Post on 30-May-2018
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
1/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 1
RUNNING HEAD: Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review
Do Superior Teachers Employ Systematic Instructional Planning Procedures? A Descriptive
Study by Young, Reiser, & Dick: An Article Review
J. Autumn Barker
September 1, 2009
EDU 515
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
2/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 2
Summary
Written by Young, Reiser, and Dick, the article Do Superior Teachers Employ Systematic
Instructional Planning Procedures? A Descriptive Study (1998), explains the study the authors
did to determine if teachers were using systematic planning procedures. This multicase designed
research study used surveys and face-to-face interviews to determine if teachers who were
labeled superior were using systematic planning procedures.
One of the most important and necessary tasks a teacher does is instructional planning.
These plans determine much of what happens in the classroom in the form of activities, work,
teaching styles, and objectives. Many of the pre-teacher programs at universities give students
an introduction of an instructional planning procedure. One of the most used in pre-teacher
preparation is the objectives-first model or rational planning model created by Ralph Tyler in
1949. The Tyler model requires the teacher to define the objectives they plan to teach first, then
determine the instructional activities that reinforce those objectives. This is followed by carrying
out the planned activities in an appropriate sequence and then evaluating the students based on
their understanding of the objectives. Another model was created by Reiser and Dick in 1994,
which defines four key principles to essential planning. The planning process must begin with
clearly defined general goals and very explicit objectives that the students will be expected to
achieve. After objectives have been stated, teachers should then plan the activities that will help
students reach and attain the objectives stated. Assesment instruments should then be created to
measure student achievement. Once assessments have been graded, instruction should be revised
to help ensure that students grasped the concepts of the objectives. The pre-service teachers that
are taught such a way of planning are usually quick to grasp the concept and are excited to
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
3/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 3
employ the process. However, when it becomes time to use the process in their student teaching
and into their own classroom, they are less enthusiastic and fail to use the taught procedures.
Many teachers once in their own classrooms do not use the systematic approach to
instructional planning. It would seem that their planning is more based on the instructional
activities they plan to use. However, if a systematic planning approach was mandated, many
more teachers would use them, but even at this point, would be much more flexible in their use
than taught.
The authors of this study wondered if the best teachers are those who employ
systematic planning. A small research study backed this research question up and led the authors
to plan a study of their own. Their purpose was to determine the planning styles of superior
elementary and secondary teachers. The superiority of the teachers was determined by the
participants having to be finalists for the county Teacher of the Year award. In their study,
Young, Reiser, and Dick wished to answer the questions of what type of planning did the
superior teachers do and how these methods are similar or different to the style of systematic
planning models.
To conduct this study, nine superior teachers of a specific single school district were
study subjects. The teachers were from the southeastern part of the United States and served a
metropolitan area with both urban and suburban areas. In the district, there are 22 elementary
schools, 7 middle schools, and 4 high schools. The teachers chosen for use in the study were
finalists for the countys Teacher of the Year award from between 1990 and 1996. The finalists
for the countys Teacher of the Year award is determined from the teachers who won Teacher of
the Year at their representative school. The schools Teacher of the Year winner is selected by
their peers using criteria such as knowledge of subject taught, leadership within the school,
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
4/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 4
ability to use materials and resources effectively, superior ability to help improve the school, and
their ability to inspire the students. Once nominations are in, the faculty and administration vote
for the three teachers they feel most meet the qualifications. Each school winner is then required
to submit a written nomination packet with several discussions of professional activities,
professional background, greatest accomplishments, and recommendation letters. A panel then
decides who should be awarded the countys Teacher of the Year.
In this study, 35 teachers who had been finalists for the Teacher of the Year award were
contacted through a letter requesting their participation. The researchers received 20 responses,
but 6 were ineligible to participate as they were no longer serving as regular classroom teachers.
The 14 that were left were sent a survey that only 9 returned. This determined the sample size of
9 for this study.
The first phase of this study was with the use of a written survey. It was a self-reporting
information gathering tool to retrieve information about planning decisions and the factors that
influence those decisions at the yearly, unit, weekly, and daily level. The questions were open
ended. Once the surveys had been completed, a database development program was used to
enter the data into a database, then coded and organized. When it came time to code the
information, a grounded approach was used. This meant that the development and assignment of
codes happened simultaneously as an output of data examination.
