Promoting the will and skill of students at academic risk: an evaluation of an instructional design geared to foster achievement, self-efficacy and motivation

Journal of Instructional Psychology, March, 2003 by Miriam Alfassi

Evaluation of student progress is done monthly. The evaluation is based upon short quizzes, performance tasks and projects that are gathered in a student portfolio. The teacher shares the evaluation with the student and together they plan learning goals, topics and materials for the coming month. Instruction is divided in to small units. Examinations and assessments are administered frequently. This allows students to experience success and develop feelings of competence. At the end of the program students are expected to master the contents and skills on the syllabi and pass external exams which are common to all students. Upon completion of the required coursework at each level, students receive formal certificates that are commensurate to their level of achievement.

The joint collaboration and professional development of the school faculty is organized by key figures within the school. The school principal allocates resources and allows for flexible scheduling to provide time for teacher collaboration. The program manager, a contact person who supervises the implementation of the program within the schools, organizes workshops for the teachers and trains program coordinators. The workshops aimed at changing teachers' educational methods and attitudes are crucial to the success of the program and deal with a variety of issues inherent to the program. The program coordinator, who is a school faculty member, organizes and supervises faculty teams in developing learning materials adapted to students' diverse needs. The learning materials become part of a library of resources for the purpose of developing program syllabi. The faculty teams also share their teaching experiences with each other, cooperatively formulate academic expectations and discuss effective learning strategies and teaching methods. This evokes teachers thinking about learning while learning about teaching.

Conventional Academic Program

The conventional academic program offered to the control group is similar in content but differs in structure from the learner-centered program. On the basis of assessment procedures which depict students' strengths and weaknesses teachers devise an IEP for each student. The IEPs include instructional goals only, they do not relate to learning materials or the sequence of curricula. In addition assessment procedures are used to search for commonalties between students with the purpose of placing similar students in the same class. This results in homogenous classes allowing teachers to select a textbook that is suitable to the particular class. This differs from the assessment methods described above, which emphasize the pinpointing of weaknesses and strengths for each individual student as a means for devising an individualized learning program based upon the offered syllabi. The sequence of instruction and use of learning materials is usually determined according to that suggested in the selected textbooks. Instruction is generally applied by using the lecture method in addition to individualized instruction. Individualized instruction is provided when students work on worksheets that are usually common to all students. Students are evaluated by teacher devised internal tests. Upon completion of their studies students receive certificates reflective of their years of schooling. Ongoing training of teachers is organized by the school district to all teachers within the district. Faculty teams of the school meet periodically to discuss student progress.