. Nurse education today, 21(7), 516-525.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–
developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Fullan, M. (2000). The three stories of educational reform: Inside; inside/out; outside/in. Phi
Delta Kappan, 81, 581–584.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45–56.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment
with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18(1), 59-82.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the
postmodern age. New York: Teachers College Press.
Heckman, J. J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive
abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor
Economics, 24(3), 411-482.
Helterbran, V. R. (2017). Lessons in lifelong learning: Earning a bachelor’s degree in retirement.
Adult Learning, 28, 12-19.
Hentschke, G. C. & Wohlstetter, P. R. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. University of
Southern California Urban Education, 17-19.
132
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in
problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and
Clark. Educational psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.
Hoban, J. D., Lawson, S. R., Mazmanian, P. E., Best, A. M., & Seibel, H. R. (2005). The self‐
directed learning readiness scale: A factor analysis study. Medical education, 39(4), 370-
379.
Hoban, S., & Hoban, G. (2004). Self-esteem, self-efficacy and self-directed learning: Attempting
to undo the confusion. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 1(2), 7-25.
Ipe, M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework. Human Resource
Development Review, 2(4), 337-359.
Jarvis, P. (1992). Paradoxes of learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Kaiser, L., Rosenfield, S., & Gravois, T. (2009). Teachers’ perception of satisfaction, skill
development, and skill application after instructional consultation services. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 42(5), 444-457.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2006). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/.
Klein, E. J., & Riordan, M. (2009). Putting professional development into practice: A framework
for how teachers in expeditionary learning schools implement professional development.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(4), 61-80.
133
Knowles, M. S. (1973/1978). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston, TX: Gulf
Publishing Company.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning. A guide for learners and teachers. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2009). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:
A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Kranzow, J., & Hyland, N. (2016). Self-directed learning: Developing readiness in graduate
students. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 13(2), 1-14.
Lee, K., Tsai, P., Chai, C., & Koh, J. (2014). Students’ perceptions of self‐directed learning and
collaborative learning with and without technology. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 30(5), 425–437.
Leithwood, K. A., & Riehl, C. (2003). What we know about successful school leadership.
Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Little, T. (2013). 21st-century learning and progressive education: An intersection. International
Journal of Progressive Education, 9(1), 84-96.
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven
decision making: A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 43(2), 269-289.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1992). Continuous learning in the workplace. Adult Learning,
3(4), 9-12.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1996). Adult educators and the challenge of the learning
organization. Adult Learning, 7(4), 18-20.
134
Maxwell, J.A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Los Angeles:
SAGE Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Merriam S., Caffarella, R. & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive
guide. (3rd ed.) New York: Wiley.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress.
The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
Thousand Oakes, CA: SAGE
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. 107-110, 20 U.S.C. § 6319 (2002).
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2006). Results that matter: 21st-century skills and high
school reform. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/RTM2006.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Chapter 7: Qualitative Interviewing. In Qualitative Research & Evaluation
Methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
135
Pollack, M. (2011, January). Lessons from Oneville: Understanding and improving a
communication ecosystem in education. Paper presented at the University of California,
San Diego.
Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement
and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human
Behavior, 63, 604-612.
Robinson, S. B. & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Los Angeles:
SAGE
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Samuels, S. (n.d.) Learning to learn: Reculturation through educational change. Unpublished
manuscript.
Sarason, S. B. (1972). The creation of settings and the future societies. Brookline Books.
Schein, E. H. & Schein, P. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5
th
Ed). John Wiley
& Sons.
Schleicher, A. (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century:
Lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary
educational psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
136
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-
4), 207-231.
Scott, G. & Palinscar, A. (2006). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/.
Simon, S., Campbell, S., Johnson, S., & Stylianidou, F. (2011). Characteristics of effective
professional development for early-career science teachers. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 29(1), 5-23.
Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2015). Thanks for the feedback: The science and art of receiving feedback
well (even when it is off base, unfair, poorly delivered, and frankly, you're not in the
mood) (Vol. 36, No. 10). Penguin.
Tarrant, P. (2017). Reflective practice and professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Thompson, C. M. (2015). Constructivism in the art classroom: Praxis and policy. Arts Education
Policy Review, 116(3), 118-127.