The second phase in the data collecting for this study was to interview each of the nine
teachers face to face. Each teacher was asked 12 open ended questions, 4 to determine if the
authors could confirm, disconfirm, or clarify on data obtained from the survey. Each of these
questions asked the teacher to describe the planning decisions they made through out the year
and the factors that influenced those decisions. The questions were purposefully broad and
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
5/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 5
unstructured as not to lead or influence the teachers responses. The next 7 questions asked
about planning practices through college courses, in-service trainings, school requirements, time,
and resources. The final question allowed the teacher to then discuss planning in their own
words and to identify the most important aspects. This data was then analyzed and coded using
the same coding procedures created from the survey data. Results and conclusions were made
once the coded data from the superior teachers was compared to documented systematic
planning models.
The authors found some very interesting data and their conclusions are also informative.
They found that the teachers in their study did not employ systematic planning practices. Many
teachers did not express much concern about clearly identifying the objectives they were trying
to teach and when discussing the way they planned, many did not mention objectives at all. If it
was mentioned, it was not as if these objectives needed to be put in writing, like the systematic
planning model calls for. The planning models also say that planning decisions should be made
with the objectives in mind. The teachers of this study rarely suggested that they considered the
objectives when they were making instructional decisions. When describing their planning
activities, the teachers failed to mention the design of objective based tests, which is a huge part
of the planning models. The teachers also mentioned many reasons that their instructional plans
could change from day to day, but they rarely mentioned those factors in systematic planning
models. Time factors and student performance were the two that changed instructional plans
most often.
The researchers did include in their conclusion that there was very little research
supporting the teacher use of systematic planning principles. The authors believe that employing
such principles result in greater learning based on research and experience. They could only cite
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
6/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 6
two conflicting reports of earlier research that said that objective based systematic planning led
to better learning and the other that said that those in a classroom that did not use systematic
planning learned just as much as the classroom that did use systematic planning. They also
mention that these superior teachers were chosen by their peers, not by the way they plan their
instructional activities and not by the academic achievement of their students.
Young, Reiser, and Dick believe that it is still important to tell pre-service teachers about
systematic instructional planning. However, this should be qualified with a statement that says
many teachers do not employ these methods and teachers who do not are still considered
superior teachers. They believe that by teaching the pre-service teachers about the methods, the
teachers can then develop a planning style that is well-suited to their personalities and the
environment which they will be teaching in.
Main Point
Young, Reiser, and Dick wrote this article to present their research on whether teachers
who were labeled superior by their peers and school districts were employing systematic
instructional planning procedures. The authors discussed the fact that many of the pre-service
teacher training programs introduce their students to systematic instructional planning that focus
on clearly identified objectives in order to plan for the instructional activities and assessments.
The authors found a research study based on two teachers who were ranked by parents and
administrators to be the best teachers in their school and they had been trained and currently used
systematic instructional planning in their classrooms. The purpose of this article and study was
to observe the planning procedures of a group of superior elementary and secondary teachers,
labeled superior because they had been finalists for the countys Teacher of the Year award.
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
7/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 7
Using questionnaires and surveys to determine the teachers planning techniques, the data was to
be compared to the models of systematic instructional planning.
Main Arguments
The main point of this article was to present research on the superior teachers and
whether they employed systematic instructional planning. It would seem that Young, Reiser, and
Dick were proponents of systematic instructional planning. Two of the authors even developed a
seven step planning process that modernized the use of Tylers rational planning model.
However, other than just presenting this research and background information, the main
argument seemed lost in the paper. Many pre-service teacher programs teach the systematic
instructional planning methods, but when teachers get to their own classrooms, they employ
other methods. While it would seem that not many teachers use this method, the authors cite
three studies that say some teachers do use systematic instructional planning. In an article by
Sardo-Brown (1990), the author examined the planning procedures of 33 teachers in a district
that required systematic instructional planning. She found that a majority of teachers used it, but
more flexible than prescribed, and among the 33, she also found some that used totally
alternative methods. It was a study by Reiser and Mory (1991) that must have supported the idea
behind this study. In a case study of two teachers, many of the parents and administrators felt
these teachers were among the best in the school. These two teachers had been taught and
currently used systematic instructional planning methods in their classrooms.
Discussion of Conclusion
Young, Reiser, and Dick concluded that the teachers that participated in their study did
not use systematic planning practices. These teachers seemed not to express much concern about
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
8/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 8
clearly defining the objectives of the instructional time and when planning activities for their
classes, many did not even mention objectives. If they were to mention objectives at all, there
was no necessity of putting it in writing, because it was in their head. This is in direct contrast to
systematic planning models who call for clearly written out objectives. The teachers in their
study also did not specify that objectives were behind the choices of instructional decisions,
again, unlike the systematic instructional methods. Systematic instructional methods also stress
the importance of student assessments and making sure they are objective based. The teachers in
this study failed to mention objectives as they spoke of creating tests. The teachers were also
asked what types of situations could cause adjustments to be made in their instructional plans.
