Differences between In-Field and Out-of-Field History Teachers Influence on Students Learning Experience in Malaysian Secondary Schools

Umi Kalsum Mohd. Salleh, I Gusti Ngurah Darmawan

1Department of Curriculum and Instructional Technology, Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
School of Education, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2013.49B002                

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.

Keywords

Teachers’ Qualification; History Education; Measurement in Education; Teacher’s Education; Learning Approaches

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

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.