Trochim, W. M., & Donnelly, J. P. (2001). Research methods knowledge base (Vol. 2).
Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog Publishing.
van Der Walt, J. (2019). The term “self-directed learning”-back to Knowles, or another way to
gorge ahead? Journal of Research on Christian Education, 28(1), 1–20.
Van Wyk, M. M. (2017). Exploring student teachers’ views on e-portfolios as an empowering
tool to enhance self-directed learning in an online teacher education course. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 42(6), 1–21.
Vince, R. (1998). Behind and beyond Kolb's learning cycle. Journal of Management
Education, 22(3), 304-319.
137
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-
continent Research for Education and Learning.
Webber, G., & Miller, D. (2016). Progressive pedagogies and teacher education: A review of the
literature. McGill Journal of Education, 51(3), 1061-1079.
Wehmeyer, M. L., Agran, M., & Hughes, C. (2000). A national survey of teachers' promotion of
self-determination and student-directed learning. The Journal of Special
Education, 34(2), 58-68.
Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational
frontier. Harvard business review, 78(1), 139-146.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Examining the teaching life. Educational Leadership, 63(6),
26-29.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic
attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American
Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social-cognitive perspective. In M.
Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39).
San Diego: Academic Press.
138
Appendix A: Protocols
Survey protocol sample questions:
Research Question/Data
Type
KMO
Construct
Survey Item (question and response)
Demographic – Sample
Description
N/A 1. I have worked for TCS for:
______ over 5 years
______ over 1 year but less than 5 years
______ less than 1 year
Demographic – Sample
Description
N/A 2. What gender do you identify as? (male, female,
_______, I prefer not to answer)
Demographic – Sample
Description
N/A 3. What is the highest degree or level of education
you have completed? (High School, Bachelor's
Degree, Master's Degree, Ph.D. or higher,
Trade School, Prefer not to say)
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
4. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students during class to set learning
goals for the week? ______
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
5. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to transfer learning in one
discipline to deepen understanding in another?
______
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
6. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to apply peer feedback to
their work so that they could improve their
ideas? ______
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
N/A
Frequency
7. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to reflect on where they are
in their learning with regards to a specific
topic? _______
139
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
8. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to reflect on what they need
to know next as they learn a specific topic?
_______
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
9. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to figure out how they will
reach their learning goals? _________
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
10. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to articulate the strategies
that they used to help them get out of the
learning pit? __________
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
11. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to identify who their
audience was for a particular task? _________
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
12. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to develop their own
success criteria for a task? __________
140
To what extent is TCS
meeting its goal of 100%
of teachers implementing
self-directed learning
skills into their classrooms
across New Zealand by the
end of 2020?
N/A
Frequency
13. In the past week, how many times did you
work with students to justify their thinking
process using valid reasoning? __________
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-DC 14. I understand the concepts involved in self-
directed learning. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-DC 15. When I approach new material, I try to relate it
to what I already know. (Strongly disagree,
disagree, undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-DC 16. I understand how to provide my students with
opportunities to take increasing ownership of
their learning. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-DC 17. I understand how to provide my students with
opportunities to plan their approaches to
learning. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-DC 18. I understand how to help my students self-
monitor their learning processes as they
progress. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-P 19. I know how to scaffold the skills necessary for
learners to become self-directed learners.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-P 20. I try to relate professional learning to practical
issues. (Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided,
agree, strongly agree)
141
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-P 21. I know how to work with my students to help
them develop their ability to self-modify their
behavior when they are working. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-P 22. I know how to work with my students to help
them develop their ability to self-manage their
behavior when they are working. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-P 23. I know how to work with my students to help
them develop their ability to self-monitor their
behavior when they are working. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-M 24. I think about how to improve my learning.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-M 25. When I learn something new, I try to focus on
the details rather than on the ‘big picture.’