Valid reasons like time constraints and student performance were common answers, but the
systematic instructional methods adjustments based on student performance on specific
objectives was not mentioned.
The authors went on to conclude that regardless of the fact that these teachers involved in
the study were using systematic planning procedures, they had been chosen as superior by their
peers. These superior teachers were selected on criteria that did not include planning their
lessons using systematic planning procedures. This selection also did not take into account the
performance of their students as compared to their planning procedures.
Young, Reiser, and Dick believe that all pre-service teachers should be told that all
teachers do not use systematic instructional planning methods and to be considered a superior
teacher, you do not have to employ such methods. However, they believe that it is important that
the pre-service teachers be exposed to these methods because it shows the interaction between
objectives, assessments, materials, and activities. This would also provide a foundation for
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
9/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 9
developing a teaching style that they could personalize to their personality and teaching
environment.
Two Problems
While it was an interesting article to read, there were a few problems with Young, Reiser,
and Dicks study and subsequent article. The first issue that seemed obvious was problems with
the study itself. For a paper that was suppose to be scientific in nature, there were not many
participants in the study group from which to draw conclusions from. The participants were
asked very open ended questions to prevent leading the participant into discussing systematic
instructional planning, but this only resulted in general answers which may or may not have been
what the researchers were looking for. The study also used coding for the responses from the
survey and interview. This seems subjective and if the person doing the coding was switched at
any point, could lead to responses being coded very differently.
Another interesting piece of this article is that the research used to support and explain
why this study was done or that systematic instructional planning was helpful for students was
either contradictory or unsupportive of the authors arguments. This made this paper hard to read
and understand because the authors would be supporting a statement, but then turn to another
research article and state the exact opposite.
Suggested Fixes
While it is understandable that some of the problems within the study were not of their
own doing, doing scientific studies to draw major conclusions from cannot only have nine
participants. If the authors could have followed up with the ten participants that did not respond
to wanting to be a part of the study, they may have had a few more participants that had forgotten
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
10/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 10
about the study or return information necessary to show their interest. Using open ended
questions prevents participants from being lead to answer what the researchers wanted them to
answer. However, it may have been possible to include another survey, perhaps with a Likert
scale with some of the systematic instructional planning methods included to see if perhaps the
teachers were not thinking that is what the researcher had actually wanted as an answer or would
perhaps jog their memory as to how they do their planning systematically, but in their heads
rather than on paper. As for the coding responses, standardizing this process with the same
person and then having one of the authors come behind and recode the information could prevent
answers from being coded incorrectly.
Though there is not much research about systematic instructional planning, perhaps this
paper could have been held while more research was done. The contradictory research is
confusing and makes the paper seem unprofessional. Including research that does not support
ones hypothesis is important, but doing it in a way that does not undermine ones arguments is
very important.
Potential Effects of Fixes
If this study were to have more participants, there is a greater chance that it could be
applicable to a larger group in society. The more participants, the greater and wider the answers
to the questions asked could provide more insight into the planning procedures most teachers
use. Including a survey with a Likert scale after the interview may also help with teachers
responses. Perhaps the way a question is worded on the second survey would be easier
understood than in an interview. It would also show if there were in fact some internal
systematic planning procedures being done, but not shared during the interview. Again, with
more data comes more answers. Having a more standardized method for coding answers and
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
11/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 11
using two or more people to code and confer on how things should be coded would prevent
answers from being placed in the wrong category. This too could strengthen the argument the
authors have.
Including more research in this article would help the reader. There would be less
confusion and undermining of the authors own work. This would help professionalize the paper
and again make the results seem less like they were the opposite of what some found and
supportive of what other researchers found. It would strengthen the arguments and provide
stronger proof for the reader as well.
Article Publication
Publication of a revised edition of this paper could be beneficial to teachers and
administrators in schools all over the country. This paper currently shows that superior teachers
do not have to employ systematic instructional planning methods to be voted superior teachers
by peers and administration. Many areas that require instructional planning could see this and
believe that it is not worth the extra time it takes to make sure everything is written down.
Teachers could use this as arguments against having to continue to do systematic instructional
planning, but rather using a more personalized version of planning for their classrooms. When
reading this paper, it is clear that the teachers who are superior are doing great things and
achieving amazing accomplishments and are great leaders but what they arent doing is clearly
writing out their objectives because the objectives are already in my head. I know exactly what
Im trying to do and what I want the kids to do and what I want them to learn.
8/14/2019 Young Article Review
12/12
Young, Reiser, & Dick Article Review 12
References
Young, A., Reiser, R., & Dick, W (1998). "Do superior teachers employ systematic instructional
planning procedures? A descriptive study,"Educational Technology, Research and
Development, 46:2, 65.