1. A funny thing happened....

2. Why did the students prefer their own teacher over a relief teacher? Why would they have preferred to work for a whole period than get a free? What did the students get from this teacher that made the hard work so worthwhile?

3. The Nature of Caring Teachers and the factors that impact on their caring

4. High educational care High personal care Low educational care Low personal care

5. Do category A teachers exist? Are you one? Do you need to be one? What makes the caring teacher ‘tick’? How do these teachers sustain what they do?

6. The first study Three secondary schools All teaching staff surveyed N = 178 Demographic questions A few open-ended questions Completed two measures: SCTI – student-content teaching inventory (Spier, 1974) Teacher Efficacy scale (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001)

7. Questions in the study How would you define a caring teacher? Definitions of caring teachers showed that: 88 teachers believed caring teachers showed educational care 121 teachers believed caring teachers showed personal care

8. The Student-Content Teaching Inventory (S-CTI)

9. Gender nMean Student Orientation Female11413.39 Male6312.95 Content Orientation Female11411.42 Male639.94

10. Subject Area There were 176 teachers who provided their main teaching area and completed the S-CTI Teaching areas were grouped under the following headings: Humanities 76 Maths & Science 41 Creative Arts 16 Technical and Practical Studies 24 PDHPE 13 Other 6

11. Subject Area Student Orientation Mean Humanities 12.57 Maths & Science 13.20 Creative Arts 14.00 Technical and Practical Studies 14.17 PDHPE 12.85 Other 14.20

12. Subject Area Content Orientation Mean Humanities 11.19 Maths & Science 10.85 Creative Arts 11.56 Technical and Practical Studies 10.17 PDHPE 10.31 Other 10.20

13. Years of Teaching Experience There were 177 teachers who provided their years of teaching experience and completed the S-CTI Years of teaching were grouped under the following headings: 0 – 3 years 31 4 – 7 years 48 8 – 15 years 38 16 – 23 years 27 24 – 30 years 29 30+ years 4

14. Years of Teaching Experience Student Orientation Mean 0 – 3 years 13.22 4 – 7 years 12.94 8 – 15 years 13.45 16 – 23 years 13.11 24 – 30 years 13.21 30+ years 13.00

15. Years of Teaching Experience Content Orientation Mean 0 – 3 years 11.09 4 – 7 years 10.71 8 – 15 years 10.26 16 – 23 years 11.07 24 – 30 years 9.25 30+ years 10.85

16. Conclusions about content and student orientation We need to remember that: The S-CTI simply shows an orientation towards students and content It would appear that: Men in these three schools are less oriented towards content than the females Years of experience and the subject one teaches has little bearing on how important one sees the content or the students.

17. Teacher Efficacy Scale (2001) The final measure used measured teacher efficacy In particular, with regard to: Instruction Engagement Management There were 12 questions and teachers were asked to respond using a Likert scale measure

18. Results of the Teacher Efficacy Scale No significant differences were found between teachers on the basis of gender, school, teaching areas or years of teaching experience As a point of comparison for you the means overall were as follows: Efficacy MeasureMean Teacher efficacy7.24 Instruction7.46 Engagement6.76 Management7.48

19. Studies two to five Peer nominations in study one Observations of caring teachers Interviews with caring teachers Group interviews with students Colleague questionnaires

20. Key results from study two Painstaking instruction & careful scaffolding Organised High expectations Gave students choice where possible Lots of praise Courteous and polite Patient Encourages participation Comfortable atmosphere in classrooms

21. Two things stood out Withitness Looked for where students were struggling or not on task Noticed haircuts and mood changes Commented on poor wearing of the school uniform Relationships Took time to work with individuals Recalled previous events, issues or personal things to draw on as a way of involving students Tactile with students Looked for non-contributors to encourage them to take part

22. Key results from interviews Interviews were conducted with the ten caring teachers to discover: 1. How they demonstrated care to their students 2. What they considered to be the personal factors that contributed to their caring 3. What factors supported and/or hindered their caring

23. Mindsets Personal mindsets Do all you can /try to solve the problem Be fair Good outcomes often require hard work and/or time People can change for the better Everyone matters Teacher mindsets Make a difference Work with the whole student Have boundaries Enjoy teaching and like kids Be concerned for both content delivery and student well-being but student well-being is more important

24. At the root of the personal mindsets is optimism Do all you can /try to solve the problem Be fair Good outcomes often require hard work and/or time People can change for the better Everyone matters Problems can be solved Being fair will level the playing field You will reap benefits in the long term Therefore it is worth putting in the effort It doesn’t matter who you help, if you can help, do it

25. Their caring behaviours were characterised by: Relational behaviours Commitment Recognition of own limitations Educational care Compassion Flexibility Persistence Empathy Attentiveness

26. RelationshipTeacherStudent Care for students (personally and educationally)

27. What sort of teacher are you? Do you care for students educationally and personally? Where do you view relationship with the students in your teacher role? How do you actively build relationships? How ‘withit’ are you? What do you remember about students? How will you balance care and control?