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-M 26. I feel that others are in a better position than I
am to evaluate my success as a professional
learner. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-M 27. I believe that practicing metacognitive
reflection is an important part of my practice as
an educator. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
K-M 28. I make changes to my teaching strategies based
on my metacognitive practice. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-SE 29. I believe that I can integrate self-directed
learning into what I teach in my classes.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
142
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-SE 30. I am able to deal with the unexpected, solving
problems in my classroom when they arise.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-SE 31. I believe that I model the use of learning tools
(T-charts, SWOT, fishbone, flow charts) in a
manner that allows my students to use them as
they learn. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-SE 32. I believe that I am able to model my own
thinking process well to my students. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-SE 33. I am able to support self-directed learning
skills in all of my students, whether they
struggle or excel in my class. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-V 34. I believe that it is necessary to put time into
supporting student’s self-directed learning.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-V 35. I believe that being a life-long learner is an
important mindset to develop in my students.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-V 36. I believe that shifting from a subject matter
specialist to a facilitator of self-directed
learning is beneficial to my students. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-V 37. I believe that self-directed learners become
life-long learners who can apply their learning
to a number of areas throughout their lives.
(Strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree,
strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
M-V 38. I believe that it is important to help students
develop an understanding of their phases of
learning as they climb the mountain. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
143
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CM 39. TCS has a culture of accountability. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CM 40. TCS has a culture of collaboration between
leadership and teachers. (Strongly disagree,
disagree, undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CM 41. TCS leadership has clearly outlined how I
should facilitate self-directed learning in my
classroom. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CM 42. TCS leadership has provided me time to
collaborate with other teachers to plan how to
develop self-directed learning skills in our
students. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CM 43. TCS leadership has allowed me to work with
other teachers across curriculum areas to
discuss how to facilitate self-directed learning
for all students. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CS 44. TCS’s leadership provides me with consistent
performance goals. (Strongly disagree,
disagree, undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CS 45. TCS’s leadership provides me with clear goals
without introducing new initiatives before
implementation has taken place. (Strongly
disagree, disagree, undecided, agree, strongly
agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CS 46. TCS leadership provides me with feedback on
how well I facilitate self-directed learning in
my classroom. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CS 47. TCS leadership provides me with clear
classroom strategies for how to facilitate self-
directed learning across all levels in my
classroom. (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
144
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational influences
related to TCS achieving
its organizational goal?
O-CS 48. TCS leadership has provided me with examples
of student evidence for self-directed learning as
they move from ‘orientate’ to ‘navigate’ to
‘explore.’ (Strongly disagree, disagree,
undecided, agree, strongly agree)
Willingness to participate
in an interview.
N/A 49. Would you be willing to be interviewed over
Zoom to discuss your facilitation of self-
directed learning? (Yes/No)
If you answered, ‘yes,’ please add name, email
address, and level taught below:
Name: _____________________________
Email address: _______________________
I teach:
( ) Primary
( ) Secondary
K-DC=Knowledge-Declarative Conceptual, K-P=Knowledge-Procedural, K-M=Metacognitive,
M-SE=Motivation-Self-efficacy, M-V=Motivation-Value, O-CM=Organization-Cultural Model,
O-CS=Organization-Cultural Setting
Interview protocol:
I would like to begin by welcoming you back to another school year and thanking you for
your time to participate in this interview. I expect that the interview should take no more than an
hour to complete.
Before we get started, I’d like to cover a few things. First, the purpose of my research is
to evaluate the extent to which The Community School is meeting its goal of 100% of teachers
implementing self-directed learning skills into their classrooms across New Zealand by the end
of 2020 and the questions that I will be asking will be on that topic. I am interviewing primary
and secondary teachers because teachers are the ones who are facilitating the development of
self-directed learning skills in students as they teach their classes. I am the Principal Investigator
(PI) for this study and am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California. Do you
have any questions about the study or the purpose of this conversation?
145
I also want you to know that anything that you share with me is strictly confidential. All
of the findings will be reported in the aggregate and any quotes will indicate that it was said by a
“TCS teacher.” No names will be used in the study and no direct quotes will be shared with other
teachers, principals, or learning leaders outside of the final report. If you have any questions
about your rights while taking part in this study, or if you have any concerns or suggestions
regarding your participation, you can reach me by phone or email. You can reference IRB # UP-
20-00294. Do you have any questions for me?
