Back
 CE  Vol.4 No.9 B , September 2013
Differences between In-Field and Out-of-Field History Teachers Influence on Students Learning Experience in Malaysian Secondary Schools
Abstract: The focus of this study was to investigate whether there were differences between the way in-field and out-of-field teachers in Malaysian secondary schools perceived and practiced History education, and the way their students perceived the teaching and learning of History.Both, teacher and student data were examined. A statistical analysis was conducted to validate the survey and test the relationships between variables. The results showed that there were significant differences between in-field and out-of-field teachers in the teacher characteristics of experience and student variables of classroom climate and History learning outcomes, but not on teaching approaches and methods.
Cite this paper: Mohd. Salleh, U. & Darmawan, I. (2013). Differences between In-Field and Out-of-Field History Teachers Influence on Students Learning Experience in Malaysian Secondary Schools. Creative Education, 4, 5-9. doi: 10.4236/ce.2013.49B002.
References

[1]   Aini, H., & Wan Hasmah, W. M. (2007). Mengajar di luar bidang peng- kususan: Sejauh manakah seriusnya masalah ini di Malaysia? (Out- of-field teaching: How series this problems in Malaysia?) Jurnal pendidikan, Jilid, 27, 149-163.

[2]   Brown, S. D. (2003). State certi-fication requirements for history teachers. ERIC Digest (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED482210).

[3]   Dee, T. S., & Cohodes, S. R. (2008). Out-of-field teachers and students achievement: Evi-dence from matched-pairs comparisons. Public Fi- nance Review, 36, 7-32.

[4]   Fox, D. (1983). Personal theories of teaching. Studies in Higher Learning, 8, 151-163.

[5]   Gao, L., & Watkins, D. (2002). Conceptions of teaching held by school science teachers in P.R. China: Identification and cross cultural comparisons. International Journal of Science Education, 74, 61-79.

[6]   Ingersoll, R. M., & Merrill, E. (2011). The status of teaching as a profession. In J. Ballantine, & J. Spade (Eds.), Schools and society: A sociological approach to education (pp. 185-189). (4th ed.). CA: Pine Forge Press: Sage Publications.

[7]   Ingersoll, R. M. (1998). The problem of out-of-field teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 773-776.

[8]   Ingersoll, R. M. (1999). The problem of unqualified in America secondary school. Educational Researcher, 28, 26-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028002026

[9]   Ingersoll, R. M. (2000). Out-of-field teaching. ERIC Digest (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED449119).

[10]   Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Rejoinder: Misunderstanding the problems of out-of-teaching. Educational Researcher, 30, 21-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189X030001021

[11]   Jerald, C. (2002). All talk, no action: Putting an end to out-of-field teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED468741).

[12]   McConney, A., & Price, A. (2009a). An Assessment of the Phenomenon of “Teaching Out-of-Field” in WA Schools: Final Report. Perth, WA: Western Australian College of Teaching (WA-COT).

[13]   Pratt, D. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching. Adult Educational Quar- terly, 42, 203-320.

[14]   Riordain, M. N., & Hannigan, A. (2011). Who teaches mathematics at second level in Ireland? Irish Educational Studies, 30, 289-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2011.569117

[15]   Seastrom, M. M., Gruber, K. J., Henke, R., McGrath, D. J., & Cohen, B. A. (2002). Qualification of the public school teacher workforce: Prevalence of out-of-field teaching, 1987-88 to 1999-2000. Statistical analysis report (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED468740).

[16]   Wilson, S. M. (2001). Research on history. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). (pp. 527-544). New York: Macmillan.

 
 
Top