DIRECTORATE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

L.N. MITHILA UNIVERSITY,

Kameshwaranagar, Darbhanga-84 !!4 "#IHAR$

A D%sser&a&%'n 'n
Teacher Effectiveness & Instructional Design
For the partial fulfillment of

M.A. (EDUCATION)
SESSION: 2014

UNDER THE SUPERVISION:

SUBMITTED BY Name : !n!" #$!ri Enrolment No.: 1%0&01'2

Dr. D.N. Singh.

. .

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that M(.

!n!"

#$!ri student of M.A.

(Education) Enrolment No: 1%0&01'2) Directorate of Distance Education, L. N. Mithila Uni ersity, Dar!han"a, has under"one his dissertation #or$ under my "uidance. The Dissertation is an outcome of a study under the title

Teacher Effectiveness and Instructional Design

#hich has not !een done %re iously. &t may !e acce%ted for the e aluation. !n!" #$!ri is a $een learner and hard #or$in" student #ith a #ell'disci%lined tem%erament. & #ish her all the success in future.

Signature of the Guide

AC NO*+ED,EMENTS

This dissertation #as de elo%ed from materials for Teacher Effecti eness and &nstructional Desi"n. & am "rateful to all my teachers, and the or"ani(ation. )ome of the content of this "uide dra#s from %re iously %u!lished material !y the author. This dissertation has not !een desi"ned to ser e as another te*t!oo$ on com%uter technolo"y, for there are many such !oo$s that are readily a aila!le on the mar$et. At the same time & am than$ful to most !elo ed Dr. S. C. Mi(hr!) Dir-./0r, Directorate of Distance Education as #ell res%ected )ir Dr. D.N.)in"h, for their "uidance and co' o%eration to ena!le me to com%lete the dissertation #or$.

1 !n!"

#$!ri2

En. R033.1%0&01'2

PREFACE +esearch sho#s that teacher effecti eness is the sin"le most im%ortant school'!ased factor in student success. )tudents #ho ha e hi"hly effecti e teachers for three years in a ro# #ill score ,- %ercentile %oints hi"her on achie ement tests than students #ho ha e less effecti e teachers three years in a ro#. Moreo er, one set of research %ro%oses that assi"nin" "reat teachers fi e years in a ro# to a class of disad anta"ed children could close the achie ement "a% !et#een these students and their %ri ile"ed %eers. .urrently, the odds that a child, let alone a disad anta"ed child, #ill !e assi"ned a "reat teacher fi e years runnin" are / in /0,---. 1or$in" definitions of teacher effecti eness are often elusi e or so %olitically char"ed that they are unusa!le. 2o#e er,

the ur"ent need for hi"hly effecti e teachers in e ery classroom calls for a clear definition of effecti eness and action to#ard creatin" the conditions for it. )im%ly %ut, education communities must de elo% a com%rehensi e definition of teacher effecti eness, the %rofessional su%%ort to maintain and !uild it, the methods to measure it, and the sustained incenti es to re#ard it. Today, in many cases students3 $no#led"e is summari(ed as a test score, and teachers3 effecti eness is %ercei ed as their contri!ution to that test score. Althou"h student scores on standardi(ed tests can !e useful "au"es of a teacher3s effect, they should not !e the sole criteria. Test scores do not "i e a full %icture of teacher contri!utions and student circumstances, not to mention #hich students "et tested and on #hat content. Definin" teacher effecti eness is not a!out creatin" a sim%listic, sin"le ie# of effecti e teachin". 4&t is a dramatic conce%tual shift,4 from focusin" e*clusi ely on the teacher to focusin" on the act of learnin".4

*****

TAB+E OF CONTENTS
P!g- N0. 1. 2. %. Ch!4/-r 5 1

01 6 07 08 6 24 08 6 24
Definin",

&ntroduction
Ch!4/-r 5 2 .once%t 5f Teacher Effecti eness Ch!4/-r 5 % 2i"hly Effecti e Teachers: +e#ardin", )u%%ortin", and E*%andin" 4. Their +oles Ch!4/-r 5 4 &nstructional Desi"n Ta$in" the Teachin"' &. '. Learnin" 6rocess to a 2i"her Le el Ch!4/-r 5 & The +esearch 7indin"s Ch!4/-r 5 '

08 6 24

08 6 24 08 6 24

.onclusions And 6olicy +ecommendations

R-9-r-n.-