Finally, I’d like to cover the logistics of the interview process. We are meeting on Zoom
and I will be recording our interview so that I can accurately capture what you share. I may also
at times take notes if you are telling me something that I’d like to come back to. If at any time
you wish to say something that would be considered “off the record” I can stop the recording and
begin it again when you finish. I would also like to let you know that as soon as I capture the
transcription of our Zoom meeting, I will delete the video. Your participation in all aspects of
this interview is completely voluntary and you can stop your participation at any time. May I
have your permission to begin the recording and get started?
Begin recording…mention time and date.
As we begin, I’d first like to ask you about your experience at TCS.
1. How long have you been teaching for TCS?
1a. What subject(s) and grade levels do you teach?
2. Can you please describe a typical class for ____________? (grade/subject)
3. Now, can you please define self-directed learning for me?
4. Can you please describe to me your level of confidence as a facilitator of self-directed learning
in your classes?
146
4a. What factors led to you say that you are ___________?
5. Can you provide examples of how you facilitate self-directed learning skills in your classes?
I’d like to now ask you some questions about collaboration at TCS.
6. Who do you consider to be members of your support team as you work to facilitate self-
directed learning in students across The Assignment, The Lesson, and The Study?
6a. How do you communicate student learning goals with those who you mentioned?
7. How, if at all, do you collaborate systematically with parents, CAs, Learning Leaders, or
Learning Center Administrators to support students as they learn?
7a. If you are not currently doing so, how do you believe that creating these supports
would be beneficial to students?
I’m now going to ask you about goals at TCS.
8. Can you please describe the goals of TCS in terms of student development by graduation?
8a. How do you feel that the goals are reflected in the way that you facilitate learning in
your classroom?
We’ve just talked about goals at TCS, but I’d also like to ask you about metacognitive reflection.
9. What are some of the reflective practices that you do that focuses on your facilitation of SDL?
9.a How frequently do you reflect on your facilitation of SDL?
9b. Can you provide an example of how this reflection changes how you practice the
facilitation of SDL?
Finally, I’m going to ask you about life-long learners.
10. How is life-long learning a part of your life?
10a. If it is, can you describe any activities that you participate in that reflects life-long
learning?
147
11. How, if at all, do you encourage your students to be life-long learners?
12. Can you provide an example of how you have shifted your teaching from that of a subject-
matter expert to that of a facilitator of SDL?
12a. Do you value content knowledge or learning process knowledge as a teacher? Why?
Now I’d like to ask you a few questions about the culture of TCS:
13. Can you please describe TCS’s culture of accountability? How do you see it as being either
weak or strong?
14. Can you please describe, in your experience, the collaboration between leadership and
teachers?
15. How does TCS’s leadership provide teachers with consistent performance goals?
15a. Are you comfortable with the amount of time that you are provided with to meet a
performance goal? Why or why not?
15b. Do you believe that TCS’s leadership provides teachers with clear goals without
introducing new initiatives before implementation has taken place?
15c. If not, how do you believe this could be remedied?
Before we officially conclude the interview:
16. Do you have any questions for me or have any other topics to add to this interview that I may
have missed?
Again, thank you very much for your time!
148
Appendix B: Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Sample of SDL Training Participant Survey - Immediately After Training
Questions 1 - 7 are on a seven-point Likert scale 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
Questions 8 - 11 are open-ended responses.
1. The trainer held my attention. (L1, E)
2. I believe that it will be worthwhile for me to apply what I learned about SDL to my teaching.
(L2, A)
3. I was encouraged to participate throughout the training. (L1, E)
4. What I learned about SDL will help me do my job. (L1, R)
5. I feel confident about applying what I learned about SDL when I return to my classroom. (L2,
C)
6. I am clear about what is expected of me regarding the facilitation of SDL in my classroom as a
result of participating in this training. (L1, R)
7. I believe that I will see a positive impact on my students if I consistently apply what I learned
about SDL today. (L4)
8. What is the first thing that you plan to implement based on what you have learned in today’s
training? (L2, Commitment)
9. What additional support will you need to implement what you learned about SDL today? (L2,
C)
10. What initial successes will likely occur as you apply what you learned about SDL in your
classroom? (L4)
11. How can this training be improved?
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
149
Sample of SDL Training Participant Survey - Delayed Use After Training
Questions 1 - 2 are on a seven-point Likert scale 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
Questions 3 - 5 are open-ended responses and question 6 offers multiple responses for the factors
that affect classroom performance.
1. The information provided in the training on SDL applies to my job. (L1, R)
2. I have successfully been able to apply in my classroom what I learned in the SDL training.
(L3)
3. What information should be added to the training that would make it more relevant to your
teaching? (L1, CS)
4. How have you used what you learned in training in your classes? (L4)
5. What positive outcomes are you seeing in the classroom as a result of purposefully facilitating
SDL in your classroom? (L4)
6. If you are not using the skills that you learned during the training, what are the reasons?
• I do not have the necessary knowledge and skills.
• I do not have a clear picture of what is expected of me.
• I have other, higher priorities.
• I am worried that my students' performance will drop initially and negatively reflect on
my teaching.
• I don’t think that SDL will work in my classroom.
• I do not have the support to apply what I learned.
• I do not have the necessary resources to apply what I learned in the training.
• The training didn’t give me the confidence that I needed to apply what I learned.
• There is not an adequate system of accountability to ensure the application of what I
learned.
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Self-directed learning (SDL) is a process in which individuals can independently take the initiative in diagnosing their learning process, including their needs, goals, and human and material resources that are required for them to be successful learners over time. Students at The Community School (TCS) are members of a closed church community who go directly from high school to being employees at church-member businesses. This study examined teacher facilitation of SDL in classrooms throughout TCS New Zealand to identify knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences that had either helped or hindered their facilitation of increasing SDL skills in their students. This process was important for students at TCS because SDL had been identified by business owners to be comprised of important attributes that they seek in their employees. Without SDL skills, many individuals may struggle to be life-long learners as they move from being students to being employees in the dynamic environments of church-run businesses upon graduation. Using a mixed-methods research design, 37 teachers were surveyed on the frequency of their SDL practice and KMO influences. The survey was followed by 9 interviews so that a deeper understanding of the KMO influences and their effect on teacher’s facilitation of SDL could be gained. The findings that were validated revealed that teachers required training in procedural knowledge, support in building self-efficacy, and clearer communication around performance goal setting and ongoing feedback from leadership. Recommendations for closing gaps included training on SDL, the development of a job aid that teachers could refer to after the training, and ongoing coaching designed around the facilitation of SDL with a focus on goal-directed practice coupled with frequent feedback on the progress of teacher learning and performance in the facilitation of SDL.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Cultivating a growth mindset: an exploration of teacher beliefs and learning environments
PDF
Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study
PDF
Approaches to teaching for twenty-first century learners in South Korea: An evaluation study of GSS
PDF
Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development
PDF
Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction
PDF
Application of professional learning outcomes into the classroom: an evaluation study
PDF
Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study
PDF
Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Answering the call for shared leadership - the missing conditions for successful implementation of English language teacher leadership: an evaluation study
PDF
Factors contributing to student attrition at a healthcare university: a gap analysis
PDF
Evaluation study: building teacher efficacy in K8 computer science integration
PDF
Perceptions of first-year tertiary students’ English language learning after six years of instruction in Japan: an evaluation study
PDF
The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study
PDF
The implementation of response to intervention: an adapted gap analysis
PDF
Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach
PDF
A qualitative analysis of student-athletes' engagement in synchronous, virtual learning environments at the secondary level
PDF
Collaborative instructional practice for student achievement: an evaluation study
PDF
Creating the conditions for change readiness in higher education: an innovation study
PDF
Winning the organizational leadership game through engagement: a gap analysis
PDF
Building data use capacity through school leaders: an evaluation study
Asset Metadata
Creator
Song, Karen Elizabeth
(author)
Core Title
A gap analysis of the community school: an evaluation of the implementation of self-directed learning
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
11/01/2020
Defense Date
10/02/2020
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
gap analysis,job coaching,learning to learn,life-long learning,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,self-directed learning
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Min, Emmy (
committee chair
), Hyde, Corinne (
committee member
), Murphy, Don (
committee member
)
Creator Email
karenson@usc.edu,kunmingsongs@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-388897
Unique identifier
UC11666403
Identifier
etd-SongKarenE-9085.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-388897 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-SongKarenE-9085.pdf
Dmrecord
388897
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Song, Karen Elizabeth
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
gap analysis
job coaching
learning to learn
life-long learning
professional development
self-directed learning